3. Distribution

3.1. Role of linear vs. non-linear distribution

The distribution system of newspapers and magazines consists of the state-owned company Lietuvos Paštas and private distribution organisations, which operate mainly in cities. The Lithuanian Government subsidises the service of distribution of periodical press to rural areas by paying compensation to Lietuvos Paštas (8).

Wholesale radio distribution services are provided by the state-owned company AB Lietuvos radijo ir televizijos centras, whose services are used by the majority of national radio broadcasters, as well as by regional radio stations. However, some private radio stations have their own radio transmitters. The digital radio network is not developed in Lithuania.

In 2020, there were 42 economic entities in the distribution market of television services in Lithuania. The market for pay-TV services is relatively concentrated as the leading participant AB Telia Lietuva had 47% of the revenue market in 2020.

Magazine publishers UAB Media 4 bees and UAB Savaitė operate the magazine and book distribution network Medipresa. The telecommunications company Bitė Lietuva is the owner of All Media Lithuania (television channels, websites), All Media Radio (radio channel) and All Media Digital (websites).

3.2. Relevant non-linear (digital) distributors

In Lithuania, the top popular digital intermediaries are YouTube, Facebook, and Google. Social media (Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, etc.) were regularly used as a news source in Lithuania (at least once a day) by 60% of the population in 2021. The average daily reach of Facebook in Lithuania was 38%, whereas YouTube’s average daily reach was 36.3% in 2021. Google was found to be relevant as a search engine (the average daily reach was 60.2% in 2021), but not as a news consumption (aggregation) platform.

Most media channels have Facebook accounts and use this social network to distribute content and attract users to their channel.  There are various Lithuanian audiovisual channels on the YouTube platform. The most significant media on this platform is a private start-up Laisvės TV. The public broadcaster LRT broadcasts its programs on the YouTube platform, and commercial broadcasters have accounts as well.

3.3. Main risks to (digital) transparency

With continuing digital restructurings in the media sector, Lithuanian citizens are steadily drawn to and rely on digital media and social media channels. Another tendency is revealed in changed forms of distribution (and ownership) when, next to established types of ownership, new actors such as start-ups (as is the case with Laisvės TV) are founded by journalists/civic activists and funded through crowdfunding models, advertising and subscriptions.

With new types of digital ownerships on the way, transparency in who owns what and what potential ways to influence public opinion might arise becomes even more important. Obviously, assuring digital ownership transparency is an issue of regulation. Nonetheless, this is also a media and information literacy (MIL) policy-related matter: there is particularly little knowledge on how digital information is arranged and what businesses can influence it. With the proliferation of information disorders and disruptions (9), MIL definitions and policies must be broadened to acknowledge types of businesses/corporations owning media and inciting decision-making power in hybrid communications. In short, digital ownership transparency needs to be broadened to take into account these issues: (a) accessibility of data, (b) extent and public meaningfulness of data collected and provided, and (c) corporate accountability and reliability of data provided.

(8) In 2020, it amounted to 7 million euros.

(9) Information abundance, fake narratives, disinformation, manipulations, online hate speech, etc.

4. Legal framework

4.1. Which laws concern transparency in media ownership and control

In general, Lithuania follows a liberal approach in media regulation. Lithuania has no specific legislation restricting the concentration of ownership or market share of media organisations. The media business is regulated as in all other economic areas in line with the dominant position statement, which is considered when the market share of the entity is at least 40 per cent.

Laws regulating these statements are the main media law, the Law on Provision of Information to the Public (10), the Law on Competition, and the Law on Political Parties of the Republic of Lithuania. Media concentration regulation follows general rules listed in the Law on Competition. The Competition Council is responsible for the mergers of all economic entities.

