Portugal's Newsrooms Must Publish State Ad Revenues and Directors' Affiliations

Portuguese newsrooms are bracing for a decisive overhaul of how they report – and justify – the money they receive from the State. Draft rules now under consultation by the media regulator demand unprecedented public disclosure of institutional advertising, aim to curb hidden political influence and align Lisbon with wider EU transparency standards. The stakes are high: non-compliance could undercut public trust in a sector already squeezed by shrinking ad budgets and fierce digital competition.

Key take-aways at a glance

• Mandatory publication of the “total annual amount” each outlet pockets from Portuguese ministries, municipalities or state-owned firms

• Parallel reporting of advertising revenue originating outside the EU, including Macau, Angola or Brazil

• Clearer definition of “institutional advertising”, even when routed through agencies

• Identification of every client supplying ≥10 % of yearly income, public or private

• Biographical notes for directors must state any political office held in the last 12 months

• All figures for 2025 services provided after 8 August fall under the new regime

Brussels writes the score, Lisbon fine-tunes the melody

The proposed changes stem from the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), the flagship regulation designed to shield newsrooms from governmental pressure. While most of the Act entered into force across the Union this summer, each member state must adapt national rules before full effect. Portugal’s answer is the ERC draft now open for comments – a document that tries to balance editorial independence, public accountability and the country’s famously tight media margins.

At the European level, a newly formed European Board for Media Services (EBMS) will monitor whether capitals respect the letter – and spirit – of EMFA. In practice, that means the ERC will soon report upwards and face peer scrutiny if Portuguese outlets fail to disclose state money properly.

The fine print of the ERC proposal

Beyond headline figures, the draft ventures deep into accounting detail. Media organisations must list every entity – from a town council to a state-controlled bank – that buys air-time or banner space, and specify which platform (print, radio, TV, digital) the money landed in. Blank lines will no longer be tolerated; the ERC insists on an explicit “no revenue to declare” statement where appropriate so watchdogs can distinguish silence from omission.

Importantly, the definition of institutional advertising has been expanded. Ads brokered through media agencies will still count as state spending, blocking the common workaround of routing campaigns via intermediaries. The regulator also reserves the right to demand group-wide reports when ownership structures appear designed to dilute exposure to official funds.

Industry pushes back: “desproporcional” or overdue hygiene?

Portuguese publishers do not speak with one voice, but three major associations – API, PMP and APR – issued a rare joint note calling parts of the draft “impossible to comply with.” They argue that small regional titles already struggle with the current Portal da Transparência, pointing out that the platform itself lags in updating filings. While endorsing pluralism as a principle, they fear an avalanche of extra paperwork could drown outlets that operate with skeleton staffs.

Privately, executives at larger groups whisper different worries: detailed data could expose negotiating leverage to rivals or prompt advertisers to demand lower rates. Yet advocacy groups for media pluralism counter that rigorous disclosure is the price of credibility in an era of political micro-targeting and foreign influence campaigns.

Crunching the numbers: how significant is state money?

Official data show that Portugal’s government accounted for just €3.5 M in direct institutional ad spend during 2023 – roughly 0.44 % of an €800 M advertising pie. However, public financial support to newsrooms is far larger when one adds the €205 M reserved for public broadcasters RTP and Lusa. The draft regulation therefore pursues two goals: reveal whether even small sums sway individual editors, and map economic dependencies that could become critical if overall market revenues keep eroding.

Adding to the pressure, global players such as Google and Meta already siphon an estimated 60–75 % of Portuguese online ad revenue. With such an asymmetric battlefield, local watchdogs say transparency is one of the few levers left to protect independent journalism.

Lessons from Europe’s transparency wave

Portugal is hardly alone. Under the Digital Services Act (DSA), platforms must catalogue online ads in real time, while the new rules on Political Advertising Transparency (TTPA) ban foreign-funded campaigning three months before elections. Early roll-outs abroad underline four take-aways Lisbon now tries to embed:

Unified definitions – leave no loophole for intermediaries.

Open databases – data must be searchable by citizens, not buried in PDFs.

Stiff penalties – up to 6 % of global turnover in the EU example.

Stable funding for public service media – transparency works only if broadcasters remain financially viable without back-room deals.

What comes next and how to be heard

The ERC consultation remains open for written submissions until January. After that, regulators will sift through industry feedback, amend the text and – if consensus holds – publish the final regulation in time for media companies to redesign their 2025 annual reports. Editors who ignore the overhaul risk fines, name-and-shame listings on the Transparência portal and, ultimately, a credibility hit in the eyes of both audiences and advertisers.

For Portuguese citizens, the promised dashboards could offer, for the first time, a clear map of who pays whom in the national media landscape. Whether that visibility will erode or enhance trust depends on how rigorously the rules are enforced – and on whether readers believe the numbers mean a cleaner, more pluralistic public sphere.