Media Capture Monitoring Report: Romania 2025

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

This page presents the 2025 Media Capture Monitoring Report: Romania, an annual assessment by the International Press Institute (IPI) and the Media and Journalism Research Center (MJRC) that measures Romania’s compliance with the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) and identifies key media capture risks.

Download full report
Project main page

Executive Summary

Although the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) legally entered into force on 8 August 2025, Romania has made no tangible progress toward implementation. The Ministry of Culture initiated early consultations, but no draft legislation has been submitted, and core structural problems continue to affect the regulator, public service media, the allocation of state advertising, and the wider media market.

Romania’s media regulator, the National Audiovisual Council (CNA), is formally an independent authority yet remains highly politicised in both composition and behavior. Appointment procedures dominated by parliamentary bargaining routinely place politically affiliated individuals on the Council. In 2024–2025, the regulator operated for a full year without a formally appointed President, and political parties considered merging the CNA with the telecom regulator ANCOM, a move widely criticised for threatening media oversight capacity. Despite its mandate, the CNA is under-resourced, slow in enforcing sanctions, and in 2024–2025 even overstepped its legal authority by ordering removal of online video content beyond its jurisdiction.

Public service media, TVR, SRR, and the national news agency Agerpres, face long-standing governance vulnerabilities. Leadership changes continue to follow political shifts, and parliamentary veto of annual reports is used as a tool of control rather than accountability. TVR suffers from severe audience decline, financial fragility and reputational challenges, while SRR performs more strongly but remains institutionally cautious. Agerpres holds a comparatively stable position but lacks a governing board and external oversight mechanisms.

The misuse of state funds remains one of the most pervasive forms of media capture in Romania. Local authorities regularly distribute advertising through opaque procedures, intermediaries and preferential contracts. Political parties, heavily funded through public subsidies, channel tens of millions of euros into media through PR intermediaries, often without proper labelling. Public procurement data remain incomplete, inconsistent and difficult to access.

Ownership transparency is only enforced for broadcasters. Most online and print outlets have no obligation to disclose ownership, and the commercial registry requires payment for access. Meanwhile, telecom-media convergence continues: Digi Communications/RCS&RDS holds a dominant position across distribution, television, and digital news. Romania lacks any mechanism to assess whether mergers could affect pluralism, as required by EMFA Article 22.

Overall, Romania is not aligned with EMFA across the four core areas: independence of media regulators, public service media governance, state advertising transparency, and ownership disclosure and assessments of media pluralism.

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 Romania, click on the respective country tab.

Questions & Answers

This section provides short, structured answers to key questions arising from the Romania 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?

Romania is not aligned with EMFA. Political influence over the media regulator and public service media, combined with opaque state advertising practices and insufficient ownership transparency, continue to enable systemic media capture.

Why has EMFA implementation not begun?

Although the Ministry of Culture initiated initial consultations, no draft law has been prepared. Political fragmentation and competing institutional priorities stalled progress. No reforms have been introduced in any of the four EMFA pillars.

How independent is the media regulator (CNA)?

Formally independent, the CNA is highly politicised in practice. Appointments are negotiated between parties, several members have explicit partisan backgrounds, and the institution lacks stable leadership. Enforcement is inconsistent, and the CNA engaged in illegal overreach by removing online content outside its mandate.

How are regulatory appointments carried out?

Appointments are made by Parliament and the Presidency without transparent, merit-based criteria. Parliamentary majorities routinely appoint individuals linked to political parties. Parliamentary rejection of annual reports can trigger leadership dismissal, enabling political control.

Does the CNA have the resources needed to oversee EMFA compliance?

No. The CNA operates with insufficient staff, especially content monitors, and faced budget cuts in 2025. Plans to modernise monitoring capacity rely on external EU funding, not stable domestic support.

What is the situation of public service media (TVR, SRR, Agerpres)?

Public broadcasters remain vulnerable to political influence. TVR struggles with audience collapse and financial losses; SRR maintains relevance but is institutionally cautious; Agerpres is relatively stable yet lacks a governing board. Political appointments dominate leadership selection.

Is public service media funding independent and predictable?

No. TVR and SRR depend on annual budget allocations, which are politically determined. Funding is not anchored in transparent, multi-year mechanisms, contrary to EMFA requirements for predictable, adequate financing.

Is funding for public service media independent and stable?

Only partially. Funding has increased but remains dependent on annual government decisions without a multi-year model, creating financial and political vulnerability.

How transparent is state advertising?

Transparency is very low. Procurement rules exist but are frequently bypassed at local level. Data on spending are incomplete, SEAP.gov.ro is unreliable, and intermediaries are used to obscure real beneficiaries. Political parties spend substantial public subsidies on media contracts without proper labelling.

How transparent is media ownership?

Only broadcasters must disclose ownership to the CNA. Ownership of print and online outlets is often opaque, and beneficial ownership information is not collected systematically. There is no national ownership database, as required under EMFA.

What is the main systemic risk identified?

The combination of politically captured regulator, politicised public service media, large-scale misuse of state funds, and telecom-media consolidation constitutes the dominant configuration of media capture in Romania.

What key reforms does the report recommend?

The report calls for a comprehensive set of reforms to bring Romania in line with the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA). It urges the depoliticisation of the media regulator (CNA) through transparent, merit-based appointments and stable resourcing, and recommends strengthening the governance, oversight and funding independence of public service media. The report also calls for fully transparent, competitive, and monitored state advertising procedures, the closure of legal loopholes that enable opaque contracting, and the establishment of a national media ownership database alongside pluralism-impact assessments for media mergers. Overall, the report stresses the need for structural reforms to reduce political influence, increase transparency, and protect editorial independence across Romania’s media system.

Resources & Reference Materials

Citation

Ganea, L. & Martin, R. (2025). Media Capture Monitoring Report: Romania 2025. Media and Journalism Research Center (MJRC): London/Tallinn/Santiago de Compostela. International Press Institute (IPI): Vienna.