https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/icon-150x150.png
Open Government Partnership
Which public issue does the measure address? The recession which began in 2009 had a negative effect on all types of media in Croatia. As a result of reduced revenues from advertising, between 2010 and 2015 the number of journalists fell, and many media houses ceased to operate. The development of technology and convergences, access to broadband Internet and the invasion of smartphones radically changed the media ecosystem. The boundary between electronic and printed media became blurred, as both now had extensions via many non-linear services. On the Croatian media market, we need to bear in mind that regulation and support must include all media: public, commercial (electronic and print), and non-profit. The sustainability of media products with contents of public interest must be the obligation of all participants, while of course the public and non-profit media have a special role. Foreign entertainment media contents dominate all platforms, whether linear or non-linear, so that domestic products and the European parts would barely be able to survive on the competitive global market were it not for envisaged quotas. As part of talks on the revision of the AVMS Directive, there has been much discussion of how the quota system and option of gathering resources for producing and distributing European AV and encouraging media pluralism can be assured, through a regime of regulating non- linear platforms and services. In Croatia, the enforcement of the Media Act has not been assured, which has had a largely negative effect on respecting journalism ethics and standards in general (the pressure of the market economy). Today, there is increasing talk of 'fake news' and the lack of editorial accountability, particularly on all non-linear platforms. Croatia is one of only a few countries which do not have a regulatory body for print or some form of Press Council. Ensuring systematic financing for non-profit media contributes to the fight against the spread of "fake news" and to the truthful and balanced information of citizens about political and social issues, so that they can competently make the best decisions in accordance with their own interests. It is necessary to strengthen co-regulation and self-regulation as models which contribute in a significant way to restoring damaged professional journalism standards and raising awareness of the phenomenon of "fake news". In this context, the issue of public trust in the media is very important, along with the issue of developing media literacy in particular. Protecting minors and fighting hate speech are special challenges in regulating non-linear services. In the Republic of Croatia, the problem related to transparency is the issue of media ownership structures and it is often pointed out that they are hidden even though we have no concrete evidence of this.

What does the measure include? The implementation of the measure will guarantee a new normative framework to enable a more functional system for working in the new digital environment and assure more transparent publication of ownership structures and the sources of financing. The establishment of working groups is needed to produce the draft Media Act, and in-depth analysis, including, if necessary, amendments to the Croatian Radio and Television Act and the Croatian News Agency Act. All stakeholders to whom the provisions of these Acts apply will participate in the working groups, from non-profit media service providers to state administration bodies, and when the draft document is ready, consultations will be held with the interested public.

How does the measure contribute to resolving the public issue? Amendments to the normative framework will facilitate the work of the media in the new conditions of the digital society, the publication of information on the proprietors of all media to the level of natural persons, the publication of relevant information linked to the work of the media, the further development of media literacy, and the establishment of the fact-checking system.

Why is this measure relevant to the values of the Open Government Partnership? The measure is relevant for a more transparent, more efficient work of the media.

Activities: Implementation start date: Implementation end date:

8.1. Drafting the Media Act underway September 2023

8.2. Improve legal provisions related to the disclosure of media ownership and sources of financing underway September 2023

8.3. Establishing the media fact- checking system underway December 2023

Number and title of activities: 8.1. Drafting the Media Act Co-leaders: stakeholders to whom the provisions of the Act apply, state administration bodies Implementation indicators: - Working groups set up to produce the draft Media Act - Draft Media Act produced - Draft Media Act adopted at a session of the Government The baseline value of result indicators: The baseline value is – 0 50 Source of data and frequency of data collection: / Financial resources required (Source of funding and planned resources): Resources are assured from the State Budget, section 55, Ministry of Culture and Media, activity A564000 Administration and management, and they relate to resources for the ordinary activities of the Ministry. Implementation start date and implementation deadline: underway – September 2023

Number and title of activities: 8.2. Improve legal provisions related to the disclosure of media ownership and sources of financing Co-leaders: Agency for Electronic Media, Croatian Chamber of Economy Implementation indicators: - Proposal for changes to the relevant legislative framework to allow the publishing of information on media proprietors to the level of natural persons (reusable, easily searchable, open code format) and the source of media funding. The baseline value of result indicators: The baseline value is – 0 Source of data and frequency of data collection: / Financial resources required (Source of funding and planned resources): Resources are assured from the State Budget, section 55 Ministry of Culture and Media, activity A785015 Programmes that enable access to cultural content for persons with disabilities, in the amount of HRK 1,000,000.00 for the year 2022 and in the amount of HRK 2,000,000.00 for the year 2023 (resources are fully assured from EU sources, under the National Recovery and Resilience Plan). Implementation start date and implementation deadline: underway – September 2023

