Advertisement

Media in Hungary: Three Pillars of an Illiberal Democracy

  • Gábor PolyákEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Gábor Polyák looks at the media and politics in illiberal Hungary. This chapter examines some of the typical methods that illiberal regimes, such as that of Hungary in recent years, employ and combine into a sustainable state censorship system. These systems are neither hold-overs nor re-makes of the preceding totalitarian control systems. Limitations are imposed simultaneously on media pluralism, on freedom of opinion, and on freedom of information, both in the legacy, and in the online, media. In Hungary, Viktor Orban’s second arrival to power in 2010 gave him a constitutional majority in Parliament, which he has used to an extent unprecedented in the EU, although it is will have many familiar aspect to those schooled in the world of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc. His establishment of ruling party domination has relied heavily on the use of media laws, coupled with control of the both the regulatory bodies and the media market. The chapter gives and overview of the major objectives of these policies and the means employed to effect the ensuing transformation in the media landscape.

References

  1. 444.hu. (2016, April 6). Az iskolaigazgatóknak írásban kell jelenteniük a Kliknél, hogy kinek készülnek nyilatkozni, és miről [School Principals Must Report in Writing to Who They Are Preparing to Comment on and on What]. Available at https://444.hu/2016/04/06/az-iskolaigazgatoknak-irasban-kell-jelenteniuk-a-kliknel-hogy-kinek-keszulnek-nyilatkozni-es-mirol.
  2. 444.hu. (2018, January 30). A Fidesz egyik Facebook-katonája elmesélte, milyen virtuális hadsereget hozott létre a párt [One Facebook Soldier from Fidesz Told Us What Kind of Virtual Army the Party Had Created]. Available at https://444.hu/2018/01/30/a-fidesz-egyik-facebook-katonaja-elmeselte-milyen-virtualis-hadsereget-hozott-letre-a-part.
  3. Bajomi-Lázár, P. (2014). Party Colonization of the Media Central and Eastern Europe. Budapest and New York: Central European University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bajomi-Lázár, P., & Horváth, D. (2013). The Continued Relevance of the Concept of Propaganda: Propaganda as Ritual in Contemporary Hungary. Global Media and Communication, 9(3), 219–237. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bárorfy, A. (2017, April 28). A kormánypárti sajtó és a közmédia is terjeszti a putyinista propagandát Magyarországon. Átlátszó.hu. https://atlatszo.hu/2017/04/28/a-kormanyparti-sajto-es-a-kozmedia-is-terjeszti-a-putyinista-propagandat-magyarorszagon/. Accessed 18 July 2018.
  6. Bede, M. (2017, November 16). Analysis: Hungarian Taxpayers Fund Unique ‘Fake News’ Industry. International Press Institute. https://ipi.media/analysis-hungarian-taxpayers-fund-unique-fake-news-industry/. Accessed 18 July 2018.
  7. Bernát, G., & Messing, V. (2015). A menekültekkel kapcsolatos kormányzati kampány és a tőle független megszólalás terepei. Médiakutató, (4), 7–17.Google Scholar
  8. Budapest Beacon (The). (2016, September 19). https://budapestbeacon.com/euronews-loses-free-cable-slot-to-andy-vajnas-tv2/. Accessed 20 July 2018.
  9. Budapest Business Journal (The). (2017, December 19). Opus Global Makes Television Acquisitions. https://bbj.hu/business/opus-global-makes-television-acquisitions_143177. Accessed 20 July 2018.
  10. CANnual Report. (2018). Does Video Kill the TV (Star)? The Advertising Industry of Central and Eastern Europe. https://cannualreport.wecan.net/2018#/hello.
  11. Constitutional Court of Hungary. (1992). Decision 37/1992 (VI.10); AB of the Constitutional Court of Hungary.Google Scholar
  12. Constitutional Court of Hungary. (2011). Decision 165/2011. (XII. 20.) AB of the Constitutional Court of Hungary.Google Scholar
  13. Council of Europe. (2008). Indicators for Media in a Democracy. Strasburg: Parliamentary Assembly.Google Scholar
  14. Democracy Reporting International. (2016). https://democracy-reporting.org/hungarys-state-owned-tv-shows-bias-in-eu-refugee-referendum/. Accessed 18 July 2018.
