What should Hungary do exactly, and why with, that media law? Here is the official translation: http://www.scribd.com/doc/46310168/Hungarian-Media-Law
Tell me what's so controversial and justifies all this fuss.

It seems like the whole row is just hot air and it's really about something else.

bristolguy - it's a pretty meaty document, 194 pages, and I doubt many of us have time to read it all now.

The most obvious angle is that the whole thing regulates "media service providers", who have to notify the government of their address etc., be domiciled in the country, follow all the rules, etc.; media service provider is defined as the entity that has editorial control over a media service, which is in turn defined as a commercial service that delivers programmes to the public through any electronic broadcasting network.

Things could turn troublesome if media service providers ends up being defined broadly; I could see it interpreted as, if you put up AdSense on your blog, you now have to follow all these rules.

"Things could turn troublesome if media service providers ends up being defined broadly; I could see it interpreted as, if you put up AdSense on your blog, you now have to follow all these rules."

If it would turn out that way, the solution is simple. Don't put AdSense on your blog... Get a job and earn a living from it and blog in your free time. Problem solved.

@barrkel

Oh, the document is too lengthy, so let's keep bashing Hungary and Mr. Orban without reading it. The argument about AdSense-supported blogs was way too thin to me. I cannot see anyway if it applies or not.

Bristolguy: don't be cynical. There are some good parts in the law (like limiting the volume of ads), a lot of points that in my opinion should be up the broadcaster (amount of foreign content or violence - my god, can't parents decide what channels their children should watch?), but the thing that really hurt is there: (and as you know, the all-mighty media council mentioned below is occupied by a Fidesz puppet for the next 9 years)
"161 (1) In case of infringement of the obligation of balanced communication defined in Article 13 (2) of the Press and Media Act and Article 12 (2) of this Act, the holder of the viewpoint that was no expressed or any viewer or listener (hereinafter for the purposes of paragraphs (2)–(6): applicant) may request that official proceedings are instituted. The powers to assess a request concerning the media services rendered by media service providers and public service broadcasters with significant powers of influence shall be with the Media Council while in case of other media services with the Office. " and the fines are there, enough the bankrupt any broadcaster...

"(3) The Media Council and the Agency — with due heed to paragraph (7) — shallhave the right to impose the following legal consequences: a) it may exclude the infringer from the opportunity to participate in the tendersput out by the Fund for a definite period of time; b) it may impose a fine on the infringer in line with the following limits:ba) in case of infringement by a JBE media service provider and the mediaservice provider under the regulations on the limitation of media market concentration,the fine shall be of an amount not exceeding HUF 200,000,000;bb) in case of infringement by a media service provider falling beyond thescope of item (ba), the fine shall be of an amount not exceeding HUF 50,000,000;bc) in case of a newspaper of nationwide distribution, the fine shall be of an amount not exceeding HUF 25,000,000;bd) in case of a weekly periodical of nationwide distribution, the fine shallbe of an amount not exceeding HUF 10,000,000;be) in case of other newspaper or weekly newspaper or periodical, the fineshall be of an amount not exceeding HUF 5,000,000;bf) in case of an online media product, the fine shall be of an amount notexceeding HUF 25,000,000;bg) in case of a broadcaster, the fine shall be an amount not exceedingHUF 5,000,000;bh) in case of an intermediary service provider, the fine shall be of anamount not exceeding HUF 3,000,000";

@mr_hu:

Asking for specific and provable facts has not been under the entry "cynism" in my dictionary so far. Maybe I've got an outdated one.

BTW, hefty fines sound like a great idea to me if they are applied in a fair process.

@bristolguy

Indeed it is hot air. Even if there are debateable points in the law, what is it compared to Berlusconi's grip on the media, the Benes decrees, or the last Hungarian governments - none of these sparked anything comparable in the EU.

Then there was the pressure to reduce the deficit below 3% from the planned 6.5% in times, when it is an EU average and some members exceed it by quite a margin. That wasn't enough, Hungary had to be downgradet by 2 degrees with a negative outlook, despite the very low deficit and excellent macroenconomic results (positive current account balance, industrial production growth rate is now 16%)...

Former Portuguese PM Durao Barroso as European champion of the freedom of the press it is like having Bernie Madoff as guardian of the transparency of finance.

I don't exactly remember, did my Dear Barroso or Mr. Charlemagne raised their voice when Slovak law prohibited ethnic Hungarians to speak their native language on public places and fined them for doing so?
Or was it completely in line with EU directives and intention?

The arguments to defend this law, brought forth in these forums, are more scary then the law itself. We can clearly see that there is in Hungary a number of otherwise intelligent people, who are willing to give up independent thought and to join up with any dictatorship that is natoionalistic enough.

These people talk like Ahmadinedschad thugs but are in the EU. Now that is scary.