Number and title of activities: 8.3. Establishing the media fact-checking system Co-leaders: Agency for Electronic Media Implementation indicators: - The Agency for Electronic Media will implement the measures through the establishment of a media fact- checking system, including the development of procedures and rules, the development of registers and the strengthening of the capacity of digital competences of fact-checkers, as well as the development of technological programmes, platforms and systems of communication with the media, the creation of a database. 51 The baseline value of result indicators: The baseline value is – 0 Source of data and frequency of data collection: Financial resources required (Source of funding and planned resources): Resources are assured from the State Budget, section 55 Ministry of Culture and Media, activity A785015 Programmes that enable access to cultural content for persons with disabilities, in the amount of HRK 5,000,000.00 for the year 2022 and in the amount of HRK 2,000,000.00 for the year 2023 (resources are fully assured from EU sources, under the National Recovery and Resilience Plan). Implementation start date and implementation deadline: underway – December 2023

Action Plan Review

Commitment 8. Media Regulatory Framework

● Verifiable: Yes

● Does it have an open government lens? Yes

● Potential for results: Substantial

(Ministry of Culture and Media,Agency for Electronic Media)

For a complete description of the commitment, see commitment 8 in Croatia’s action plan: https://www.opengovpartnership.org/documents/croatia-action-plan-2022-2024/.

Context and objectives

Croatia, with a population of less than four million, enjoys a modestly sized but diverse media sector. There are half a dozen national daily newspapers but with concentrated ownership (two media companies control three-quarters of the market). Two major private television networks provide national coverage, competing with the Croatian public broadcaster (HTV), while most radio stations are only present locally. [1]

Even though Croatia has risen in World Press Freedom Index rankings in the past several years, [2] national and international reports and indexes on media freedoms in Croatia note political interference at public broadcaster HRT, increasing public intimidation of critical media, continued impunity for physical attacks against journalists, the use of criminal slander and libel legislation (strategic lawsuit against public participation [SLAPP] lawsuits) to silence investigative journalism, and a reduced arena for media pluralism, including minority and nonprofit media. [3]

In this context, the commitment aims at ensuring greater transparency and independence of Croatian media through changes to the Media Act (Milestone 8.1) to reflect issues in the digital sphere, improving legal provisions to make transparent media ownership and media funding sources (8.2) and establishing a fact-checking system to fight disinformation in the media and improve media literacy (8.3). The responsible authority is the Ministry of Culture and Media, with over 15 other public institutions, companies, and CSOs, including fact-checking experts, listed as “other participating actors.”

Except for establishing a media fact-checking system, the other two milestones in this commitment were for the most part copied directly from the previous action plan, as they were not implemented in the envisaged time period. [4] This commitment also builds upon milestones from Croatia’s second OGP action plan, [5] two of which were aimed at increasing media transparency via legislative changes. The commitment is also part of Croatia’s Recovery and Resilience Plan. [6]

Potential for results: Substantial

Conditions in the media landscape have been a contentious issue ever since Croatia’s democratic transition started, so a large-scale legislative overhaul is an opportunity for positive change. [7] The government can demonstrate its dedication to open government values through implementation of this commitment, as ensuring media independence and plurality is a tenet of a functioning democracy. While the actions that would open up government-held information are more likely to have modest results, implementation could have a more substantial impact on the transparency and accountability of the media landscape in Croatia.

The last amendment of any significance to the Media Act took place in 2013. [8] There is an understandable need to revise the existing regulation, as the media landscape has changed profoundly since the act was originally adopted back in 2004. As the process is still in early stages, there is no concrete information on what the changes to the Media Act would entail. However, according to the action plan, the changes will include supporting all media (public, commercial, electronic and print, and nonprofit), the sustainability of media products with contents of public interest, journalism ethics and standards, editorial accountability, media financing, as well as the protection of journalists. An important potential outcome of the new legislation may be the introduction of a regulatory body for print media (e.g., a press council), as Croatia is one of only a few countries without one. The creation of a multistakeholder working group to produce the draft legislation is a welcome open government approach.

