Mediaboss Marketing

European Commission

Vra Jourov says her upbringing in former Czechoslovakia has inspired her work to ensure journalism remains independent

Vra Jourov was 13 when she was first investigated for her political views. It was 1977 in communist Czechoslovakia and the state was cracking down on political dissidents who had signed a human rights declaration Charter 77. Her civics teacher wanted to know what she thought of the document. Jourovs parents were already blacklisted and she feared the wrong answer would make things worse. It was a horror moment, recalls Jourov, who knew about Charter 77 from the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe broadcasts that her family listened to in secret. So she said nothing and saw her school marks slide.

Nearly half a century later, Jourov is one of the European Commissions most powerful officials and seeking to protect the media in the European Union. There are increasing threats and a very dangerous trend, she told the Guardian.

On Wednesday, World Press Freedom day will be marked, during which global alarm about the state of media freedom is expected to be raised, and Jourov warned of the risks. Journalists are facing online and physical attacks, and are even killed for their work; public service media in some countries are pressured to become state or party mouthpieces; powerful businessmen are buying up outlets struggling to cope with the digital age, an oligarchisation that could endanger media pluralism, she said.

The European Commission vice-president was speaking in a week when the human rights watchdog Civil Liberties Union for Europe said abusive lawsuits against journalists were on the rise in a dozen EU countries. Meanwhile in four central European countries Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia the majority of people told the Median pollster they were concerned about media freedom, an increase on last year in each state.

The European Commission, long a powerful regulator of the free market, used to argue it had no powers to defend the free press. EU treaties left the commission with weak equipment, Jourov said in defence of her predecessors. But starting her job as vice-president for values and transparency in 2019, she realised passivity might be a fatal mistake.

If we understand the rule of law principle as a healthy and functioning division of powers, then of course the media belong to this game. A year ago she proposed measures to protect journalists and campaigners from vexatious lawsuits, so-called strategic lawsuits against public participation, or Slapps, used by wealthy individuals and companies attempting to quash investigative reporting. This was followed last autumn with the proposed European media freedom act, intended to prevent political interference in editorial decisions, ensure the independence of public service media and ban the use of spyware on journalists.

The proposal has to be agreed by EU governments and the European parliament. Not everyone is enthusiastic. The German government, under pressure from powerful media groups that dislike the plans, such as Axel Springer, the owner of Bild and Politico, argues that EU regulation could dilute national media protections. Jourov insists this is not the case, because the legislation proposes minimum standards. Even countries, with long traditions of free media, such as Denmark, should not be complacent, she suggested. My message is no country is immune, for instance, against the appetite of politicians to interfere into the job of journalists.

Meanwhile the European parliaments lead negotiator on the file, the German centre-right MEP Sabine Verheyen, is seeking to weaken aspects of the proposals. She wants to protect the rights of media owners to assume a leading editorial role. Jourov insists the EU regulation cannot be a cosmetic change The media sector needs a radical solution when it comes to its protection, she said.

In contrast the Committee to Protect Journalists has welcomed the various EU plans but warned that the EU shift to protect the media still needed to be translated into meaningful action.

The proposed media freedom act, Jourov acknowledged, cannot undo the damage in some member states, such as Hungary, where last year independent election monitors found that biased and unbalanced news coverage in favour of the ruling party had limited voters ability to make a choice. We cannot unscramble scrambled eggs, Jourov said, referring to Kesma, Hungarys rightwing pro-government media group spanning TV companies, internet portals, newspapers and sports publications that dominates the news agenda. But I believe that the media freedom act might have an influence on the behaviour of the states including Hungary, she said, suggesting the possibility of EU legal action would limit future moves to control journalism.

Inspired by her own upbringing, the Czech politician also wants to support Russias exiled independent journalists, now labelled foreign agents by the Kremlin. She says the creation of Radio Free Russia will help Russian independent journalists in the EU find an audience in their home country. Rather than just a radio station, she proposes a broader set of initiatives to fund and help journalists working for the likes of the Dozhd TV station, Novaya Gazeta and the Meduza internet portal. The EU has set aside 3m (2.65m) in seed funding to create a media freedom hub that will give grants and raise money for Russian media groups that have lost their business model. The hub, the centrepiece of Radio Free Russia, is intended to launch on 1 July and will also help exiled Russian journalists get humanitarian visas and bank accounts.

I believe that there might be a lot of people in Russia, who want to hear something else, said Jourov, seated in front of a large portrait of Anna Politikovskaya, the campaigning Russian reporter murdered in 2006. It would be a mistake not to support independent Russian journalists on EU territory, she said.

She remembered the horrible brainwash of her youth, countered by secret listening to the free media. Without Voice of America, I only would have known that Vclav Havel [dissident and later statesman] and others were enemies of the people, she said recalling the stations jaunty Yankee Doodle jingle. The official doctrine was very intense.

Radio Free Russia would also help Russian journalists distribute their work in their home country, whether via VPN, satellite or the internet. We cannot remove the fear I know what it is to live in such a kind of fear but we can remove the lack of information, with the Radio Free Russia initiative.