According to the Law on Provision of Information to the Public (Article 24), Lithuania requires media owners to disclose ownership changes by reporting to the designated institution, which is the Ministry of Culture. The same law imposes certain restrictions on the control of media ownership. The state and municipal institutions and other organisations, except for research and study/education institutions and legal persons, whose founder or shareholder is the state/municipality, may not be producers of public information. Political parties and banks  also cannot be owners of media means in Lithuania. Other obvious limitations to ownership are statements in the law that a broadcasting (retransmission) license shall not be issued to an applicant if the person who can directly or indirectly control the outlet was convicted for a crime against the independence of the State of Lithuania, the integrity of the territory, and the constitutional order, if the person poses a threat to national security or is affiliated with, or maintains contact with, organised crime groups, foreign special services, or groups affiliated with international terrorist organisations.

4.2. Correspondence to normative expectations

As a tradition, different countries apply diverse legislative measures towards media ownership. For small markets such as Lithuania, media concentration in the hands of just a few powerful owners is considered a justified threat to pluralism as this might lead to reduction of content diversity and plurality of voices.

In Lithuania, as implied from media policy, the purpose of instilled regulation (also taking into account the unfinished integrated Information System of Producers and Disseminators of Public Information: Virsis)(11) is to increase the publicity, transparency, and accountability of the activities of producers and disseminators of public information by ensuring the possibility for the public and competent state institutions to monitor, analyze, and evaluate data on media producers, disseminators, and their activities specified by law (12). Although the Law requires the disclosure of detailed data on media owners, they will be collected and published when the information system will start operating.

4.3. Main risks

Public policy documents (13) in Lithuania take into account the characteristics of the geopolitical context (14) by stressing requests to strengthen media literacy, digital competencies, and digital resilience of groups of people (children and youth, minorities, seniors, professionals); prioritising the need for media support; indicating but insufficiently addressing problems of media in the regions. In addition to requests for economic transparency of media ownership and media performance, a stronger emphasis needs to be placed on the transparency of (political) interests and influence.

(10) Law on Provision of Information to the Public: https://www.e-tar.lt/portal/lt/legalAct/TAR.065AB8483E1E/asr.

(11) “Virsis” is an integrated system on public information producers that is designed (but not yet practically implemented) to provide data on information producers and providers registered in the Republic of Lithuania: their management, type of activities, persons responsible for content, licenses, income received (from political advertising, funds, natural persons, etc.).

(12) Law on Provision of Information to the Public: https://www.e-tar.lt/portal/lt/legalAct/TAR.065AB8483E1E/asr.

(13) Nacionalinio saugumo strategija, 2021 (National Security Strategy). Available at: https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAD/TAIS.167925/asr; Lietuvos Respublikos piliečių rengimo pilietiniam pasipriešinimui strategija (Strategy for Preparing Citizens for Civil Resistance), Available at: https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAP/3ac8fb30800311ecb2fe9975f8a9e52e; Lietuvos Respublikos Kultūros Ministerijos Visuomenės informavimo politikos strateginės kryptys 2019-2022 (Strategic Directions of the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Lithuania Public Information Policy 2019-2022), Available at: https://www.e-tar.lt/portal/lt/legalAct/95c4cf60344211e99595d005d42b863e; The 18th Programme of Government ( XVIII Vyriausybės programa)  Available at: https://www.e-tar.lt/portal/lt/legalAct/ed22bb703bc311eb8d9fe110e148c770.

(14) The second decade of the 21st century has brought the intensification of information disruptions and propaganda from Russia and China. The 2020s is marked by new risks and crises as a result of ever-deepening and widespreading disinformation and malign information attacks linked to the global pandemic and the Russian invasion and war in Ukraine.

Discussion and conclusions

Although for the majority of audiences the conventional news media channels, such as print or broadcast media, do not appear as primary choices for searching information, conventional news media remain an important player (15) in the digitally mediated communications arena. Though overall trust rates in media are low, people would choose as most important sources for news: commercial

TV channels (63%), LRT TV (61%), national commercial portals (60%), social networks (57%), YouTube/blogs (50%), relatives/friends (76%) (16).