Milestone 8.2. has a clearer open government lens and aims to improve the regulations on the existing registry of beneficial ownership of the media, published by the Agency for Electronic Media. [9] The action plan and Croatia’s Recovery and Resilience Plan explain that a new and unified digital system will ensure more transparent publication of data on media ownership structures and sources of media funding. [10] Representatives of Gong, a CSO, have previously expressed that changes would not be sufficient to improve the register unless they address deficiencies in identifying the “real” owners, not just the formal ones. [11]

Milestone 8.3 seeks to implement a media fact-checking system. The Agency for Electronic Media has begun to conduct a public tender for a digital system to battle disinformation. [12] On media literacy, a public consultation process [13] on the objectives, activities, and criteria for a grant program to establish media fact-checking [14] has begun. The grant program is based on recommendations from an expert study on disinformation [15] and states it will support a multitude of projects, mostly aimed at public education and campaigns for fighting disinformation. The Agency for Electronic Media would coordinate campaign efforts, using content produced from the grant-funded projects. Fact-checking efforts in Croatia have demonstrated the success of building networks to challenge disinformation (particularly during the coronavirus pandemic) and have noted the need for greater media literacy in Croatia. [16] Supporting media literacy and fact-checking systems has the potential to deliver substantial results and reduce the impact of disinformation in Croatian public discourse. This has become particularly pertinent in Croatia as right-wing free speech bloggers and portals criticize the work of Faktograf—Croatia’s primary fact-checking platform—when it reports factually inaccurate posts to Facebook. [17]

Opportunities, challenges, and recommendations during implementation

The drafting of the Media Act was a milestone in Croatia’s previous action plan, but it was not started due to disputes over the need for a major overhaul versus making smaller-scale amendments to the law. [18] According to the government, the relevant ministry held several meetings with the Croatian Journalists’ Association (CJA) and legal experts, concluding that opinions on the need to draft a new act vary. [19] The CJA has to date not submitted any comments or proposals related to specific changes to this act. [20] The same issues were present during the drafting of the Electronic Media Act—the CJA withdrew from the working group, citing the Ministry’s failure to take into account any of their remarks and proposals, and its failure to pass the media strategy and the new Media Act before drafting the Electronic Media Act. [21] The Ministry later published a response stating that it had incorporated most of the CJA proposals into the Draft Proposal for the Electronic Media Act. [22] The new commitment mentions conducting an in-depth analysis, which may lead to amendments of two other acts: the Croatian Radio Television Act [23] and the Croatian News Agency Act. [24] This could postpone the implementation of the milestone, but the representative of the ministry was unavailable for comment on this topic.

The Agency for Electronic Media published a public tender for consulting services to develop a public data platform on media ownership and media funding sources in August 2022. [25] According to civil society, the topic of media ownership transparency is prominent not due to a lack of a regulatory framework or registers but because the data available does not always include the actual owners of media outlets. [26] It would, therefore, be critical for the milestone’s implementation to provide a way to resolve this issue of data accuracy and verification.

Citizens and CSOs have submitted 19 comments so far to the public consultation on the objectives, activities, and criteria for the grant program for fact-checking projects (Milestone 8.3). [27] One CSO comment highlighted the weakness of multiple unconnected projects being encouraged. Having a large number of unconnected or small-scale funded projects could fragment the impact of the project, limiting the number of participants and geographical spread, thus not achieving the intended objectives or producing a strong media fact-checking ecosystem.

The government can ensure ambitious implementation of this commitment by:

Ensure the effective functioning of the working group for drafting the Media Act. At a minimum, this group should include media stakeholders as it did during the previous action plan cycle. Establishing the working group, as well as other consultative activities on the drafting of a new Media Act, should ensure the representation of all relevant stakeholders, including independent media experts, CSOs dealing with media freedoms and democratic values, the academic sector, and especially journalist and media professional associations. The comments received during the previous attempts to develop this legislation should be considered in advance to avoid the draft act being abandoned again.

As IRM previously recommended for the 2018–2020 action plan, the government should ensure a new Media Act develops and reinforces the legal framework to protect the rights of journalists and independent media. This includes establishing mechanisms to foster independent media, especially minority and nonprofit media; avoid concentration of media ownership; strengthen the autonomy of the publicly owned Croatian Radio Television; and introduce mechanisms and amend legislation allowing for an inordinate amount of SLAPP lawsuits. The Ministry has already started some of these actions and should continue to ensure these IRM recommendations continue to be implemented.

