Crossroads for media deals: Plurality, foreign ownership and regulatory scrutiny

A series of high-profile transactions – and the political and popular debates they have ignited – has pushed control of media, especially by foreign or state-backed investors, firmly back up political and regulatory agendas.

The result? A reshaped landscape for media transactions across Europe with new and expanded media plurality, merger control and FDI regimes.  Even if deals may ultimately be cleared, media groups and investors must now plan for more intrusive, complex and politically charged reviews, often involving multiple regulators, overlapping legal tests and uncertain timelines.

The regulatory landscape

European governments do not rely on the same type of frameworks to scrutinize media mergers, nor do they necessarily rely on only one. Transactions may therefore face simultaneous merger control, including specific media tests, FDI and sector-specific media reviews, with overlapping remedies and approval timelines.

Frameworks vary considerably at the national level. Some jurisdictions operate specific media plurality regimes, with distinct sector-specific rules, as is the case in France, Germany and Italy, where filing obligations arise when certain revenue and market or viewer share thresholds are met.

Beyond dedicated media plurality regimes, many jurisdictions such as Spain, Germany and France have designed FDI regimes specifically to capture media activities, while the UK has recently introduced a Foreign State Intervention (FSI) regime aimed at addressing concerns around foreign state involvement in media ownership.

Other countries address plurality concerns through the merger control framework itself, including Austria and the UK. For a transaction to fall within the UK’s Public Interest Intervention Notice (PIIN) regime, it must meet the merger control filing thresholds but below-threshold mergers can be caught by the Special Public Interest Intervention Notice (SPIIN). Thresholds are equally varied: some regimes can be triggered by minority stakes, board rights or significant influence falling short of majority control.

A more significant structural shift is taking place at EU level. For the first time, the European Media Freedom Act 2023 (EMFA) introduces a common EU framework for assessing media market concentrations through the lens of media pluralism and editorial independence.

Subject to the required implementation laws at Member State level, national regulatory authorities are now required to conduct mandatory impact assessments of qualifying media mergers, complementing – but not replacing – standard competition law review. They can then request that the European Board for Media Services (the Board) issue an opinion, or the Board may do so proactively where a media transaction is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market. These opinions are non-binding, but should carry significant normative weight and influence national decisions.

EMFA's scope is deliberately broad, with “media” covering television and radio broadcasters, on-demand audiovisual media services, audio podcasts, press publications, providers of online platforms granting access to media content, as well as providers of video-sharing platforms or very large online platforms exercising certain editorial responsibility. Notably, only one party to a transaction’s activities need to fall within this definition for the framework to apply.

Implementation progress has, however, been uneven with only a limited number of Member States having completed full implementation, Finland being one example. Austria has recently amended its existing media merger regime to implement the EMFA. Many Member States are still aligning domestic legislation with their EMFA obligations. Germany is developing a Digital Media State Treaty to implement it, which is expected to deviate significantly from the current media regime, while the Commission on Concentration in the Media (KEK) is expected to retain a central role. Italy's Communications Regulatory Authority (AGCOM) and France's Audiovisual and Digital Communication Regulatory Authority (ARCOM) are also moving towards implementation. Other Member States are further behind in their implementation journey.

Against this backdrop, the evolving landscape creates a period of regulatory flux that deal practitioners must navigate carefully.

Remedies?

For transactions subject to review – whatever the applicable framework(s) – remedies may in some cases be required in order to address a range of potential concerns.

1. Editorial and governance remedies to safeguard independence. These may include independent editorial boards, editor lock-ins to prevent post-acquisition changes in editorial direction, guarantees to maintain a certain number of journalists and independence charters.
2. Strategic and operational remedies to address sovereignty concerns. These may include retaining domestic headquarters, server localization and local content quotas.
3. Structural and economic remedies to target plurality directly. Such remedies may include divestments of overlapping assets and enhanced transparency of ownership structures.

Media mergers in the spotlight

Recent transactions illustrate the unpredictable and politically charged environment in which media deals now proceed.

Hungary - Ringier Hungary

The acquisition of Ringier Hungary Kft., publisher of Blikk, one of the most widely read daily newspapers in Hungary, by Indamedia Network Zrt. resulted in the first EMFA opinion in April 2026. Indamedia is one of the largest players in the Hungarian media market that was considered to have close ties to, and be aligned with, the previously ruling party Fidesz and former Prime Minister Orbán. The acquisition had was initiated and closed Orbán and the Fidesz party were still in power. At that time, the media Council did not conduct a national-level assessment and did not consult the Board, upon which the Board stepped in proactively. It concluded that the concentration posed risks to media pluralism and editorial independence, citing increased capacity to influence public opinion and further consolidation of Indamedia's dominant position in online news.

The Board determined that, despite being primarily domestic, the acquisition would likely affect the internal market for media services, as the merged group would reach a large share of Hungarian print and digital audiences in an already highly concentrated market, further disadvantaging independent and foreign media.

Since then, the Hungarian Competition Authority (GVH) picked up the transaction post-closing by exercising its below threshold call-in powers. It claimed this was on the basis of having received a complaint regarding the accuracy of previously received information and clarified that it could only assess the merger’s impact on competition, whereas the diversity of media sources was the responsibility of the national media authority.

Italy - GEDI

Antenna Group, the Greek media conglomerate owned by the Kyriakou family, completed its acquisition of GEDI from Exor, the Agnelli-Elkann holding company, in March 2026, gaining control of La Repubblica newspaper alongside a broad portfolio of digital and radio assets.

The transaction was strategically simplified upfront by a separate agreement to sell La Stampa to Italian publishing group SAE. At a national level, based on public information the deal did not appear to have triggered filing obligations with either the Italian Competition Authority (AGCM) or the Italian Authority for Communications (AGCOM), and it is unclear whether Italy's Golden Powers FDI regime was formally invoked.  

Both AGCM and AGCOM can nonetheless still be assumed to have considered the transaction, given their respective roles. The acquisition also sparked fierce political debate, calls for employment and editorial safeguards and sustained newsroom resistance including ongoing strikes. Notably, despite Italy's EMFA transposition still being in progress, there were reports, apparently based on submissions from La Repubblica journalists, that the GEDI acquisition could have been among the first transactions reviewed by the Board under EMFA's new media plurality framework.

The UK - The Telegraph

The Telegraph sale is a clear example of the regulatory risks affecting media transactions. Political sensitivity and prolonged scrutiny demonstrate how these factors can shape deal outcomes. Since October 2023, four successive bidders have attempted to acquire the newspaper, the majority encountering multi-layered regulatory reviews. An initial bid by RedBird IMI, a joint venture between US private equity firm RedBird Capital Partners and International Media Investments – a UAE-backed media group – was blocked by the introduction of the FSI regime.

The FSI regime was specifically designed and introduced to prohibit foreign state ownership of national newspapers, in light of the proposed RedBird / IMI transaction. A revised RedBird structure was devised but subsequently abandoned in late 2025 after protracted delays generated significant reputational attrition. DMGT, the Daily Mail's owner, then agreed a deal in November 2025. However, the deal faced intervention by the Secretary of State under a PIIN and the prospect of an in-depth competition and media plurality reference in February 2026 to assess whether the planned acquisition would have reduced the plurality of persons with control of newspaper enterprises serving specific audiences.

In March 2026, German publisher Axel Springer displaced the DMGT bid and the Secretary of State confirmed she was not minded to intervene under either the UK’s public interest media or FSI regimes.

With thanks to Freshfields Geronimo Benedict and Iona Crawford for their contributions to this update.