A shock for the left-wing RTV: the end of self-government, the return of the CEO!

The Slovenian government has proposed sweeping changes to media legislation, including the reintroduction of a general director for public broadcaster RTVS and a shift away from self-governance structures. The Ministry of Culture submitted draft amendments to both the Media Act and the RTVS Act to the Council for Inter-Institutional Coordination, with the proposals published on e-democracy platforms. These changes aim to redefine financial support mechanisms for media, restore centralized management under a general director, and transfer oversight of media market concentration to the national communications regulator, AKOS. The proposed amendments to the Media Act include a revamp of the financial support system for media organizations. A key change involves shifting funding priorities toward content creation in the public interest, particularly cultural and artistic content. The mandatory minimum level of funds allocated for this purpose would be removed, allowing flexibility based on annual budget planning and state financial capacity. Non-governmental organizations operating in the public interest and initiatives aimed at developing new content formats or journalistic tools would no longer receive guaranteed funding. Instead, resources would be directed more directly toward media operations and content production. Digital transition support for print and digital media would remain, but it would become optional rather than compulsory. This means the extent and availability of such funding would depend on annual budget decisions rather than being legally mandated. Additionally, media networks linked through programming partnerships, such as Next Media (Radio Center, Rock Radio) and Infonet Media (Radio 1), would be excluded from receiving public funding. The implications for entities like the Odlazkov media empire (Media24), which operates a complex network of companies and family-owned assets, could be significant given its entanglements in media ownership. The proposal also outlines a restructuring of RTVS governance. The current board of directors would be replaced by a program council, while the existing financial committee would take over the role previously held by the supervisory board. Under the new framework, a four-member management team would be replaced by a single general director, who would serve as the sole executive body responsible for the operations and development of the public broadcaster. This structure aims to enhance accountability and streamline decision-making processes within RTVS. The transition provisions stipulate that upon enactment of the law, mandates for members of the RTVS board, the Financial Committee, and the management team would cease. This indicates a clear break from the current governance model, emphasizing a move towards centralized control and operational clarity. The proposed changes to the RTVS Act also address the financing of minority language programs and music production. While the obligation for state funding of these activities as part of public service remains intact, the legal binding of funding amounts to predetermined percentages of the RTV contribution would be lifted. The new proposal still anticipates the existence of such contributions, but their exact levels would be determined annually in the state budget and implementing laws. The Ministry of Culture argues that these changes will create a more transparent and development-oriented framework, directing public funds more precisely toward high-quality content. However, the proposal goes beyond technical adjustments, fundamentally altering how much money the state allocates to media and to whom. It reduces the number of entities eligible for public funding, focusing resources on direct media operations and content creation in the public interest. The practical impact of these changes includes greater flexibility for the government and parliament in budgeting, potentially leading to increased, decreased, or reallocated funding for media without requiring further legislative changes. This flexibility comes at the cost of reduced predictability for media organizations, especially those engaged in long-term projects requiring employment, technological investments, or expansion efforts. While the proposal does not explicitly reduce the total amount of funding available to media, it shifts the certainty of funding away from statutory guarantees, placing it instead in the hands of annual budgetary decisions and political priorities.