how the EUSSR still standing? by quietly funding its media outlets
EU FUNNELED €132 MILLION TO MEDIA AHEAD OF ELECTIONS
A massive EU slush fund of €132 million was quietly handed to media outlets ahead of the European elections - with zero transparency on who got paid and why.
Roberta Metsola and Ursula von der Leyen funneled the money through a private ad agency, Havas Media France, bypassing competitive bidding and keeping payouts hidden.
In Italy, outlets like Repubblica were directly paid to publish EU-friendly election coverage - with no disclosure to the public.
AI translated:
~~~
Source: Il Fatto Quotidiano
130 million given to the media: this is how the EU secures good press
Which controllers – The funds distributed by the Commission before the June elections through Havas. But names and figures are classified.
February 11, 2025
by Ivo Caizzi
In Brussels, a “shadow zone” emerges involving EU funds amounting to a whopping 132.82 million euros, which were allocated to the media in connection with last June’s European elections. This mega-disbursement, coordinated by the Maltese President of the European Parliament Roberta Metsola in sync with the German head of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen (and with contributions from the Council of the 27 governments, the European
Investment Bank, and the Economic and Social Committee), is embarrassing not only due to the substantial amount related to 12 months—adding to the many millions annually assigned through questionable tenders to TV stations, newspapers, press agencies, and online sites, as revealed by Il Fatto before the last European elections—but also because a particular administrative method was used which, according to EU leaders, allows the secrecy of individual payments and the recipient outlets to be maintained. These outlets and media should instead be overseeing how EU public institutions spend taxpayers’ money, rather than being funded by the “controlled” entities, to avoid suspicions of influence and conflicts of interest.
Metsola and von der Leyen, both European People’s Party (EPP) members, informed Il Fatto through their respective spokespersons that they will not provide information on recipients, amounts, reasons, or outcomes, because these 132 million fall under a framework contract. The document dated September 5, 2023, identifiable by the code Comm/Dg/Fmw/2023/30, outsources everything to the private advertising agency Havas Media France, part of the Vivendi group, as an intermediary. Only this contract was put out to tender. How Havas then distributed the payments to the media—in agreement with EU leadership—would remain confidential. It also appears to be exempt from certain restrictions, such as the obligation to put payments over 14,000 euros out to tender and register them in the vast ted.europa.eu database alongside hundreds of thousands of other contracts, though these are not easy for ordinary citizens to locate.
Anyone searching for payments to Italian outlets must enter Italian Television Networks for Mediaset, Gedi for Repubblica, Rcs for Corriere della Sera, and so on. However, in the case of an intermediary company, nothing may turn up.
Metsola stated that she will not provide further information about the contract with Havas because one can initiate the bureaucratic procedure of “access to documents under Article 15 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU.” But would that help? Von der Leyen clarified that Havas, “in line with the framework contract,” must “ensure that the dissemination of any information does not compromise the commercial interests of economic operators.”
Many private companies entrust advertising agencies with campaigns that include purchasing media space. And the contract with Havas pertains to “advertising” and “advertising services.” But the European Parliament, Commission, Council, and other EU public institutions are not meant to promote product sales. To communicate their initiatives, they have crowded press offices. So why don’t they offer maximum transparency on these payments to allow citizens to assess whether they might influence the recipient media?
Il Fatto revealed that among the EU funds for major Italian media (Rai, Mediaset, Sky, Corriere della Sera, Repubblica, Il Sole 24 Ore, Ansa, Agi, AdnKronos, Citynews, etc.), some included the provision of articles and services favored by Brussels leadership. It even emerged that the wealthy Agnelli-Elkann publishers had linked Repubblica in a “partnership” with the European Parliament and Commission to be paid for articles specifically about the European elections. It was confirmed that this deal—initially worth 62,000 euros—had not been put out to tender (despite exceeding 14,000 euros) as it was allowed under the “framework contract” with Havas. And that similar “broad-spectrum” agreements were being finalized in Italy. But then, should those Repubblica articles and partnerships with other EU outlets be considered “advertising”? And is it appropriate to use intermediaries if it allows expenditures over 14,000 euros and services that could effectively provide “good press” to remain confidential?
Il Fatto Quotidiano, February 11, 2025