  15. Ember, Z. (2016, October 13). Pecina, a rejtélyes osztrák milliárdos, aki Orbánnal üzletelhetett a Népszabadságról. 24.hu. https://24.hu/belfold/2016/10/13/pecina-a-rejtelyes-osztrak-milliardos-aki-orbannal-uzletelhetett-a-nepszabadsagrol/. Accessed 18 July 2018.
  16. Erdélyi, K. (2018). Tavaly 12 milliárdot költött sorosozós reklámkampányokra a kormány. https://atlatszo.hu/2018/02/02/tavaly-12-milliardot-koltott-sorosozos-reklamkampanyokra-a-kormany/. Accessed 2 February 2018.
  17. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. (2015). Opinion on Media Legislation (Act CLXXXV on Media Services and on the Mass Media, Act CIV on the Freedom of the Press, and the Legislation on Taxation of Advertisement Revenues of Mass Media) of Hungary, Strasbourg.Google Scholar
  18. European Council, Media Pluralism and Human Rights—Issue Discussion Paper. (2011). Available at https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1881589. Accessed 2 February 2018.
  19. European Court of Human Rights: Judgement in the Case of Informationsverein Lentia and Others v. Austria. (1993, November 24). Paragraph 38. Available at http://www.menschenrechte.ac.at/orig/93_6/Informationsverein.pdf. Accessed 20 July 2018.
  20. Góra, M., & Zielińska, K. (Eds.). (2013). Democracy, State, and Society: European Integration in Central and Eastern Europe. Krakow: Jagiellonian University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Gross, P., & Jakubowicz, K. (Eds.). (2012). Media Transformations in the Post-communist World: Eastern Europe’s Tortured Path to Change. Plymouth: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  22. Hallin, D., & Mancini, P. (2012). Comparing Media Systems Between Eastern and Western Europe. In P. Gross & K. Jakubowicz (Eds.), Media Transformations in the Post-communist World: Eastern Europe’s Tortured Path to Change (pp. 15–33). Plymouth: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  23. HírTV. (2018, March 10). Trumpi diskurzus: Orbán Viktor szerint fake newst gyárt a Hír TV [Trumpi Discourse: Viktor Orbán Says Fake Newst Is Produced by News TV]. Available at https://hirtv.hu/ahirtvhirei/trumpi-diskurzus-orban-viktor-szerint-fake-newst-gyart-a-hir-tv-2452743.
  24. Hvg.hu. (2015). A TV2 reklámperceit áruló cég az MTVA-val is leszerződött. https://hvg.hu/gazdasag/20151203_A_TV2_reklamperceit_arulo_ceg_az_MTVAval.
  25. Hvg.hu. (2017, March 3). Nem titkolják tovább, Mészáros Lőrinc az Opimus tulajdonosa [They Will Not Be Kept Secret, Lőrinc Mészáros Is the Owner of Opimus]. Available at http://hvg.hu/kkv/20170303_nem_titkoljak_tovabb_meszaros_lorince_az_opimus.
  26. Index.hu. (2018, May 4). Még meg sem alakult az új parlament, egy indexest máris kitiltottak [The New Parliament Has Not Been Formed, an Index Has Already Been Banned]. Available at https://index.hu/belfold/2018/05/04/parlament_index_kitiltas/#.
  27. Jakubowicz, K. (2007). Rude Awakening: Social and Media Change in Central and Eastern Europe. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  28. Jakubowicz, K., & Sükösd, M. (Eds.). (2008). Finding the Right Place on the Map: Central and Eastern European Media Change in a Global Perspective. Bristol and Chicago: Intellect Books.Google Scholar
  29. Kleinsteuber, H. (2010). Comparing West and East: A Comparative Approach to Transformation. In B. Dobek-Ostrowska, M. Glowacki, K. Jakubowicz, & M. Sükösd (Eds.), Comparative Media Systems (pp. 23–41, 34). Budapest and New York: CEU Press.Google Scholar
  30. Magyar Nemzet. (2012, August 12). Szonja Kuslits: Letiltott egészségügyi nyilatkozatok? [Sona Kuslits: Disabled Health Statements]. Available at https://mno.hu/belfold/letiltott-egeszsegugyi-nyilatkozatok-1375367.
