Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Now, it is eight years since the new media law was introduced by Victor Orbn's government. Can you say -from that time perspective -which particular changes of the law affected the media system and journalists the most? Or maybe it is the practice of the party in power that influenced the media the most? I think both the law and its implementation were meant to completely retransform Hungary's media system. The new law created a new media authority with new members. All members of the Media Council were delegated by the Fidesz party, while its first chair was nominated by Prime Minister Viktor Orbn himself. (Now the chair is delegated by the President of the Republic who also happens to be a former Fidesz member.) In other words, a new nomenklatura system was created to take over decision-making positions in order to control the redistribution of media resources. Of course, the members are bound to be independent by media law, but can a one-party body ensure the pluralism of voices? Certainly not.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bajomi‐Lázár et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: