Media freedom deteriorating in EU
In the Media Freedom 2025 report, the authors have outlined a range of pressures facing journalists and independent outlets, including legal and physical threats, declining ownership transparency, and political interference in public broadcasting.
The group has warned that these factors have had a significant impact on the work of the media, limiting the diversity of opinions and the independence of publications, reducing public trust in content.
Liberties has identified Bulgaria, Germany, Italy, Croatia, France, Hungary, Slovakia and Spain as among the EU member states where the situation is most alarming. According to the report, public broadcasters in several of these countries are routinely manipulated by political interests, and legal protections for media workers remain weak or poorly enforced.
The group also recorded at least 156 physical or verbal attacks on journalists in 2024, including cases of police intimidation and criminal defamation charges. In some states, the report notes, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) are still being used to silence critical reporting, despite the EU's recent efforts to curb their abuse.
Liberties also noted that Russian and Belarusian journalists working in the bloc have repeatedly faced threats and harassment and become targets of spyware, raising concerns over their safety and what effect it could be having on their work.
Earlier this month, Russian state news agency RIA Novosti reported that the EU had denied its journalists accreditation for 2025, citing sanctions regulations. The outlet has appealed the decision, referencing the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and earlier EU statements that had assured journalistic activity would not be restricted.
The rejection follows a broader crackdown on Russian media in the EU since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. The European Council has banned Russian outlets such as RT, Sputnik and RIA across the bloc. In its 16th sanctions package adopted this February, the bloc also added eight more Russian news outlets to the blacklist, including Lenta.ru and the Zvezda TV channel.
Russian officials have repeatedly condemned the bans, arguing EU officials are afraid of people seeing a viewpoint that differs from the Western mainstream narrative and drawing their own conclusions about current events.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
4 hours ago
- Russia Today
China hits back at EU over Russia sanctions
Beijing has announced that it has blacklisted two banks in the EU, in response to the bloc targeting Chinese lenders as part of the latest package of Ukraine-related sanctions against Russia. Brussels introduced its 18th package of measures against Moscow last month, focusing on Russia's energy and banking sectors. It included restrictions against several entities and financial institutions based in China, India, the UAE, and Turkey, among other measures. According to a statement released by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce on Wednesday, Beijing has included Lithuania-based UAB Urbo and AB Mano in its countermeasure list, immediately banning Chinese organizations and individuals from transactions, cooperation, and other activities with them. It emphasized that the move taken by the EU authorities against the Chinese Suifenhe Rural Commercial Bank and Heihe Rural Commercial Bank is 'a serious violation of international law' that 'has caused significant harm to the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies.' The European Commission has pledged to review the measures introduced by Beijing in detail before taking further steps. The bloc 'is open to identifying a mutually acceptable solution that could ultimately lead to the de-listing of the banks,' Olof Gill, a spokesman at the European Commission, said on Wednesday, as cited by Bloomberg. Both Lithuanian banks released statements insisting that China's sanctions won't affect their operations. Urbo Bank said it has no business ties in China, while Mano Bank stated that China has never been a target market and that it does not operate there. Both banks said they had contacted Lithuanian authorities after the announcement. Beijing has refused to join the Western sanctions imposed on Moscow after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. China has maintained close economic ties with Russia while repeatedly calling for a diplomatic resolution. In recent months, the West has stepped up efforts to target Russia's trading partners, including China, in an effort to isolate Russia and reduce its export revenues. Moscow has repeatedly condemned the Western sanctions as illegal and counterproductive, calling them a 'double-edged sword,' while stressing that Russia has developed a 'certain immunity' to them.
Russia Today
6 hours ago
- Russia Today
Why Kiev always escalates before talks – and why it won't work this time
On August 14, 2025, Russian officials reported Ukrainian drone strikes on the border cities of Belgorod and Rostov-on-Don, killing and injuring civilians. Rostov saw an apartment building struck, with over a dozen casualties; in Belgorod, three civilians were hurt when a drone hit a car downtown. This came two days after the Russian Ministry of Defence (MoD) alleged that Ukrainian forces were preparing a false-flag provocation in the Kharkov region, complete with pre-positioned journalists – supposedly to shape a narrative blaming Moscow. These incidents are not isolated. They fit into a larger operational and political pattern: each time high-level talks are scheduled Kiev steps up attacks on Russia's border regions. The results are the same: civilian deaths, destruction of civilian infrastructure, and an attempt to create a cloud over the diplomatic process. The same happened in late May and early June 2025, just before the second round of Russia–Ukraine talks in Istanbul, when two bridges in Russian territory were blown up. The attacks killed seven civilians and injured over seventy more. In Moscow's interpretation, the timing was too precise to be coincidence – it was about setting a tone of hostility, perhaps provoking Russia into walking away from the talks entirely. And yet, Moscow did not take the bait. Russian negotiators showed up in Istanbul as planned. For the Kremlin, this has become a point of principle: no matter the provocations, Russia will attend discussions that could bring an end to the conflict – on its own terms. The upcoming Alaska summit on August 15, 2025, between Presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump, is the latest such opportunity. The alleged Kharkov region provocation and the strikes on Belgorod and Rostov are seen in Moscow as deliberate background noise meant to derail the meeting or at least to