  31. Magyar Nemzet. (2018, February 18). Azt akarja, hogy kikísérjem a teremből? [She Wants Me Out of the Room]. Available at https://mno.hu/belfold/kovacs-zoltan-azt-akarja-hogy-kikiserjem-a-terembol-2447668.
  32. Martin, J. P., & Ligeti, M. (2017). Hungary. In A. Bitonti & P. Harris (Eds.), Lobbying in Europe: Public Affairs and the Lobbying Industry in 28 EU Countries (pp. 177–193). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  33. Media Act. (2010). Act CLXXXV of 2010 on Media Service and on Mass Communications. Available at http://nmhh.hu/dokumentum/106487/act_clxxx_on_media_services_and_mass_media.pdf. Accessed 20 July 2018.
  34. Mertek Media Monitor. (2016). The Methods Are Old, The Cronies Are New: Soft Censorship in The Hungarian Media in 2015. http://mertek.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Mertek_Fuzetek_9_ISBN.pdf. Accessed 28 Febraury 2018.
  35. Mertek Media Monitor. (2017). Soft Censorship in Hungary in 2016: When Propaganda Rules Public Discourse. http://mertek.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/MertekFuzetek12.pdf. Accessed 28 February 2018.
  36. Mérték Médiaelemző Műhely and Publicus Reseach. (2016). A médiamenedzserek a sajtószabadságról. http://mertek.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/mediamenedzser2016.07.18.pdf. Accessed 28 February 2018.
  37. Nagy, K. (2016). Abnehmende Vielfalt auf dem lokalen Radiomarkt. In B. Holznagel & G. Polyák (Eds.), Medienfreiheit unter Druck. Medienregulierung und Medienpolitik in Ungarn (pp. 108–122). Berlin and Kassel: B&S Siebenhaar Verlag.Google Scholar
  38. Nagy, K., & Timár, J. (2018, March 14). Jusztícia mérlegén a Médiatanács. Mérték Blog. https://mertek.atlatszo.hu/juszticia-merlegen-a-mediatanacs/. Accessed 18 July 2018.
  39. Nagy, K., & Lehóczki, Z. (2014). A médiatartalomra vonatkozó előírások a Médiatanács gyakorlatában 2011–2013. In G. Polyák & E. Uszkiewicz (Eds.), Foglyul ejtett media—Médiapolitikai írások (pp. 105–148). Budapest: Gondolat Kiadó.Google Scholar
  40. Navratil, S. (2014). A Mérték Médiaelemző Műhely sajtószabadság-indexe. In G. Polyák & E. Uszkiewicz (Eds.), Foglyul ejtett média. Médiapolitikai írások (pp. 148–188). Budapest: Gondolat.Google Scholar
  41. Országgyűlés. (2013, September). Rules on the Entry and Residence of the House of Representatives. Available at http://www.parlament.hu/a-sajtotudositas-rendje.
  42. OSCE Limited Election Observation Mission. (2018, April 8). Hungary—Parliamentary Elections: Statement of Preliminary Findings and Conclusions. https://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/hungary/377410?download=true. Accessed 18 July 2018.
  43. Pap, A. (2017). Democratic Decline in Hungary: Law and Society in an Illiberal Democracy. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Podesta, D. (2009). Soft Censorship: How Governments Around the Globe Use Money to Manipulate the Media. http://www.cima.ned.org/resource/soft-censorship-how-governments-around-the-globe-use-money-to-manipulate-the-media/. Accessed 18 July 2018.
