Hungary’s path to illiberal democracy and how it affects media freedom

In 2015, Hungary had to face a major challenge, as an extensive number of people from the Middle East sought asylum in the European Union. Although their final destination was mainly Western European countries, like Germany, they were bound to cross Hungary, as they arrived from the southeast corner of Europe. “In July, when the government began building a razor-wire fence along its southern borders, giant posters went up around the country, insisting on the need to “defend the country from the migrants” (Thorpe, 2015). As a country faces a national crisis, let it be a natural disaster, warfare, financial difficulties or large-scale immigration, it is the elected government’s responsibility to tackle the problem effectively, but what role does the media play in it? The media provide us with “powerful stories that define our national identity, heroes and enemies” (Denisova, 2019). In any illiberal democracy, chances are that the main media outlets support the current governing party, thus immensely altering the national mentality, which is exacerbated by the so-called ‘siege mentality’.

​

Hungary is one of the Eastern European countries that has struggled for centuries to implement the freedom of speech in terms of supporting the existence of the free press, as in most cases it has been challenged by the presence of overly authoritarian leaders. It was the 1848 revolution that brought about changes under “The Twelve Points”. The number one point requested the “Freedom of the Press”, which reflected the primary concerns of the Progressives at the time.

 

Another considerable conflict between the media and the government occurred during the Communist rule of the country between 1949-1989. The press was under complete political control, implying that “They communicated pre-selected information from the party to the public and commented on this information in accordance with set guidelines, explicit or implicit” (Bajomi-Lázár, 2003, p90). On the other hand, journalists did have limited freedom in news selection, as long as they avoided taboo issues. The censorship was finally abolished in 1989 when the first democratic elections were held. Political elites stopped interfering with media content as Hungary commenced its transition to liberal democracy (Bajomi-Lázár, 2003). However, the shift to the new system occurred within two years, which is a relatively short time span, therefore it resulted in deviations from an ideal liberal model.

 

The post-communist period saw an immense struggle for power in terms of property as well, as the previously state-owned assets shifted to private owners. Simultaneously, new political parties were formed, generating a new societal structure. Politicians were eager to gain control over both public and private media organisations, while media owners were ambitiously trying to intervene in political matters. According to Bourdieu’s theory of the “Polarized Pluralist” media system, the media field and the political field are highly proximate, where politics mostly dominate the media. Politicians were convinced that the media was supposed to serve the government (Gross and Jakubowicz, 2013). In conclusion, it is notable, that Hungary’s media freedom has always been heavily influenced by both internal and external political affairs.

​

In the case of the 2018 Hungarian elections, the shared sense of danger and the need to be protective among Hungarians culminated in the re-election of the right-wing leader, Viktor Orbán, who won by a two-thirds majority. The aforementioned ‘siege mentality’ played a key role during Orbán’s anti-immigrant campaign. This phenomenon is not unfamiliar if we consider Israel in the Middle East, North Korea in Asia, or even a liberal country such as the United States of America. If the leaders of a given country have enough influence on media corporations, for instance, if they are sustained by government incentives, they will be forced to abide by the needs of the governing party, hence creating a hegemonic state media.

 

However, “The key ingredient in any hegemony is consent: hegemony cannot be reduced to domination or manipulation, rather hegemony indicates consensual relationships among groups or classes whereby one sector represents and leads others” (Artz, 2013, p336). Based on Hungary’s propaganda during the latest elections, it is of legitimate concern that the country’s media is leaning towards being dominated by rather than co-operating with the current government. “Coupled with internal intercultural conflicts in most of the Eastern European countries, and the relentless bombardment with poorly understood concepts and images via the mass media, people began to long once again for the ‘fleshpots of Egypt’ and a feeling of security, at almost any cost” (Casmir, p112). For any Hungarian, during the elections, the main concern was to differentiate propaganda from actual news, and additionally, as fake information had spread across all media channels, not to trust unreliable news sources. National mentality had begun to transform across the country.

 

While many were relying on foreign media as a source of credible information regarding the migrant crisis, for most Hungarians it was not an option due to the language barrier. The risk of reading only Hungarian news can be demonstrated by investigating the two leading online publications, Origo (right-wing) and Index (left-wing). The most recent article on the government features “Orbán’s clearly successful politics”, as opposed to the Western world’s crisis in leadership (Kovács, 2019). Origo’s highly anti-immigrant views are openly displayed daily in articles that portray migrants negatively. On the other hand, Index is easily a reflection of any left-wing British publication, promoting the importance of climate change and only factually reporting on Orbán’s activities (Arató, 2019).