Although a framework for the Register of Beneficial Owners exists, thegovernment needs to address concerns regarding the accuracy of information held on the “real” owners of media outlets when amending legislation on media ownership and funding. This means going beyond publishing the submitted beneficial ownership information, to also ensure that it is verified and accurate. Information on media ownership and funding needs to be up-to-date and correspond to the actual situation, making it more difficult for owners and their media outlets to hide behind proxy ownership or sources of funding. These concerns could be addressed through collaboration with CSOs and other relevant stakeholders to ensure that the information published via the new system is verified and accurate. Denmark and the Slovak Republic currently have public registries that include steps to confirm the accuracy of the information submitted. [28]

The Agency for Electronic Media’s campaign and awareness-raising projects it funds to improve media literacy would benefit from a unified and common visual identity and coordinated messaging and dissemination. The overarching program of actions could consider learning from Canada’s “healthy democracy” commitment, focused on media freedom and democratic strengthening. The commitment championed international norms supporting diversity of content and quality and transparency of information. Its milestones also included supporting a healthy and reliable news ecosystem in the country in which media organizations were consulted to consider how the government can further support the transition to digital media and experts were consulted on how to increase diversity of content in the digital age. [29]

[1] “Croatia” World Press Freedom Index (Reporters Without Borders: 2022), https://rsf.org/en/croatia

[2] “Croatia” World Press Freedom Index (Reporters Without Borders: 2022), https://rsf.org/en/croatia. In the report, Croatia increased its ranking from 56 to 48 out of 180 countries included in the index. The legislative indicator achieved the highest score of the five indicators evaluated (political, economic, social, and security are the other indicators).

[3] “Croatia” World Press Freedom Index (Reporters Without Borders: 2022), https://rsf.org/en/croatia; 2021 Rule of Law Report Croatia (European Commission, 2 November 2022), https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/2021_rolr_country_chapter_croatia_en.pdf; Freedom House Report 2021 (Freedom House, 2 November 2022), https://freedomhouse.org/country/croatia/freedom-world/2021; Marijana Grbeša, Marija Volarević: “Media in Croatia: From freedom fighters to tabloid avengers” (Medienpolitic International, 10 September 2021), https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11616-021-00683-y; Lina Rusch: “Media Freedom in Croatia” (Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, 2 November 2022), https://www.kas.de/en/web/balkanmedia/media-freedom3; Scott Griffen, Croatia: Media Freedom in Turbulent Times (Joint International Mission, August 2016), https://ipi.media/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Croatia-Report-Intl-Mission-2016.pdf. The Croatian Journalists' Association regularly publishes articles and analyses on the state of the media in Croatia, available at: https://www.hnd.hr/eng/home; Giovanni Vale, “Media freedom in Croatian: The problem is not the laws, but their application” (BalkanInsight.com, 2 May 2022), https://www.balcanicaucaso.org/eng/Areas/Croatia/Media-freedom-in-Croatia-the-problem-is-not-the-laws-but-their-application-217769

[4] See Commitment 8. Media Regulatory Framework in the Action Plan for Implementation of the Open Government Partnership Initiative in the Republic of Croatia up to 2020 (OGP, December 2018), https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Croatia_Action-Plan_2018-2020_EN.pdf, and in IRM: Croatia Transitional Results Report 2018–2020: https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Croatia_Transitional-Results_Report_2018-2020_EN.pdf

[5] Government of the Republic of Croatia, Action Plan for Implementation of the Initiative Open Government Partnership in the Republic of Croatia for the Period 2014 to 2016 (OGP, July 2014) 24−25 (Measure 8), https://www.opengovpartnership.org/sites/default/files/Action%20Plan-OGP-8-7-2014-final-ENG.pdf.

[6] C1.1.1. R6-I2 Establishment of media fact-checking and public disclosure system, Recovery and Resilience Facility Operational arrangements between the European Commission and Croatia, February 2022, https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/countersigned-croatia-rrf-oa_0.pdf

[7] “Regulations > Media” (Ministry of Culture and Media of the Republic of Croatia, 2022), https://min-kulture.gov.hr/propisi-543/mediji-16238/16238.

[9] These registers are also published in a reusable and easily searchable format (Excel spreadsheet) on the website of the Agency for Electronic Media (September 2022, https://www.aem.hr/).

[10] Croatia’s Recovery and Resilience Plan states that a single digital system for the publication of data on media ownership would include the publication of media financing, which would require publication of data on media income from activities, income from received state grants, income from local units and regional self-governments, revenues from advertising of state administration bodies and public institutions founded by the Republic of Croatia, as well as legal entities owned or predominantly state-owned on the websites of regulators and media service providers. Government of the Republic of Croatia, National Recovery and Resilience Plan 2021−2026 [Nationalni Plan Oporavka I Otpornosti 2021- 2026], July 2021, https://vlada.gov.hr/UserDocsImages/Vijesti/2021/srpanj/29%20srpnja/Plan%20oporavka%20i%20otpornosti%2C%20srpanj%202021..pdf

[11] Melisa Skender (Gong), online interview, 11 November 2020.