Knowing who (physical persons and entities) are active players and own/control information production and distribution and what potential spheres of influence might arise from these varying forms of ownership has always been listed as an issue of heightened significance. Nonetheless, with accelerating digital transformations, intensified information disruptions (an influx of disinformation and misinformation), and growing malign information campaigns, such as instigations to conflict, the upswings towards radical and populist politics, hate speech, etc., knowledge of who (which interest groups, businesses, and countries) controls digital media infrastructures becomes of primary significance in today’s Europe.

Although there was a moment in time when it seemed that restrictions imposed on media ownership in Lithuania might have limiting effects on political diversity in the country, from today’s perspective such a regulatory constraint and imposed safeguards towards (political) ownership are considered an advancement, and there are no media owned by hostile influences. Nevertheless, there are cases when private owners may have opaque interests and connections, and this becomes the subject for fact-checking and investigations for journalists. There are extensive journalistic fact-finding analyses accomplished by the LRT and Delfi fact-checking units/newsrooms (17), which expose persistent campaigns of Kremlin propaganda in Lithuania, which are organised via networks of natural persons (also politicians) and local organisations spreading false and conspiracy information on social networks and pseudo-media outlets registered in the country.

To conclude, drawing an extensive picture on media ownership is a demanding and time-consuming matter. As specified, in Lithuania, already back in 2019, there has been a well-coordinated plan announced to establish Virsis, an integrated database about all public information producers and distributors, where all media owners and their economic activities (beneficial owners, turnover, profit, profit from direct and indirect sources: government support/advertising, etc.) would be shown (18). However, this plan is yet to be completed. The Ministry of Culture anticipates achieving the implementation in 2023.

Judging from the EurOMo exercise, the examination of media ownership structures (owners, networks) in Lithuania is not yet defined as a financially expensive process. The secondary data on economic indicators of companies (turnover, revenues) is accessible via the Rekvizitai.lt (19), which is a private initiative sustained by the business daily Verslo žinios. Rekvizitai.lt is a good secondary source, yet its primary focus is not ownership, but economic performance of business entities in Lithuania. Data fed to Rekvizitai.lt comes from the Center of Registers, as well as the State Social Insurance Fund. There is always a risk that such a private initiative will be closed, and no data will be publicly available for research and analysis.

All in all, for most media users who would be interested to find out more information on who is behind the publication (20), searching through such private initiatives (first, people must be aware of the availability of such projects!) or accessing company register does not seem to be realistic.

Briefly, there is a lack of systematic approach to media ownership transparency assurance in Lithuania. There is also a lack of a detailed analysis of the diverse factors (regulatory framework and effectiveness/performance analyses) influencing the situation, which calls to be defined as of limited efficiency.

On a final note, there is one more issue which attracted our attention. In academic analyses, ‘ownership transparency’ problem has been mostly addressed in the frame of assuring higher standards for economic/business transparency of media entities. Yet, there are new requests arising from a rapidly changing communications arena and persisting uncertainties in the geopolitical context in Europe, so a number of new questions linked to information/communication disruptions (21) must be thought about and, possibly, also tackled in the context of ‘ownership transparency’ (22).

(15)  In August 2021, Lithuania had the lowest confidence in the media since 1998: 24.8% trusted the media and 33.4% did not, whereas in May 2022, half of the surveyed people did not trust the Lithuanian media, and slightly less than half trusted it (46% trusted and 50% did not).

(16) The role of media in the Baltics (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTL_NWu9WFw).

(17) Investigative reports on propaganda networks in Lithuania disclosed by fact-checking and investigative units of the LRT (with DebunkEU.org) and Delfi: https://www.lrt.lt/en/news-in-english/19/1701641/lithuania-s-pro-kremlin-disinformation-network-exposed-lrt-investigation; https://www.delfi.lt/multimedija/sekant-pinigus.

