The ERC wants to promote a “clear distinction” between journalistic publications and those that are not

The ERC has submitted proposals to parliament to amend the radio and press laws, the latest of which extends the scope to the “online” medium and promotes a “clear distinction” between journalistic and non-journalistic publications.

In a statement released this Monday, the Media Regulatory Authority (ERC) says it submitted two proposals to the Assembly of the Republic 10 days ago (July 14) for urgent consideration and discussion.

Regarding the Press Law, which was passed in 1999, the Media Regulator notes that it “applies only to printed publications” and that “none of the specific changes it has undergone have outlined its adaptation to the profound changes in the economic and social fabric brought about by the digital revolution and the Internet, so it has proven outdated and for a long time unable to respond to emerging regulatory challenges.”

The ERC proposal “pursues the first goal of extending the scope of the Press Law to the ‘online’ environment, providing an unambiguous legal basis for various regulatory approaches, including some that are in force, for example, in relation to registration.”

The second, “in a scenario of large dissemination of expressive content, stems from the urgency of making a separation before the public of what is journalistic information and communication not produced in accordance with journalistic rules”, since “it is known that most of the content that circulates on the World Wide Web” [www] are not of a journalistic nature.

In this sense, the diploma “contributes, in the eyes of the public, to a clear distinction between journalistic and non-journalistic publications, reflecting right at the time of the classification that the ERC is obliged to carry out, the characteristics of the respective content: journalistic or non-journalistic, retaining only the former qualification of publications of general or specialized information and offering, in relation to the latter, the designation of general or thematic.”

The proposal states that “in addition to requiring that publications be classified for immediate visibility on the front page of print periodicals or on the front page(s) of ‘online’ publications, this will allow the public to assess the level of participation of the publication in certain values ​​and responsibilities, allowing it to make an informed choice.”

Thus, “journalistic publications will be periodicals or electronic publications in which the functions of researching, collecting, selecting, processing and disseminating facts, news or opinions are carried out for informational purposes and are carried out by journalists, as defined by law (i.e.

Thus, he adds, periodical publications or electronic publications that are primarily aimed at promoting activities, products, services or organizations of a commercial or industrial nature cannot be classified as journalistic.

According to the regulator, “the current restrictive (and misleading) classification system that obliges publications to be classified only as informational or doctrinal, assuming that only journalistic publications can be classified as informative (general or specialized information), that non-journalistic publications are designated as general or thematic, and that both types of publications can, where applicable, be doctrinal in nature.”

With regard to the classifications, “it was decided to consider as Portuguese publications distributed or made available in Portuguese to the public residing in Portugal or in Portuguese communities abroad, under the brand and under the responsibility of a Portuguese publisher or with the nationality of any Member State of the European Union, provided that it has its headquarters or any form of permanent establishment in the national territory.”

The rest will be considered foreign publications.

The third goal of the proposal is “to secure a minimum level of protection for the public in front of the entire press”, regardless of support.

“There is an understanding that everything that is illegal in the material world cannot but be illegal “on the net” when it may affect interests or legally protected rights,” and “both criminal offenses and crimes of a purely social or civil nature must maintain their protection mechanisms in all circumstances, whether they are committed through the press or not,” the document says.

Press bodies, online or offline, journalistic or non-journalistic, “will be required to undergo registration to make their ownership and internal organization known, as well as a media transparency regime, and must provide the regulator with all relevant information about their ownership and funding structure.”

The ERC believes that “it is also necessary to require an ‘editor’s charter’ that discloses to the public the aims and obligations of the electronic or electronic periodical, among which, in the case of journalistic publications, the respect for the ethical and deontological duties of the profession, and in the case of non-journalistic publications, respect for the integrity of readers, as well as guaranteeing the right of reply in accordance with the provisions of the law, should be emphasized.”

The proposal also expands the duties of identification and segregation to editorial content under the current law, “subjecting them to differentiated pagination or graphic treatment, and extending to the press the principle that journalistic texts and images may not be sponsored or contain advertising links to any person, product or service.”

It is also proposed that the press support system “be limited to Portuguese journalistic publications (Article 4) in order to promote the use of public funds in press projects promoting the employment and professional development of journalists in ways subject to regulation.”

In a statement, “the regulator identifies a number of aspects of the Radio Law that should be reviewed, either because they raise doubts about interpretation or difficulty in application, or because, in the meantime, it has become necessary to revise certain procedures in order to ensure greater dynamism”, proposing “significant changes both in terms of general provisions and the mode of access to activities, programs, the regime of sanctions and even additional, final and transitional provisions.”