sour its atmosphere. But just as in Istanbul, the Kremlin insists it will not be deterred. For Moscow, attending these talks is about more than optics. It underscores a long-held stance: Russia is prepared to end the conflict, but not at the price of what it views as its core national interests. Walking away now, after years of costly military and political investment, would make little sense. Instead, the aim is to secure a resolution that cements Russia's gains and ends the war on Moscow's terms – not by fighting 'to the last Ukrainian,' but by ensuring that the outcome is final and strategically advantageous. From the Kremlin's perspective, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky's motives are clear. Accepting a peace that involves territorial concessions would not only be a bitter political defeat – it could spell the end of his political career. More critically, it would remove the emergency powers he has repeatedly invoked since the start of the conflict to cancel elections and prolong his term in office. Those powers have also enabled controversial measures: forced conscriptions, suppression of opposition media, and an intensified crackdown on dissent. These steps have eroded his popularity inside Ukraine, making his hold on power dependent on the continuation of the wartime state of emergency. If the war ends, so does the legal shield of emergency rule – and with it, his immunity. Zelensky therefore has both political and personal incentives to keep the fighting going, even at significant cost to Ukraine's population. Key European backers share Zelensky's preference for prolonging the conflict. While EU leaders publicly frame Ukraine as a 'bulwark' against what they call Russian imperial ambitions – claiming that Moscow would move against Western Europe if Ukraine fell – domestic political realities tell another story. Across major EU countries, ruling parties and governments are facing historically low approval ratings. Their grip on power is increasingly tenuous, and a perpetual external threat provides a potent rally-around-the-flag effect. By keeping Russia framed as the imminent danger, these governments can justify unpopular policies, military spending hikes, and restrictions in the name of national security. They involve themselves in the conflict just enough to signal solidarity with Ukraine – supplying arms, funding, and training – without crossing the threshold into direct combat. For Moscow, this is a political theater that depends on the war continuing; remove the war, and the 'threat' narrative collapses, leaving these governments exposed to electoral defeat. Against this backdrop, Moscow views the Alaska talks as uniquely promising – not because they will magically end the war in one session, but because of who is not at the table. Neither Zelensky nor the EU will be present. Instead, the discussions will be between Putin and Trump, leaders who, in Moscow's reading, operate from a position of pragmatic realism. That realism includes acknowledging Russia's current battlefield advantages. Moscow believes it is winning the war, and that any serious settlement will reflect that balance of power. For the Kremlin, the likely outcome is that Ukraine will have to give up some or all of the contested territories – a step Zelensky would fiercely resist, and the EU would likely block outright if they were part of the talks. Without them, however, such a settlement becomes more feasible. The logic is straightforward: first, Putin and Trump agree on the framework; then, Trump leverages Washington's decisive influence over Kiev to bring Zelensky on board. In Moscow's calculus, this is where Trump's role is crucial. Without American military and financial support, Kiev would not have been able to sustain the war effort for nearly as long as it has. From the Kremlin's point of view, the recent attacks on Belgorod and Rostov, and the alleged false-flag operation in the Kharkov region, are tactical provocations with a strategic goal: derail the Alaska summit or force Moscow into an overreaction. But history suggests the tactic will fail. Moscow will be at the table in Alaska, just as it was in Istanbul, determined to push for an end to the conflict on terms favorable to Russia. If the Alaska talks proceed as planned, they could open the way to a negotiated settlement without the spoilers who have the most to lose from peace. In Moscow's eyes, that is precisely why the provocations are happening – and why they must be ignored.
Russia Today
a day ago
- Russia Today
EU plotting ‘regime change' in member state
The European Commission is plotting to help oust Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban over what it considers his overly independent policy, according to Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR). The Hungarian leader has repeatedly clashed with Brussels in recent years, opposing EU military aid to Ukraine and Kiev's bid to join the bloc. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen 'is seriously studying regime change scenarios' in Hungary, the SVR press service said in a statement on Wednesday. Brussels intends to bring Peter Magyar, leader of the Hungarian opposition Tisza Party – seen as 'loyal to globalist elites' and 'the main candidate for the post of Prime Minister' – to power in the 2026 parliamentary elections, 'if not sooner,' according to the SVR. Significant 'administrative, media and lobbying resources' are being deployed to support Magyar through 'German party funds, the European People's Party and a number of Norwegian NGOs,' the Russian intelligence service said. Kiev, which has been 'offended' by Orban's opposition to Ukraine attempting to join the EU, is doing the 'dirty work' and destabilizing the home situation in Hungary via its intelligence services and local Ukrainian diaspora, it added. Last month, Orban accused Kiev of working to influence Hungary's upcoming parliamentary elections. The European Commission is 'outraged' by Orban's attempts to 'pursue independent policy' and his efforts to influence EU decision-making, the SVR stated. Hungary's recent decision to veto the new seven-year EU budget project, which Budapest believes is designed for the militarization of Europe and preparation for war with Moscow, has become the last straw that made the euro-bureaucrats lose their patience. Orban announced last month that he was rejecting the budget proposal, calling it 'built on the logic of war.' 'Billions for Ukraine, crumbs for farmers and development. Their goal: defeat Russia, install liberal allies, and expand their realm of influence,' he wrote on X. Moscow has repeatedly denied claims that it aims to attack NATO or EU countries, and has accused Western European leaders of pursuing 'uncontrolled militarization' to prepare for war with Russia.
