Media Capture Monitoring Report: Hungary 2025

Measuring EMFA Compliance: Can EMFA Capture-Proof the Hungarian Media?

This page presents the 2025 Media Capture Monitoring Report: Hungary, an annual assessment by the International Press Institute (IPI) and the Media and Journalism Research Center (MJRC) that evaluates Hungary’s compliance with the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) and identifies acute media capture mechanisms shaping the country’s information environment.

Download full report
Project main page

Executive Summary

Since the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) entered into force in August 2025, Hungary has taken no steps toward implementation. The government has instead openly opposed the regulation, framing it as an external interference tool and initiating legal challenges before the Court of Justice of the EU.

As a result, the country continues to exhibit the most advanced model of media capture inside the European Union, combining full government control of the public service media, a regulator aligned with the ruling party, opacity in state advertising, and highly concentrated cross-media ownership.

The media regulator, the National Media and Infocommunications Authority (NMHH) and its Media Council, is legally defined as independent, yet its leadership is appointed exclusively through ruling party votes. Key positions carry nine-year terms, locking in long-term political influence. Regulatory decisions, particularly around licensing, mergers and tenders, consistently favour pro-government outlets.

Public service media (PSM) are formally required to operate independently, but in practice function as a central tool of government communication. Structural control is exercised via the MTVA, which centralises funding and content production, while editorial direction is influenced through political appointments and instructions. Multiple leaked recordings and newsroom testimony confirm widespread censorship, agenda-setting, and exclusion of independent voices.

The misuse of state advertising remains a core mechanism of control. Hungary lacks any EMFA-aligned framework regulating distribution. State contracts overwhelmingly benefit pro-government outlets, while independent media receive minimal or no public funding. No independent mechanism monitors these financial flows.

Media ownership transparency rules exist but are incomplete and poorly enforced. Political allies and state-aligned business networks dominate large parts of the media, particularly following the creation of the KESMA conglomerate — exempted from competition review by government decree.

Overall, Hungary remains not aligned with EMFA across all four monitored dimensions: regulator independence, public service media governance, state advertising transparency, and ownership disclosure.

Explore the data

Media capture mechanisms and safeguards

The table below summarises the key media capture mechanisms as well as the existence and enforcement of legal safeguards, and their alignment with the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) identified in the countries covered by the project. To see Hungary, click on the respective country tab.

Questions & Answers

This section provides short, structured answers to key questions arising from the Hungary 2025 Media Capture Monitoring Report. These entries support journalists, policymakers, researchers and educators who need fast, clear access to findings without reading the full report.

What is the core finding of the report?

Hungary continues to operate a structurally entrenched form of media capture, with no progress toward EMFA compliance. 

Why is EMFA implementation stalled?

The government rejects EMFA as an external intrusion and is pursuing legal action to annul parts of the regulation. 

How independent is the media regulator (NMHH)?

Not independent in practice. Leadership is appointed solely through ruling-party votes and decisions routinely favour pro-government media. 

How are regulatory appointments carried out?

Key roles, including the Media Council presidency, are tied to nine-year terms and filled without cross-party participation. 

Does NMHH have capacity and accountability mechanisms?

While formally mandated to report to Parliament, transparency remains minimal and appeals rarely result in reversals. 

What is the status of public service media (MTVA)?

Public service media operate under strong government influence via the MTVA system and political appointment structures. 

Is funding independent and stable?

Funding is substantial but highly centralised under political control, with no independent oversight. 

How are state advertising and public funds allocated?

There is no regulated system; allocation is consistently politicised and disproportionately benefits pro-government outlets. 

How transparent is media ownership?

Some transparency rules exist, but enforcement is weak and major conglomerates operate without meaningful scrutiny. 

What is the main systemic risk identified?

A mutually reinforcing system combining political control, captured regulation, financial influence, and concentrated ownership.

What key reforms does the report recommend?

The report calls for enforcing ownership disclosure and independent monitoring, depoliticising regulatory appointments, restructuring governance of public service media, and establishing transparent criteria for state advertising.

Resources & Reference Materials

Citation

Nemeth, R. (2025). Media Capture Monitoring Report: Hungary 2025. Media and Journalism Research Center (MJRC): London/Tallinn/Santiago de Compostela. International Press Institute (IPI): Vienna.