  45. Polyák, G. (2017). Hungary. In F. J. C. Blázquez & S. Valais (Eds.), Journalism and Media Privilege (pp. 60–68). Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory.Google Scholar
  46. Polyák, G. (2018). A Propaganda visszaszorításának intézményi-szabályozási keretei. In J. Dombi, J. Farkas, & E. Gúti (Eds.), Aszimmetrikus kommunikáció - Aszimmetrikus viszonyok (pp. 266–288). Budapest: SZAK Kiadó. http://www.manye.hu/sites/default/files/Aszimmetrikus%20kommunik%C3%A1ci%C3%B3.pdf#overlaycontext=node/14.
  47. Polyák, G., & Nagy, K. (2015). Hungarian Media Law. Mertek Booklets (Vol. 1). Available at http://mertek.eu/en/reports/mertek-booklets-vol-1.
  48. Polyák, G., & Rozgonyi, K. (2015). Monitoring Media Regulators’ Independence—Evidence-Based Indicators: Hungarian Experience. International Journal of Digital Television, 3, 257–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Polyák, G., & Urbán, Á. (2016a, October 10). A Major Step Towards an Authoritarian Media Regime in Hungary. Mertek.eu. http://mertek.eu/en/2016/10/10/major-step-towards-authoritarian-media-regime-hungary/. Accessed 22 February 2018.
  50. Polyák, G., & Urbán, A. (2016b). Az elhalkítás eszközei. Médiakutató, 3–4, 109–123.Google Scholar
  51. Pringle, H., & Marshall, J. (2012). Spending Advertising Money in the Digital Age: How to Navigate the Media Flow. London, Philadelphia and New Delhi: KoganPage.Google Scholar
  52. Puddington, A. (2017). Breaking Down Democracy: Goals, Strategies, and Methods of Modern Authoritarians. Washington, DC: Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/June2017_FH_Report_Breaking_Down_Democracy.pdf. Accessed 18 July 2018.
  53. Rényi, P. D. (2015). Köztük oszt ki az állam 25 milliárdot kommunikációs munkákra. http://444.hu/2015/08/07/ok-harman-osztoznak-az-allami-cegek-25-milliardjan/.
  54. Rényi, P. D. (2018). Orbán lerendelte magához Hatvanpusztára Puch Lászlót, hogy vegye meg neki a Népszavát. https://444.hu/2018/03/09/orban-lerendelte-magahoz-hatvanpusztara-puch-laszlot-hogy-vegye-meg-neki-a-nepszavat. Accessed 9 March 2018.
  55. Simon, J. (2014). The New Censorship: Inside the Global Battle for Media Freedom. New York: Columbia University Press (e-book version).Google Scholar
  56. Urbán, Á. (2015). Distortions in the Hungarian Media Market: The Impact of State Advertising on Competition in the Media. In M. Herrero & S. Wildman (Eds.), The Business of Media: Change and Challenges. Porto: MediaXXI.Google Scholar
  57. Urbán, Á. (2016). Recent Changes in Media Ownership. Mertek.eu. http://mertek.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/mertek_media_owners2016.pdf. Accessed 18 July 2018.
  58. Urbán, Á. (2018a). State Advertising Spending: All-Out Attack. In Á. Urbán (Ed.), An Illiberal Model of Media Markets—Soft Censorship 2017 (Mertek Booklets Vol. 15). http://mertek.eu/en/2018/08/05/an-illiberal-model-ofmedia-markets-soft-censorship-2017-mertek-booklets-15/
  59. Urbán, Á. (2018b, April 16). The End of Magyar Nemzet. Mértékblog. https://mertek.atlatszo.hu/the-end-of-magyar-nemzet/. Accessed 18 July 2018.
  60. Voltmer, K. (2012). Comparing Processes: Media, “Transitions”, and Historical Change. In D. Hallin & P. Mancini (Eds.), Comparing Media Systems Beyond the Western World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Zakaria, F. (1997). The Rise of Illiberal Democracy. Foreign Affairs, 76, 22–43. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Media and CommunicationsUniversity of PecsPecsHungary

Personalised recommendations