Adequate regulatory framework, but poorly implemented and arbitrarily applied
Difficult to obtain public information: state bodies rarely comply with their obligations laid down in the laws, and the judiciary system is not able to enforce them to do so
Low journalistic standards, weak and fragmented professional organizations
The Media Act 2010 can't prevent the governmental control over the Media Authority
The regulatory framework can't prevent soft-censorship, chilling mechanisms
Key findings
The ownership on paper is transparent, but many of the owners, even independents have business links to the government
The media ownership regulation alone can't prevent information monopoly/dominance in news media (KESMA)
State advertising/funding is the main income for most of the pro-government news outlets, but some independent outlets are also controlled through state funds
Commercial advertising also can be hijacked by the government
Key findings
Most of the initiatives to elevate media literacy and representation come from the civil sector with limited reach and financial support
The number of cases of harmful speech are growing
Conclusions
On the basis of laws the media situation in Hungary can't be understood, and will be extremely difficult to deal with
The European-level investigations by the EC on state advertising and KESMA got stuck during the procedure
The erosion of the Hungarian media landscape can't be stopped by legal instruments. The Hungarian government has unlimited financial sources to support pro-government media, and commercial marketers simply can't balance it.