The Portuguese case illustrates the shortcomings of national legislation in addressing the challenge posed by the EU-designated gatekeepers and the need for harmonization at the EU level. The sector expects the enforcement of existing EU regulations and the adoption of a new EU-wide framework that protects and sustains media plurality and journalism standards.
Portugal’s media market-based landscape is threatened by systemic disruption from extra-territorial operators sapping the economic and financial foundations of the national media organisations, challenging financial sustainability, media plurality, and imperilling democracy itself (“We are not the gatekeepers anymore, democracy is at stake”). Inadequate and outdated national legislation (the law still classifies the Internet as print) allows for gatekeeper ad sales intrusion into journalism and unfair competition of anything labelled “news”.
It is estimated that 80% of the online advertising revenue is captured by the EU-designated gatekeepers, denting the balance sheets of heritage and digital-native operators alike. Layoffs, bankruptcies, mergers, and opportunistic anonymous investors have revealed the impossibility of present-day national regulation to address all challenges and to re-establish a predictable and sustainable market-based level playing field.
Political pressure on journalism is not a concern but rather the financial pressure that is holding back the development of quality products (e.g., investigative journalism). Harsh working conditions nudge professionals to leave the profession because of financial precarity and mental health hazards. More expensive but experienced staff are being laid off. Overloaded newcomers have fewer senior colleagues to learn from, potentially leading to decreased standards. Technologies are envisioned as business model disrupters. The increased rhythm of the journalistic process, the production of instant information, and the prevalence of sensationalism all contribute to disinformation, fake news, and consequent distrust of the media. This is aggravated by widespread ignorance about how the ad-based business model finances the media and by prevailing mistrust of media independence from political and business actors.
The cost of subscriptions has led many users to rely solely on a diet of self-fact-checking by comparing online headlines from diverse trusted media incurring the risk of also absorbing disinformation. The debate often migrates to extremes, and rigorous coverage is deemed to have the paradoxical effect of contributing to the growth of polarization. Original reporting is overcome by easier and cheaper formats based on an increasing number of non-journalist commentators, especially on TV, mixing facts with opinion that may negatively influence trust in journalism.
Media professionals do not blame excessive State interference in the profession (“we do our journalism in peace”), but rather the inaction of successive governments to address the financial crisis of the media industry such as support for structural universal funding mechanisms (tax reductions, subsidising subscriptions, a national media financing fund). Public service media operates a mixed and protected business model. Its financing is assured by a tax included in the electricity bill and by a quota the of the advertising expenditure. The public TV broadcaster is the most trusted source, closely followed by the private TV broadcasters, albeit not the most watched.
In 2024 the government’s Action Plan for Social Communication established 30 measures related to State subsidies for technological modernization, hiring of journalists, training in artificial intelligence, and support of 50% of media subscriptions. Measure 13 advocates the integration of public policies at the EU level recognizing the incapacity of the State to negotiate the extraterritorial challenge at the national level.
However, more subsidies are not deemed to be the solution. Influent voices advocate that the media financing crisis in the EU should not be addressed with more public subsidies but with EU-led negotiations with the digital platforms.
Nuno Cintra Torres, Tatiana Chervyakova & Manuel José Damásio
Lusófona University