Measuring EMFA Compliance: Can EMFA Capture-Proof the Polish Media?
This page presents the 2025 Media Capture Monitoring Report: Poland, an annual assessment by the International Press Institute (IPI) and the Media and Journalism Research Center (MJRC) that measures Poland’s compliance with the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) and identifies key media capture risks.
Executive Summary
Poland remains substantively misaligned with the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), despite formal legal provisions intended to guarantee media freedom. As of October 2025, EMFA has not been incorporated into national media legislation, and key reforms aimed at addressing long-standing media capture risks have stalled due to political polarization and institutional deadlock, including the continued possibility of a presidential veto.
The independence of the media regulator, the National Broadcasting Council (KRRiT), is guaranteed in law through the Constitution and the Broadcasting Act, but not in practice. Appointment procedures remain highly politicized, and although the dismissal of the previous chair in mid-2025 reduced overt bias, the regulator continues to be dominated by members appointed under the former government. As a result, KRRiT’s operational independence and credibility remain weak, limiting its ability to fulfil its expanding responsibilities under EMFA.
Public service media (PSM), including Telewizja Polska (TVP) and Polskie Radio, operate within a legal framework that formally guarantees independence, pluralism, and impartiality. However, decades of political interference have hollowed out these safeguards. The liquidation of PSM in late 2023 and the subsequent governance crisis exposed the fragility of existing protections. While recent changes have reduced direct government control over editorial content, governance arrangements remain unstable, funding is politically contingent, and no independent monitoring body exists to safeguard editorial autonomy.
The misuse of state funds to influence media output represents one of Poland’s most acute vulnerabilities. There are no comprehensive rules governing state advertising, nor effective transparency or monitoring mechanisms. Past practices show systematic channelling of public advertising to politically aligned media, while independent outlets were financially marginalized. Despite EMFA’s clear requirements, no concrete regulatory framework has yet been introduced to ensure fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory allocation of state advertising.
Media ownership transparency and pluralism remain only partially addressed. While broadcasters are subject to disclosure requirements, there is no comprehensive national media ownership database, no obligation to disclose beneficial owners across all media sectors, and no system for monitoring public funding flows at outlet level. Concentration control relies primarily on competition law, without a pluralism-specific assessment mechanism capable of evaluating the impact of mergers on editorial independence, as required by EMFA Article 22.
Overall, Poland demonstrates formal alignment but effective non-compliance with EMFA. Structural weaknesses persist across media regulation, public service media governance, state funding, ownership transparency, and pluralism safeguards, leaving the media system vulnerable to continued political and economic capture.
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 Poland, click on the respective country tab.
Questions & Answers
This section provides short, structured answers to key questions arising from the Poland 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?
Poland remains substantively misaligned with EMFA, with persistent media capture risks despite formal legal safeguards.
How independent is the media regulator (KRRiT)?
KRRiT is legally independent but lacks effective independence due to politicized appointments and institutional capture.
How are regulatory appointments carried out?
Members are appointed by the Sejm, Senate, and President, a process that has prioritized political affiliation over expertise.
Does KRRiT have the resources needed to oversee EMFA compliance?
No. While KRRiT has formal powers, its effectiveness is undermined by politicization and limited operational capacity.
What is the situation of public service media?
Public service media operate under a formal independence framework but remain highly vulnerable to political interference and governance instability.
Is public service media funding independent and predictable?
No. Funding relies heavily on annual political decisions and extraordinary state allocations, undermining predictability and independence.
How transparent is state advertising?
State advertising lacks transparency, with no clear criteria, reporting obligations, or independent monitoring mechanisms.
How transparent is media ownership?
Ownership transparency is partial and sector-specific; beneficial ownership disclosure is incomplete and fragmented.
Does Poland assess media mergers for their impact on pluralism?
No. Merger control focuses on competition law and lacks a pluralism-based assessment as required by EMFA.
What is the main systemic risk identified?
The persistence of politicized control over regulation, public media, and state funding mechanisms.
What key reforms does the report recommend?
Depoliticizing regulatory appointments, reforming PSM governance and funding, introducing transparent state advertising rules, establishing a comprehensive media ownership database, and implementing a pluralism-focused merger assessment.
Resources & Reference Materials
- Full report (PDF): Media Capture Monitoring Report: Poland 2025
- Integrity and Verification Note (PDF): SHA3-256 digital fingerprint and verification instructions
- Earlier reports: Media Capture Monitoring Report: Poland 2024
- Methodology overview: Check the project page
Citation
Głowacki, M. (2025). Media Capture Monitoring Report: Poland 2025. Media and Journalism Research Center (MJRC): London/Tallinn. International Press Institute (IPI): Vienna.
Invest in independent media research and join a community of practice.
Your contribution supports MJRC’s investigations and global analysis. As a supporter, you can receive early access to new findings, invitations to small-group briefings, inclusion in our Supporters Circle updates, and the option to be listed on our Supporters Page.
Contribute to MJRC