Distribution of media content

Despite the popularity of news portals in Cyprus, distribution of digital media content does not pose any serious risks regarding news prioritisation and possible agenda setting. As a result, ownership transparency of the content distributors cannot be seen as an actual risk. On the other hand, print media (not popular anyway) reach nearly the whole country and the entire population and there are no official reports or claims of discrimination.

The TV sector is characterised by a high infrastructure diversity (through DTT and IPTV systems), accompanied by conditions of fierce competition among multiple organisations of TV channels, owned by a number of different owners, which, given the population of Cyprus, is rather high. By contrast, in the radio sector, even though there are multiple distributors of content, forming an audio field of intense competition, the infrastructure diversity can be considered as low. For instance, only a few radio stations are using the DAB / DAB+ options via the free digital broadcasting infrastructure or the subscription based platforms. On the other hand, most (if not all) of the radio stations are broadcasting through the Internet.

The public broadcaster RIK is a universal provider of digital broadcasting services, being obliged to cover the entire Cyprus territory with a digital signal (DAB, DAB+ included). In the field of subscription-based IPTV, there are several companies offering their digital audiovisual services (Cytavision, Cablenet, Epic) to the whole population with a high infrastructure diversity (DTT, CATV, IPTV, DTH) in a situation of competition (multiple operators of different owners). According to the DESI connectivity indicator (2022) Cyprus is ranked 13th with the DESI close to 60. The fact that the main Internet providers[12] (Cyta, Primetel, Cablenet, Epic) are offering digital audiovisual services themselves is an issue because they are mainly emphasising sports content and movies / series rather than news.

The Cypriot NRA reports no relevant infringements. Suspect cases are independently investigated and eventually clarified, with high compliance by internet providers. Office of Electronic Communications & Postal Regulation’s main findings were that Cyprus’ ISPs are acting in conformity with the provisions of the Regulation and the Decree[13] (high compliance, no recidivism). There are rare (one case) and no recurring infringements.

Direct online access to news is higher than that obtained via Facebook or other information intermediaries (which is, though, higher than print and broadcasting news consumption) and has higher news consumption levels than digital information intermediaries. Most of the relevant intermediaries in Cyprus either provide no information or disclose general criteria on pages that cannot be reached from the content area. While some intermediaries inform that paid content might get prioritised, they do not promise to disclose the existence of commercial agreements behind this content.

The legal framework

In theory, the importance of the issue of transparency is evident in the State of Cyprus. In fact, the law provides that the ownership, financial situation and financing of the media must be disclosed. There are five different laws which relate to those (and many other, including ownership transparency, competition, etc.) issues. The main Press Law (145/1989) covers mostly print media, for instance the statutory newspaper manager. The Law on Radio and Television Organisations (7(Ι)/1998) covers mostly the broadcasting sector (including digital content) and refers (among others) to the number of allocated licences, ownership transparency, financial reporting, etc. The Law for the Cyprus Broadcasting Corporation covers the public media outlet of Cyprus and includes provision also for the role of RIK (CyBC) as the national digital broadcasting provider. The other two laws (the recent Competition Law – 13(I)/2022, and the Law on the Right of Access to Public Sector Information Act – 184(Ι)/2017) are quite generic and refer mainly to companies (within or outside the media sector). Both of them are the result of transferring EU regulation to the context of Cyprus.

All the previously mentioned laws are subject to successive additions, amendments or replacements, making it difficult to understand the depth of the regulation they aim at.

Cyprus has a rigid legal system for property transparency. The Press Law and the Law on Radio and Television Organisations apply, but not to all types of opinion-forming media. Media outlets are obliged to disclose their ownership scheme publicly and in sufficient detail. However, they are mostly covering print and broadcasting media. Online media outlets channels have no legal obligation to provide ownership information.

The responsibility for securing media ownership transparency is given to Cyprus Radio-Television Authority (CRTA). Issues related to (media) competition are co-examined by the Cyprus Competition Commission and the Cyprus Radio-Television Authority. Once a year, media outlets must (re)publish / update information about their ownership structure while changes during the year must be also made publicly available. In addition, for radio and TV outlets a disclosure of shareholder and beneficiary information (in the case of private outlets) must be also made publicly available. In order to ensure diversity, owners who want to hold shares in other media outlets are restricted to 5% (or less) of the shares.

Public authorities or media companies have a legal obligation to disclose state/public funding to the Cyprus Broadcasting Authority, but this is not always the case. There are provisions for applying, automatically, tough sanctions including operation suspension. However, such sanctions are rarely applied in practice while financial sanctions are rather soft and do not deprive licence to practise. As far as journalists are concerned, they follow self-regulation, i.e. the obligation to comply with the Code of Conduct for the Journalistic Profession, which has been formulated by journalists’ associations, but there is no specific law covering this issue.

As to the field of digital information intermediaries, in the Cyprus legal framework there is no specific provision that addresses the issues of transparency in content curation.

Conclusions

Media ownership transparency needs to be systematically monitored in all media channels involved in the provision and distribution of news. Information relating to the legal, financial, relational and managerial levels of all media outlets must be examined with scrutiny and should be easily accessible by the public.

Starting with the legal context, the current research concluded that this information is direct and accessible. At the relational level it is clear which media outlets have close links with political parties or individuals. In contrast, information on the economic level, i.e., funding models, public subsidies and revenue from public advertising, and the managerial level, i.e. how the independence of the Editorial Board is secured, who determines the resources for news distribution, etc., is not accessible to the general public.

An issue of concern is that most of the natural owners of media outlets are related also with the ownership of companies acting in economic areas different from the media sector. Also, in two cases even the direct owner company of a media outlet has a NACE code irrelevant to the media sector.

The legal framework that covers the operation of media outlets, despite being complex, is sufficient. However, when it comes to enforcing this legal framework in practice the situation is quite different, since it is rather difficult to apply hard sanctions.

The online media sector, while popular, is not covered sufficiently by law provisions and this is evident also in ownership transparency.