In 2017, the Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM) has examined 28 European Union Member States as well as three Candidate Countries: Turkey, and for the first time Serbia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. The results of this second EU-wide implementation of the MPM show either general stagnation or deterioration in all of the four major areas encompassed by the MPM: Basic protection, Market plurality, Political independence and Social inclusiveness, and they confirm that no country analysed is free from risks to media pluralism. Download the MPM2017 Press Release.
In the Basic Protection area, the MPM assesses the fundamental factors which must be in place in a plural and democratic society, namely the existence and effectiveness of the implementation of regulatory mechanisms to safeguard freedom of expression and the right to seek, receive and impart information; the status of journalists in each country; the independence and effectiveness of the media authority; the universal reach of traditional media and access to the Internet.
In the Market Plurality area, the MPM assesses the risks to media pluralism linked to lack of transparency and concentration of media ownership, commercial and owner influence over editorial content, and the economic conditions in which the media operate (media viability).
Political Independence is assessed using indicators that evaluate the extent of the politicisation of the media system, media organizations, newsrooms, media reporting and the public service media.
The Social Inclusiveness area looks at access to media by various social and cultural groups, such as minorities, local/regional communities, people with disabilities and women. In addition, the Monitor considers media literacy as a precondition for using media effectively, and examines media literacy contexts, as well as the digital skills of the population.
After three rounds of implementation (two pilot implementations and one standard application), the CMPF slightly revised the version of the MPM already implemented in 2016, providing minor refinements to the tool and further improving the quality of the questionnaire, trying to recognize an increased role to the online dimension of media pluralism.
MPM 2017 Country teams
|Austria||Institute for Comparative Media and Communication Studies (CMC)||Joseph Seethaler|
|Belgium||KU Leuven||Peggy Valcke|
|Bulgaria||Foundation media democracy||Orlin Spassov|
|Croatia||Institute for Development and International Relations (IRMO)||Paško Bilić|
|Cyprus||Media Consultant||Christophoros Christophorou|
|Czech republic||Charles University||Vaclav Stetka|
|Estonia||Media Law Consultant||Andres Kõnno|
|Finland||University of Jyväskylä||Ville Manninen|
|France||Science Po||Thierry Vedel/Geisel Garcia Grana|
|Germany||Department of Communication Studies and Media Research, LMU Munich||Thomas Hanitzsch|
|Greece||ELIAMEP||Evangelia Psychogiopoulou/ Anna Kandyla|
|Hungary||CEU/CMDS||Marius Dragomir/ Attila Batorfy|
|Ireland||Dublin City University||Roddy Flynn|
|Latvia||Riga Stradins University||Anda Rozukalne|
|Lithuania||Vytautas Magnus University||Aukse Balcytiene|
|Luxembourg||University of Luxembourg||Raphael Kies|
|The Netherlands||Media Consultant||Mara Rossini|
|Poland||University of Krakow||Beata Klimkiewicz|
|Portugal||Universidade Nova de Lisboa||Francisco Rui Nunes Cádima|
|Romania||Median Research Centre&CEU||Marina Popescu|
|Slovakia||Pan European Univeristy||Zeljko Martin Sampor|
|Slovenia||University of Lubjana||Marko Milosavljevic|
|Spain||Universitat Ramon Llull||Pere Masip|
|Sweden||University of Gothenburg||Mathias A. Färdigh|
|UK||University of Edinburgh||Rachael Craufurd Smith, Paolo Cavaliere|
|FYROM||Research Institute on Social Development – RESIS||Snezana Trpevska, Igor Micevski|
|Serbia||University of Belgrade||Jelena Surculija|
|Turkey||Galatasaray University||Yasemin Inceoglu/Ceren Sozeri|