@Herrcule:

What arguments did you call "scary"? Did you mean perhaps the one drawing attention to the Slovak language law which clearly breached all sort of "European values"... but which somehow hardly made some democratic European eyebrows raised. That happened so in lack of a conflict like the one the Hungarian government undertook when they kicked out the IMF from Hungary and levied crisis taxes on big multinational companies.
Or did you mean that argument that one should actually try to point out something definite to critise in the law?

bristolguy: I call scary the cynical way the defenders of the law mix rthings together. To take your example: what has the Slovak law to do with the Hungarian media law.

Do you mean that if for some reason the Slovak government did somethiong despicable then Hungary should have the right to do something equally idiotic and damaging to the country? Can't you see how utterly stupid this position is?

The argument about the content of the law is stupidity again itself - people know well enough what they are protesting against. Repeating like a parrot that they don`t is acting like a member of the Slota or the Great Romanian Party . I find it scary that such people are now the ones who support the Hungarian government.

Mr Barroso and the EU are quite right to be concerned about the undemocratic mode of government in Hungary, and they are right to insist that the government demonstrates and proves, in a real and practical way that Hungary is the democratic society which Fidesz and Orbán purport that it is.

The problem is that Hungary has had little practice at being a democracy, and has confused values about ethics, legislation, accountability and working as a „team-player”. Orbán’s bullish insistence on „I’ll do it my way’ is a symptom of a general lack of understanding on how to play ball within a team.

Schools in Hungary (and I know from several years’ experience of teaching in different schools here) emphasise learning by rote and memorising facts. This is very good and an important part of learning, but there is no encouraging students to engage in dialogue, and to work through problems within a team. No notion of compromise or discussion of ethics.

Hungarians do not know how to have a civilized discussion and a civilized „beg to differ” mode of dialogue. Anyone who holds a view contrary to Fidesz and Orbán is a ”traitor” and not a „real Hungarian”. Facts and figures which support an argument are treated as false evidence, and those who disagree, are called liars.

Anyone who demonstrates against the government is automatically called a communist, despite the fact that many of us who are opposed to the present corrupt mode of governing, and the erosion of what was slowly and painfully shaping up to at least try to be part of the democratic process, also fought against communism, or simply fled from its corrupt and repressive regime.

The sad irony, which Fidesz supporters just do not get, is that Orbán is the new „communist”- a corrupt, authoritarian, single-party leader, whose only interest in Hungary is not what is best for the country, but how to maintain power at all costs. He knows exactly which buttons to press,in order to divide and rule.

"what has the Slovak law to do with the Hungarian media law"

What I wrote earlier. The Slovak language law clearly and openly breached "European norms" but there wasn't much uproar against it. Unlike the case of the Hungarian media law which initiated really vicious attacks against Mr. Orban's government before even the English translation (or actually the final version of the text in Hungarian) was available.

Can't you see how utterly immoral this position is?

magyar2lips: As for corruption, you'd better shut up, given the long list of serious corruption scandals the governments you clearly liked produced in the last 8 years.
As for grabbing onto power at all costs, nobody could surpass Mr. Gyurcsány, the miserably fallen Socialist ex-PM, who is probably your chosen one..

bristolguy: So you actually believe that if the Slovak (Romanian, Serb, Turkish, Iranian...) government is doing something immoral then Hungary must have the right to do the the same?

This is typical third-world logic - if the whites had introduced the Apartheid then Mugabe has the right to chase them out of the land, right? Stupid...

What you fail to see is that defending the freedom in speech in Hungary is GOOD for the Hungarians - and I hope the EU will somehow stop Hungary becoming a third-class third world dictatorship.

bristolguy: "As for corruption, you'd better shut up,"

Oooh, I see now. You are not a big fan of the freedom of speech, are you? It will be tough for you, Orban-fans, to have discussions in media outside Hungary - people will speak up and asking them to shut up will not work. Poor you.

magyar2lips: "Hungarians do not know how to have a civilized discussion .... Anyone who holds a view contrary to Fidesz and Orbán is a ”traitor” and not a „real Hungarian”."

You seem to assume that all Hungarians are for the fidesz. I beg to differ :) I think, there is a part of the popuöation, who acts like real sectarians generally do - and willingly shut down their brains for the sake of the Great Leader. This is not specific to Hungary, the majority of Romanians acted the same during the Ceausescu - era to name just one example and I seem to remember at least one example from Western - Europe :)

I only hope it will not take a bloody revolution or a war to wake these people up.

This article isn't even particularly critical of Orbán and yet the strawman arguments are in full flow! Slovakia first. I expect Romanian next. And Trianon will be mentioned soon enough. No attacks on Britain yet, which I'm surprised by.

What I don't understand is why people here keep calling anyone who makes a stand against their beloved PM communists? I expect you believe that editors and journalists working for magazines such as The Economist also belong to that 'lot'. Because only those accepting everything Mr Orbán says and approving of everything he does can be real fans of democracy. Even if his deeds clearly limit your freedom of choice in many areas. Congratulations. Fidesz boys clearly outperform communists in obedience, at least. (Despite the fact that even party members disapprove of some of Mr Orbán's decisions, you should really just go on.)