Portugal’s TV Giants Feud Over 2026 Presidential Debates, Viewers Left in Limbo

Few months before Portugal even begins printing ballot papers for the 2026 presidential race, an unexpected court-side drama is unfolding off-screen. CMTV – the country’s most-watched cable news channel – accuses RTP, SIC and TVI of cornering the market on presidential debates, filing twin complaints to the national regulators and promising to fight what it calls a cartelisation move all the way to election day. Whether the claim sticks could reshape not only who moderates the next showdown but also how the 2026 election itself is televised.

A legal gambit before the first vote is cast

Medialivre, the media group behind CMTV and the streaming service Now, lodged a formal complaint with both the Entidade Reguladora para a Comunicação Social (ERC), Portugal’s media watchdog, and the Autoridade da Concorrência (AdC), the national competition authority. The ERC ensures pluralism and ethical standards across broadcast outlets, while the AdC polices market fairness and prevents anti-competitive behaviour. The filing argues that the trio’s debate pact amounts to anti-competitive exclusion of other broadcasters. Medialivre insists that the absence of its flagship channel – and by extension the Now streaming platform – denies millions of viewers a choice of viewpoints, undermining Portugal’s tradition of broad audience share in election coverage. It points to the fact that only nationwide free-to-air networks were invited, calling the arrangement a textbook case of market dominance dressed up as editorial strategy.

How the biggest networks defend their turf

The three broadcasters counter that they are protecting a multi-million-euro investment in production crews, studios and transmission. They plan to air 28 face-offs between 17 November and 22 December, all in prime time, and say splinter debates would fracture the audience. Their selection relied on editorial criteria such as opinion polls and past electoral performance, they claim. Although an early draft included a strict exclusivity clause, channel executives have since stressed there is no explicit exclusivity in the final agreement. Still, most campaigns offered an informal understanding to avoid parallel events, partly because production costs limit smaller outlets’ ability to match the prime-time spectacle.

Regulators walk a tightrope amid election season

The National Election Commission has already warned that limiting access raises red flags for pluralism and equal opportunities enshrined in Portuguese law. Now the ERC must weigh its own constitutional duties against industry realities. It could impose interim measures as it did in the high-profile autárquicas 2025 precedent, where it ruled in favour of the CDU after the party was barred from municipal debates. Conversely, the regulator dismissed a CHEGA complaint that year, signalling that not every claim of bias meets the bar. The upcoming deliberation will test the ERC’s balancing act between newsroom autonomy and broadcast fairness during a national poll.

Why the battle matters to viewers and candidates

For the electorate, the spat is more than a corporate quarrel: it will shape voter information flows in a campaign where many rely on TV rather than online sources. If regional outlets and subscription platforms remain sidelined, advertising money – and therefore visibility – concentrates in three hands, tilting ad revenue toward bigger campaigns. Strategists worry that limited exposure could affect campaign strategy in swing districts and even dampen turnout among undecided voters. Meanwhile a perception that deals are struck behind closed doors chips away at trust in media, pushing citizens toward digital alternatives where misinformation thrives.

Possible scenarios from here to January 2026

Should the AdC grant an injunction, the current debate calendar shift would ripple through newsroom budgets and candidate diaries alike, opening space for last-minute debates on additional channels. If the authorities side with the big three, CMTV could still pursue court appeals, though any decision after December would arrive too late for the first round. A second-round run-off on 8 February would offer a fresh window for negotiation. Broadcasters are already mapping contingency plans to handle broadcast logistics, mindful that surging public pressure or even European precedents on media pluralism might force a broader solution before viewers pick up the remote.