Media Capture Monitoring Report
Finland Country assessment 2025 · update 2026
Finland meets the European Media Freedom Act on paper. The pressure on its media sits elsewhere: in a concentrated market, a frozen public broadcasting budget, and a regulator handed new duties without new resources.
Where the risk sits
2025 assessmentIndependence of media regulators
Independence of public service media
Misuse of state funds
Ownership transparency and pluralism
Levels summarise the findings of the 2025 country report across the four areas in which EMFA sets safeguards against capture.
Executive summary
2025 reportThe European Media Freedom Act entered into force on 8 August 2025, and Finland moved early to meet it. The government adopted the Act on the Supervision of Media Markets and amended several existing laws, among them the Act on Yleisradio, to carry EMFA obligations into national law.
Compliance, however, has not settled the underlying questions. Finland’s long-standing media welfare state is under pressure from market concentration, the dominance of digital platforms, and an intense political argument about what public service media should be.
Both regulators, Traficom and KAVI, are legally and operationally independent, and stakeholders were consulted extensively during alignment. Traficom now maintains a public media ownership database, oversees state advertising transparency, and assesses mergers for their effect on pluralism and editorial independence. Those assessments cannot block a transaction, which limits what the mechanism can achieve in an already concentrated market.
Yle remains broadly independent but is increasingly exposed to political and commercial pressure. The parliamentary working group’s decision to freeze the funding index for 2025 to 2027 has driven organisational restructuring and may weaken the broadcaster’s long-term capacity. Amendments to the Act on Yleisradio added transparency and reporting duties, which some stakeholders expect to be used politically.
Misuse of state funds is not a systemic risk. State advertising plays only a minor role and involves mostly municipal announcements; EMFA introduces the first basic transparency requirements over it.
The largest structural risk is concentration. Finland’s market is small and linguistically fragmented, dominated by a handful of players, with consolidation clearest in print. Concentration has traditionally been assessed for its effect on competition alone, never on pluralism, and EMFA closes only part of that gap.
Findings by area
Four EMFA safeguardsEMFA sets safeguards against capture in four areas. Each is assessed twice: whether the law is in place, and whether it does the work in practice.
Media regulatorsTraficom and KAVI
Both regulators are legally and operationally independent, with no recent controversies. Traficom now acts as the EMFA supervisory authority and Digital Services Coordinator. Its Director General is appointed by the government for five years; KAVI’s leadership is appointed by the Ministry of Education and Culture. Neither board includes NGO or opposition representation. The new duties arrived without new resources, which raises questions about long-term capacity.
Public service mediaYleisradio
Yle remains structurally independent and widely trusted, but faces political scrutiny, funding constraints and commercial criticism, a combination that erodes editorial autonomy over time. A statutory index normally makes funding predictable; the freeze for 2025 to 2027 cuts against EMFA’s requirement of adequate and sustainable support and has already forced restructuring.
State fundsPublic advertising and support
State advertising is marginal in Finland and consists largely of municipal announcements, so it is not a plausible instrument of capture. EMFA requires authorities and media providers to report spending to Traficom, which publishes its first annual summary in 2026.
Ownership and pluralismMarket concentration
Finland had no central media ownership register; under the new act Traficom must maintain a public database alongside company-level disclosure. The deeper problem is unresolved. A small, linguistically divided market is dominated by a few groups, consolidation is clearest in print, and merger review still measures competition rather than pluralism and cannot stop a transaction.
Four levels, from low concern to severe. They describe how far the area is exposed to capture in practice, not whether the law has been transposed.
The 2026 update
In preparationOne Changes since the last publication
Legal changes, new trends and developments, and other relevant events over the past year, and whether they have improved the media environment.
Two Outstanding problems
The problems that continue to affect media independence and journalism in the areas the report covers.
Questions and answers
11 entriesShort answers to the questions the Finland report raises most often, for journalists, policymakers, researchers and teachers who need a finding quickly.
What is the core finding of the report?
Finland complies with EMFA at the legislative level, but risks to pluralism persist through market concentration, political pressure on Yle, and the limited ability of regulators to influence mergers.
Why has Finland’s EMFA implementation been relatively smooth?
Finnish law already met many EMFA standards. The government chose minimal legislative change, mostly administrative additions, with more extensive updates only to the Yle Act.
How independent are the media regulators?
Traficom and KAVI are both legally and operationally independent, with no recent controversies. Traficom now serves as the EMFA supervisory authority and as Digital Services Coordinator.
How are regulatory appointments carried out?
Traficom’s Director General is appointed by the government for a five-year term. KAVI’s leadership is appointed by the Ministry of Education and Culture. Neither board includes NGO or opposition representation.
Does Traficom have the resources to oversee EMFA compliance?
The report finds that Traficom received new responsibilities without new resources, which raises concerns about long-term capacity, particularly for its engagement with the European Board for Media Services.
What is the situation of public service media?
Yle remains broadly trusted and structurally independent, but political scrutiny, funding constraints and commercial criticism together weaken editorial autonomy over time.
Is public service media funding independent and predictable?
Only partly. The statutory index normally makes funding predictable, but the freeze covering 2025 to 2027 undermines EMFA’s requirement of adequate and sustainable support.
How transparent is state advertising?
State advertising plays a small role in Finland. EMFA requires authorities and media providers to report spending to Traficom, which publishes its first annual summary in 2026.
How transparent is media ownership?
Finland traditionally had no centralised ownership register. Under the new act Traficom must maintain a public database, complementing company-level disclosure requirements.
What is the main systemic risk?
Market concentration. It threatens pluralism in a small linguistic market and is compounded by global platforms and shrinking newsroom resources.
What reforms does the report recommend?
Strengthening Traficom’s resources, clarifying the safeguards around Yle governance, making public service funding predictable, developing merger methodologies that measure pluralism, and restoring reliable national media consumption statistics.
Resources
Files and reference materialMedia Capture Monitoring Report: Finland 2025
The full country assessment, with findings and recommendations across the four areas.
Verification, PDFIntegrity and verification note
SHA3-256 digital fingerprint for the 2025 report, with instructions for checking it.
Archive, PDFFinland 2024
The previous country report, for comparison across reporting years.
ProjectMethodology and country comparison
How the assessment is built, and the findings for the other member states covered.
Cite this report
Horowitz, M., Söderström, A. & Neuvonen, R. (2025). Media Capture Monitoring Report: Finland 2025. Media and Journalism Research Center (MJRC): London, Tallinn and Santiago de Compostela. International Press Institute (IPI): Vienna.
MJRC accepts no government funding. The Media Capture Monitoring Report is produced with the International Press Institute. Support the research.
Invest in independent media research and join a community of practice.
MJRC takes no government money — so the questions we chase are set by the field, not by a funder. A contribution keeps our research and global analysis independent, and buys you a seat closer to the work: early access to new findings, invitations to small-group briefings, a place in our Supporters Circle, and the option to be listed on our Supporters Page.