​

The 21st century has so far witnessed numerous liberal Hungarian media companies slowly alter their original values to reflect the government’s agenda, especially during political campaigns. In 2016, Népszabadság (Liberty of the People), a key left-wing publication, ceased to operate after 60 years of solid circulation, after Fidesz suddenly decided to allow them only 3 per cent of Hungary’s newspaper state advertising budget, which had previously been 12.7 per cent. In contrast, the government-supporting Magyar Nemzet (Hungarian Nation) was awarded a staggering 22 per cent of the budget (Dragomir, 2018). Interestingly, Magyar Nemzet was shut down following Viktor Orbán’s landslide victory in 2018, reporting financial problems. It is important to note, that the controller of the publication, Lajos Simiscka, had a public quarrel with long-time best friend Orbán before the elections (Schlee, 2018). These events have contributed to the fact that Hungary has the lowest Freedom House score out of the 28 European Union member states, as press freedom has deteriorated since the 2010 elections (Bogaards, 2018).

 

Another example of an Eastern European country where the existence of media freedom is extremely questionable is Slovakia. According to the American social critic, Noam Chomsky, “Journalists and commentators have two options: either to adapt or to be excluded” (Blaha, 2015, p15). His theory was unambiguously illustrated in the famous 2018 murder case that took place in Slovakia. Ján Kuciak, an investigative journalist, was shot dead along with his girlfriend, for attempting to reveal tax fraud associated with people in relation to the social democratic party, Smer (Hovet, 2018).

 

Having said that, it is important to note that Western European media outlets are not entirely bias-free, either. In light of recent Brexit developments, many right-wing publications, and especially tabloid magazines were fuelling Britain’s siege mentality, therefore implicating that it is not only Eastern Europe where this phenomenon exists. Yet, without a doubt these publications have a less severe effect on national identity and mentality, providing that right-wing and left-wing media companies co-exist in the country allowing citizens to opt for their preferred news source.

​

Nonetheless, it is evident that Eastern Europe is more prone to sustaining media hegemony in times of crisis, which can be due to numerous factors. First of all, as mentioned before, these countries’ proximity to the migrant wave in 2015 was undeniable, therefore their sense of fear was rational. To put this in context, Iceland was ranked one of the most welcoming countries during Europe’s migrant crisis (Dearden, 2015), as opposed to Hungary, where the government built a fence across the south-eastern border in order to prevent migrants from entering. While it was generous of the North European island to offer assistance during the emergency situation, it was highly unlikely that many refugees would actually be able to fly to Iceland, as they mostly arrived in Europe on foot, carrying only what was essential to survive.

 

Consequently, it was understandable that the Hungarian government would be less welcoming, as there was no way to avoid people from trespassing into the country. Hungary’s leaders were eager to dominate the media and implement changes in accordance with the nation. “The leading trait of populist parties is to claim a monopoly on representing the people” (Rupnik, 2018). Secondly, contemporary Hungary is burdened by its shadowing oppression throughout its history, which took its toll on the nation as a whole and, more importantly, the national mentality has been shaped by occupying forces and abrupt changes in the regime.

​

The ongoing de-democratisation of Hungary has been surveilled globally, as it made headlines in prominent publications like The New York Times in the United States, or The Guardian in the United Kingdom. CNN concluded that “Since 2010, Viktor Orbán has passed laws that suffocate the free press, politicize Hungary’s judiciary and demonize nongovernmental organizations” (Verhofstadt, 2018). There exists a distinct discrepancy between the Western and the Eastern perception of democracy. “The principal democratic role of the media, according to traditional liberal theory, is to act as a check on the state. The media should monitor the full range of state activity, and fearlessly expose abuses of official authority” (Curran, 2002, p217).

 

The “watchdog” role of the media is highly emphasised in Western European countries, while towards the east of the continent, it seems almost impossible to achieve that level of freedom in coverage. Evidently, the term “free press” does not exist in the same form. In his 2014 campaign speech, Orbán said that “democracy is not necessarily liberal. Just because something is not liberal, it still can be a democracy.” This statement is clear evidence of the underlying issues with Eastern European leaders’ mentality. It is debatable whether the long-term rule of communism resulted in such direct effects on Eastern European countries, however, there is ample resemblance between Russia’s former media policies and Hungary’s contemporary approach to media regulation. “Manipulation of public opinion during presidential and parliamentary election campaigns in 1996, 1999-2000 and 2004 – known as the “information wars” of the late 1990s – made Russians critical of the media’s role in the political process and the interrelations between media and “broadcast” political parties in organising elections” (Hallin and Mancini, 2012 p131). 

​

All things considered, hegemonic state media in Eastern European countries is gaining power at a dangerous rate. Additionally, there is a precise correlation between the rise of illiberal democracies and the deterioration of independent media corporations practising free speech. Countries in the west, like the United Kingdom and the United States, started to note the gravity of the situation in Hungary and are warning against the emergence of an authoritarian regime inside the European Union. However, the fact that changes in Hungary’s government gained worldwide attention provides us with the hope that the world is ready to tackle this alarming situation in the future. The world’s population as a whole needs to detach itself from the extreme capitalist mentality, as it is one of the driving reasons behind the global emergence of illiberal democracies, and a major influencer of the media industry. As Chomsky said: “Capitalism appears as if it created its own “matrix” in which the people are held in a deep illusion. And we are all sleeping. It is a sweet sleep of the manipulated and the deceived” (Blaha, 2015, 7).