(18) irsis (Viešosios informacijos rengėjų ir skleidėjų informacinė sistema) will provide data on information producers and providers registered in the Republic of Lithuania: their management, type of activities, persons responsible for content, licenses, income received (from political advertising, funds, natural persons, etc.). In order to ensure relevance and accuracy of the collected data, an integrated system of state informations resources (registers) will be formed on the basis of: The Register of Legal Entities, Integrated Tax Information System, Information System of the Central Ellectoral Commission, Integrated Library Information System, and other resources. More Information (in Lithuanian): https://lrkm.lrv.lt/lt/veiklos-sritys/visuomenes-informavimo-politika/viesosios-informacijos-rengeju-ir-skleideju-informacine-sistema-virsis.

(19)  https://rekvizitai.vz.lt.

(20) Data is made publicly available via the Ministry of Culture database of information producers/disseminators and through public initiative by Transparency International Vilnius Bureu project Stirna.info. 

(21) Media ownership transparency must be explored in line with heightened efforts to assure digital resilience. For that, more systematic ‘forms of knowing’ of who (persons, groups, businesses) is behind the digital information infrastructures and media networks must be developed.

(22) Some relevant questions: What has significantly changed in communications arena/infrastructures in Europe, and what problems are arising as a result of these digital transformations that require to address the issue of media ownership transparency with a new attitude? Who are the owners (private and legal persons, groups, secondary businesses), and what are their potential networks of (political, economic, cultural) influence across different countries and regions in Europe? How widespread is the problem of media ownership ‘transparency’ in Europe: what types of data are missing, what is the ‘relevance’ of the missing data, and how the gaps in the current systems of data collection must be corrected? What are variations in regulation and legal safeguards to protect/restrict media ownership in different legal/political/cultural contexts and traditions?

References

Balčytienė, A. (2009). Market-led reforms as incentives for media change, development and diversification in the Baltic States: a small country approach. International Communication Gazette, 71(1-2), 39-49.

Balčytienė, A., & Lauk, E. (2005). Media transformations: the post-transition lessons in Lithuania and Estonia. Informacijos mokslai, 33, 96-109.

Balčytienė, A., Jastramskis, D., Juraitė, K., & Kalpokas, I. (June 2022). Monitoring media pluralism in the digital era. Country report: Lithuania. European University Institute: Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom. Retrieved from https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/74696/CMPF_MPM2021_final-report_QM-07-22-558-EN-N.pdf?sequence=1.

Balčytienė, A., Juraitė, K., Jastramskis, D., & Kalpokas, I. (July 2021). Monitoring media pluralism in the digital era. Country report: Lithuania. European University Institute: Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom. Retrieved from https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/71953/lithuania_results_mpm_2021_cmpf.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.

Baltic Media Health Check 2020-2021 (January 2022). Bouncing back: Recovery and a way forward. Retrieved from https://mediacentre.sseriga.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Baltic-Media-Health-Check-2020_2021.pdf.

Jastramskis D. (2008). Žiniasklaidos organizacijos nuosavybės struktūros įtaka žiniasklaidos priemonės turiniui. Informacijos mokslai, 46, 136-150. Retrieved from https://www.journals.vu.lt/IM/article/view/3351/2419.

Jastramskis, D. (2015). The political (in)dependence of the media in Lithuania. Kwartalnik Nauk o Mediach, 2015(1). Retrieved from http://knm.uksw.edu.pl/the-political-independence-of-the-media-in-lithuania.

Jastramskis, D., & Plepytė-Davidavičienė, G. (2021). Audience and revenue concentration in Lithuanian media markets (2008–2019). Informacijos mokslai, 91, 120-135. Retrieved from https://www.zurnalai.vu.lt/IM/article/view/23993.

Jastramskis, D., Rožukalne, A., & Jõesaar, A. (2017). Media Concentration in the Baltic States (2000–2014). Informacijos mokslai, 77, 26–48. Retrieved from https://www.zurnalai.vu.lt/IM/article/view/10705/8776.

Juraitė, K. (2008). Media power in the Lithuanian news market reconsiderred. Informacijos mokslai, 27, 121-132.

Population of Lithuania (2020, Oficial statistics portal). Population and its composition. Retrieved from https://osp.stat.gov.lt/en/lietuvos-gyventojai-2020/salies-gyventojai/gyventoju-skaicius-ir-sudetis.