Brussels 05.06.2025 The European Parliament, through its Directorate-General for Communication, has allocated nearly €30 million since 2020 to media for campaigns, including explicitly self-promotional content ahead of elections. The aim is to “increase the reach towards targeted audiences more effectively with messages related to the work of the European Parliament,” adding “legitimacy to EP campaigns”. This is seen as an attempt to “manufacture democratic legitimacy” due to a lack of organic support. (Image above: illustration, European Parliament session in Strasbourg, France).

🧵 NEW: Brussels’s €80M/year 'Media Machine'

A new MCC Brussels report by @battleforeurope reveals how the EU uses media funding to systematically shape the narrative across the bloc

Key takeaways 👇 pic.twitter.com/Ybm8aVM3sV

— MCC Brussels (@MCC_Brussels) June 4, 2025

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

An explosive new report from MCC Brussels reveals a vast, previously under-scrutinised system through which the European Union annually disburses nearly €80 million to media projects across Europe and beyond. The report, published by MCC Brussels and authored by investigative journalist Thomas Fazi, argues that this extensive funding, often presented as support for media freedom, in fact, frequently serves to promote explicitly pro-EU narratives and marginalise critical voices, raising serious concerns about editorial independence and democratic integrity.

Kobakhidze: The resolutions of the European Parliament are absolutely irrelevant. If anything resembles a Soviet institution today, it's the European Parliament, which, in its current form, is no different from the Supreme Soviet of the USSRhttps://t.co/ZsiZT0xP9z pic.twitter.com/EyoMWpn2ua

— Ghia Abashidze (@ghiageo) June 5, 2025

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

The report contends that the EU’s financial leverage creates a “semi-structural relationship” with major media outlets, particularly public broadcasters and news agencies, blurring the lines between independent journalism and institutional communication. This systemic conflict of interest is argued to compromise the media’s ability to hold power to account.

Massive, Under-Scrutinised Funding: The European Commission and European Parliament collectively disburse close to €80 million annually to media projects. This is considered a conservative estimate, with the total over the past decade likely exceeding €1 billion. This figure doesn’t include indirect funding like advertising contracts, such as the €132.82 million awarded to Havas Media Group ahead of the 2024 elections.

Von der Leyen has fled the plenary session of the 🇪🇺EU Parliament again. She cannot be at her job for three hours in a month. What kind of behavior is that? Shameful. The staff should have been sent to bring her back so that she could hear what the MEPs think about her policies. pic.twitter.com/O8s3pM8OQ7

— Mislav Kolakusic MEP 🇭🇷🇪🇺 (@mislavkolakusic) January 17, 2024

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Promoting Pro-EU Narratives: Funding programmes are often framed using buzzwords like ‘fighting disinformation’ or ‘promoting European integration’, but the report presents evidence that they have clear strategic objectives to shape public debate and promote the EU agenda.

Covert Propaganda Campaigns: The Information Measures for the EU Cohesion Policy (IMREG) programme has channelled around €40 million since 2017 to media outlets and news agencies to produce content highlighting the “benefits” of EU policy. The report highlights examples where this funding is not clearly disclosed, effectively amounting to “stealth marketing” or “covert propaganda”.

News Agencies as Narrative Gatekeepers: The EU strategically partners with major news agencies like ANSA (Italy), EFE (Spain), and Lusa (Portugal) through programmes like IMREG, ensuring pro-EU messaging cascades across hundreds of outlets that rely on agency content. The €1.7 million European Newsroom project, bringing together 24 news agencies in Brussels, is described as an effort to standardise and align messaging on EU matters.

“Fact-Checking” and Controlling Discourse: Initiatives like the European Digital Media Observatory (EDMO), funded with at least €27 million, involve news agencies and media in networks to “fight against disinformation”. The report warns that when entities involved in promotional funding also participate in defining disinformation, it risks becoming a tool to “police the boundaries of acceptable discourse” and label dissent as disinformation.

Investigative Journalism Focused Outward Never Inward: The report scrutinises EU-funded investigative journalism projects, noting a pattern where much of the focus is directed towards non-EU countries like Russia or Kazakhstan, with “scant scrutiny of the EU itself” despite documented scandals within the Union.