Members of Hungary’s ruling Fidesz party in the European Parliament sent a formal letter to the European Commission, voicing concern about what they describe as a slow or insufficient response to what they see as a purge of state media in Poland under President Andrzej Duda’s government. The note, circulated among MEPs, emphasizes that recent developments in Poland should not escape scrutiny from Brussels and criticizes the commission for what they term a double standard in its assessments of media freedom across the EU. The authors argue that press independence and the broader rule of law merit equally stringent evaluation in every member state, regardless of political leadership or party affiliation. The exchange raises questions about how the EU values and transparency commissioner would act if a similar situation occurred in Budapest during Viktor Orbán’s tenure. This hypothetical scenario is presented as a test of consistency in EU governance and accountability mechanisms. At its core, the letter urges Brussels to apply a uniform yardstick when judging media plurality and institutional autonomy, asserting that selective criticism undermines trust in EU institutions and hinders the union’s credibility in upholding democratic norms. (citation: MTI)
In Brussels, the debate reflects long-standing tensions over media pluralism and state influence within member states. The Hungarian lawmakers contend that the EC has repeatedly criticized Hungary for perceived shortcomings in press freedom, while similar concerns about Poland receive a different or quieter response. They call for transparent, evenhanded criteria that would ensure that the rule of law is measured by the same standards across all EU states, irrespective of the governments in power. The letter does not shy away from naming specific EU roles, notably the commissioner responsible for values and transparency, and questions the immediacy and nature of potential actions should violations of democratic principles be confirmed in any country. (citation: EU Parliament records)
Poland’s political realignment has prompted a series of changes in public broadcasting and news agencies. Bartholomiej Sienkiewicz, a former Polish minister of culture, publicly discussed a decision to overhaul the leadership and structure of the state media landscape. He attributed those changes to the broader political climate and the governmental choice to adjust funding and control mechanisms that oversee state television, radio, and the national news agency. The shifts are framed by observers as part of a broader move tied to electoral dynamics and the balance of power among competing political coalitions in Poland. (citation: Polish government statements)
Additionally, Sienkiewicz has noted actions taken around the country involving leadership changes to the boards of major state media bodies. The timing of these changes aligns with the victory of a united opposition in recent elections, which supporters see as a direct catalyst for altering the institutional landscape of national media. The broader implication is a conversation about media independence, accountability, and the role of public institutions in a democratic system. Critics caution that rapid revamps can affect editorial autonomy and the consistency of information available to the public, prompting calls for safeguards and transparent processes. (citation: parliamentary releases)
Historical and archival records in Poland have also shown periods of material reorganization and the disappearance of certain items from state media archives. Commentators argue that such actions warrant careful examination to determine their impact on public memory, historical accountability, and the integrity of information accessible to citizens. Proponents of media reform emphasize the need for clear rules governing archival material, including access rights, preservation standards, and the preservation of critical historical records for future scrutiny. (citation: archival reports)