[12] “Javna nabava” (Agency for Electronic Media, 5 October 2022), https://www.aem.hr/kategorija/javna-nabava/year/2022/

[13] The document “Introductory announcement in the preparation of the Grant Program and the Public Call for the allocation of grants. The initial framework: objectives, activities and criteria” was open for public consultation from May 26 to June 17, 2022. The document received 19 comments from citizens and CSOs. (e-Savjetovanja, 4 October 2022), https://esavjetovanja.gov.hr/ECon/MainScreen?entityId=20788

[14] “Javno savjetovanje za pripremu NPOO programa ‘Uspostava provjere činjenica’” (Agency for Electronic Media, 29 September 2022), https://www.aem.hr/en/nekategorizirano/javno-savjetovanje-za-pripremu-npoo-programa-uspostava-provjere-cinjenica/

[15] “Strengthening society’s resistance to misinformation: Analysis of the situation and guidelines for action” (Agency for Electronic Media, 29 September 2022), https://www.aem.hr/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Studija_dezinformacije_2-izdanje.pdf

[16] Tara Kelly, How Faktograf worked across borders to stem COVID-19 misinformation in southeastern Europe (Paynter, 15 December 2022) https://www.poynter.org/business-work/2020/how-faktograf-worked-across-borders-to-stem-covid-19-misinformation-in-southeastern-europe/

[17] Darko Markusic, Croatian Fact-Checkers’ War on Fake News Draws Bias Charge (BalkanInsight.com, 24 March 2022) https://balkaninsight.com/2022/03/24/croatian-fact-checkers-war-on-fake-news-draws-bias-charge/

[18] According to Nives Zvonarić, Ministry of Culture and Media in “Zapisnik sa 6. sjednice Savjeta inicijative Partnerstvo za otvorenu vlast” [Minutes from the sixth session of the Open Government Partnership Initiative Council] (22 December 2020), https://udruge.gov.hr/UserDocsImages//dokumenti//Zapisnik%20-%206.%20sjednica%203.%20saziva%20Savjeta%20inicijative%20POV%20-%203.%20mandat.pdf

[19] Government of the Republic of Croatia, Croatia End-of-Term Self-Assessment2018–2020.

[20] Ibid., p. 62.

[21] “HND: Istupili smo iz Radne skupine za izradu ZEM-a jer Ministarstvo culture nije uvažilo nijedan naš prijedlog” (Croatian Journalists’ Association, 19 January 2020), https://www.hnd.hr/hnd-istupili-smo-iz-radne-skupine-za-izradu-zem-a-jer-ministarstvo-kulture-nije-uvazilo-nijedan-nas-prijedlog1.

[22] Reaction of the Ministry of Culture to the withdrawal of the Croatian Journalists’ Association from the Ministry’s working group for the drafting of the new law on electronic media (Ministry of Culture and Media, 29 September 2022), https://min-kulture.gov.hr/vijesti-8/reagiranje-ministarstva-kulture-na-istupanje-hrvatskog-novinarskog-drustva-iz-radne-skupine-ministarstva-za-izradu-novog-zakona-o-elektronickim-medijima/18690.

[24] Croatian News Agency Act (Official Gazette 96/2001-1612, 3 October 2022), https://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2001_11_96_1612.html

[25] “Jednostavna nabava” (Agency for Electronic Media, 5 October 2022), https://www.aem.hr/kategorija/jednostavna-nabava/

[26] Melisa Skender (Gong), online interview, 11 November 2020. For more information, see Andreja Žapčić, “Tko su stvarni vlasnici ‘vlasnika’ najžilavijih medija?” [“Who are the real owners of the ‘owners’ of the toughest media?”] (Gong, 13 February 2014), https://www.gong.hr/hr/dobra-vladavina/mediji/tko-je-stvarni-vlasnik-vlasnika-najzilavijeg-medij/.

[27] The document “Introductory announcement in the preparation of the Grant Program and the Public Call for the allocation of grants. The initial framework: objectives, activities and criteria” was open for public consultation from 26 May to 17 June 2022 (e-Savjetovanja, 4 October 2022), https://esavjetovanja.gov.hr/ECon/MainScreen?entityId=20788

[28] “How Denmark is verifying beneficial ownership information” (Tax Justice Network, 8 October 2020) https://taxjustice.net/2020/10/08/how-denmark-is-verifying-beneficial-ownership-information/; Tymon Kiepe, Victor Ponsford, Louise Russell-Prywata, “Early impacts of public registers of beneficial ownership: Slovakia” (OpenOwnership, 1 October 2020) https://www.openownership.org/en/publications/early-impacts-of-public-registers-of-beneficial-ownership-slovakia/

[29]“Canada’s 2018-2020 National Action Plan for Open Government” (Open Government Partnership, January 2019) https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Canada_Action-Plan_2018-2020_EN.pdf