​

​

References

​

Arató L. (2019). Formálódik a bevándorlásellenes koalíció – de kimarad a Fidesz? (An anti-immigration coalition is in the making – is Fidesz excluded?) Index, 3 April. Available from https://index.hu/kulfold/eurologus/2019/04/03/formalodik_a_bevandorlasellenes_koalicio_fidesz_salvini_orban_le_pen_wilders_nepek_nemzetek_szovetsege/ [Accessed 8 April 2019].

​

Artz, L. (2013) Media Hegemony. In: Danesi, M. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Media and Communication. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 336-339. Available from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275408880_Media_Hegemony [Accessed 8 April 2019].

​

Bajomi-Lázár, P. (2003). Freedom of the Media in Hungary, 1990–2002. Political Science Department at the Central European University. Available from https://politicalscience.ceu.edu/sites/politicalscience.ceu.hu/files/basic_page/field_attachment/bajomithesisedited.pdf [Accessed 8 April 2019].

​

Blaha, L. (2015). The Limits of Hegemony?. Slovak Journal of Political Sciences, 15 (1), 5-30. Available from https://content.sciendo.com/view/journals/sjps/15/1/article-p5.xml [Accessed 8 April 2019].

​

Bogaards, M. (2018). De-democratization in Hungary: diffusely defective democracy. Democratization, 25 (8), 1481-1499 Available from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13510347.2018.1485015?scroll=top&needAccess=true [Accessed 8 April 2019].

​

Casmir, F.L. (1995) Communication in Eastern Europe: The role of history, culture, and media in contemporary conflicts. Mahwah, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum.

​

Curran, J. (2002). Part III: Media politics. In: Media and Power, London: Routledge. Available from https://www.dawsonera.com [Accessed 8 April 2019].

​

Dearden, L. (2015). More than 11,000 Icelanders offer to house Syrian refugees to help European crisis. Independent, 1 September. Available from https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/more-than-11000-icelanders-offer-to-house-syrian-refugees-to-help-european-crisis-10480505.html [Accessed 8 April 2019].

​

Denisova, A. (2019). Week 3: Global News and the Role of the State in Eastern Europe [lecture notes]. Media and Globalisation. Available from https://learning.westminster.ac.uk/ [Accessed 3 April 2019].

​

Dragomir, M. (2018). Control the money, control the media: How government uses funding to keep media in line. Sage Journals, 19 (8), 1131–1148. Available from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1464884917724621 [Accessed 8 April 2019].

​

Gross, P. and Jakubowicz, K. (2013) Media Transformations in the Post-Communist World: Eastern Europe’s Tortured Path To Change. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

​

Hallin, D.C. and Mancini, P. (2012). The Russian Media Model in the Context of Post-Soviet Dynamics. In: Comparing Media Systems Beyond the Western World. Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press, 119-142. Available from https://www.dawsonera.com [Accessed 8 April 2019].

​

Hovet, J. (2018). Police suspect Slovak investigative journalist murdered for his work. Reuters, 26 February. Available from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-slovakia-crime/slovak-investigative-journalist-killed-at-home-report-idUSKCN1GA0Y5 [Accessed 8 April 2019].

​

Kovács, A. (2019). Így teszi tönkre Nagy-Britanniát napról napra a migráció (This is how migration ruins the United Kingdom day by day) Origo, 2 April. Available from https://www.origo.hu/nagyvilag/20190402-nagy-britannia-migracio-bunozes-iszlamizacio.html [Accessed 8 April 2019].

​

Rupnik, J. (2018). Explaining Eastern Europe: The Crisis of Liberalism. Journal of Democracy, 29(3),  24-38. Available from https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/explaining-eastern-europe-the-crisis-of-liberalism/ [Accessed 8 April 2019].

​

Schlee, M. (2018). Hungarian opposition newspaper to close. Politico, 4 October. Available from https://www.politico.eu/article/hungary-opposition-newspaper-magyar-nemzet-to-shut/ [Accessed 8 April 2019].

​

Thorpe, N. (2015). Migrant crisis: Hungary denies fuelling intolerance in media. BBC News,22 December. Available from https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35162515 [Accessed 8 April 2019].

​

Verhofstadt, G. (2018). Hungary is a threat to international order. The US must act — now. CNN, 12 September. Available from xhttps://edition.cnn.com/2018/09/12/opinions/hungary-sanctions-article-7-verhofstadt-opinion/index.html [Accessed 8 April 2019].