How Do Experts See Prevention of Media Concentration?

The Media Azi portal returns to the problem of concentration in mass media. We invite journalists and experts, including media law experts, to share their opinions regarding possible ways to stop this phenomenon. Thus, we aim to identify, with joint efforts, weaknesses in the legislation and the actions that need to be taken by decision makers in order to avoid concentration and ensure media pluralism. Today, we introduce the first opinion in this sense.
 

Tatiana Puiu, media law expert:
Limiting a person’s right to owning only 2-3 media outlets could be the first step towards de-concentration

Media pluralism contributes to proper functioning of the democratic system and provides public with diverse media content that reflects various political and cultural opinions. Public access to various sources of information and/or opinions is ensured by media pluralism, which is connected with media concentration and plurality of ownership. Until recently, some of the most important problems in Moldova were the lack of transparency and media concentration in the hands of one person with political and/or economic interests. Amendments made to legislation included provisions regulating the issue of media transparency, and TV companies now must divulge the names of beneficial owners of media outlets. However, though the names of real owners/beneficiaries of televisions and/or radios have been opened, the threat for media pluralism through monopolization of the entire mass media sector has not disappeared. It is due to the legislation containing rules that allow having several broadcasting licenses in one administrative-territorial unit or zone. Thus, people that have influential financial resources and clear political or economic interests and own several media outlets can concentrate the media in their hands or the hands of certain groups of interests, violating consumers’ right to information and freedom of opinion. Amendment of the current regulatory framework by limiting a person’s right to owning only 2-3 media outlets could be the first step towards de-concentration of media ownership. It would ensure free access to information of public interest, without influencing dominant opinions.