{{topLeft}}

{{bottomLeft}}

{{topRight}}

{{bottomRight}}

{{.}}

Read this article:
Threats are increasing: the EU official on a mission to protect media freedom - The Guardian

Europe has long been the trendsetter in policy and regulation around environmental, social and governance issues. The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) is the latest in a line of European Union policies intended to nudge economic and investment activity towards more sustainable outcomes.

The CSRD replaced the Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD), which only covered the disclosure requirements for about 11,000 EU companies. In contrast, the CSRD will require nearly 50,000 companies to enhance their reporting around sustainability. This number includes about 10,000 companies outside the EU, and it doesnt just include the largest of the large companies.

The CSRD was adopted by the EU Council in November. EU companies already subject to the NFRD will have to begin compliance with the CSRD, which means reporting in 2024. Those for whom this reporting will be new, including companies outside the EU, have until 2025 to begin complying.

The NFRD was never mandatory. As a result, investors, regulators and civil society groups were often frustrated with the lack of sustainability-related information from companies and the lack of comparability of that data. The European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) recently released animplementation appraisal on the NFRD that highlighted many shortcomings of the NFRD:

The purpose of the CSRD is to provide investors and businesses with more information about the sustainability of companies operating in the EU, that is timely, consistent and comparable.

In essence, the CSRD is becoming the de facto sustainability disclosure regulation for large global companies; as companies with significant business in Europe will have to adhere to the rules Europe sets down.

The rules will cover both public and private business that satisfy two of the following criteria:

Compliance with CSRD isnt that far away. Companies that meet the reporting requirements will have to submit their first report of aligning with CSRD by Jan. 1, 2025. Smaller and medium-sized entities (SMEs) wont have to comply with the rules until January 2026.

Companies outside of Europe that do business in the EU will also be covered by the new rules companies that generate total revenue of $167 million in the EU and have at least one branch or subsidiary in the EU with more than $44.51 million in net revenue will be required to comply with the new disclosure requirements.

In essence, the CSRD is becoming the de facto sustainability disclosure regulation for large global companies; as companies with significant business in Europe will have to adhere to the rules Europe sets down. The hope of European regulators and sustainability-minded professionals around the world is that this higher disclosure bar will export European best practices in disclosure globally. As large companies in global markets are forced to raise their standards, these disclosure standards will cause other companies in those markets to follow the more stringent disclosure standards set by the EU in order to keep up with best practices.

In addition to information already required by the NFRD, companies that comply with the CSRD will have to publish information related to:

Companies will be required to set annual ESG targets and report their process hitting these targets, including transition plans (if any).

The CSRD will require third-party assurances, including integration into the auditors report, a requirement not covered by the NFRD. This information will be required to be presented in a companys annual financial reports, not in a separate sustainability report. Assurances can at first be "limited" but must reach the threshold of "reasonable" assurances by 2028. For those of you out there who are not accountants (good for you), reasonable assurances amount to an auditor affirming that the information reported is materially correct, while limited assurances simply state that the auditor is not aware of any material modifications that need to be made.

The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) is drafting the upcoming EU Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) that the CSRD will adopt as its reporting standard. The European Commission is due to adopt the initial ESRS standards in mid-2023.

If all of this sounds like a lot of work, you are right. If all of this sounds like a lot of work and a little bit intimidating if you are not a European company used to European regulation, accounting and disclosure standards, you are right again. Companies outside the EU that will be subject to CSRD reporting have realized the daunting task ahead of them. Those ahead of the curve have already started the process of adjustment to the CSRD landscape.

Chris Librie, senior director of ESG at Applied Materials, acknowledged that CSRD will require companies outside the EU to change their perspective on sustainability. "CSRD is pretty comprehensive," Librie said. "It involves double materiality, which may bring into scope things that we may not have considered. For example, we havent traditionally looked at biodiversity, but that may come up."

Most companies will need to expand their ability to measure and manage sustainability issues in their own operations; as well down their supply chains to comply with CSRD disclosure rules.

"Our ESG team is fairly small," Librie said, "so we will be reaching to other divisions such as human resources, environmental health and safety and others, as well as our outside auditors and consultants. The number of potential topics are so many that we are taking a team approach to develop a structured approach to the CSRD process."

The race is on to train financial professionals for the transition. Several organizations are working with companies to help them prepare for the transition. One of these is Accounting for Sustainability (A4S). A4S was established by King Charles III in 2004, with the aim of working with chief financial officers and other financial leaders to drive a shift towards more sustainable business models. A4S routinely hosts workshops to share best practices and build knowledge of financial professionals to bring them up to speed.

The number of potential topics are so many that we are taking a team approach to develop a structured approach to the CSRD process.

Brad Sparks, executive director of A4S Foundation U.S., emphasized how A4S is seeing significant interest from finance and accounting professionals that A4S works with around CSRD.

"CSRD has become part of the reporting workshops that we host," Sparks said. "We also started a new controllers forum and had a meeting earlier this year where we brought in someone from EFRAG to discuss the emerging ESRS standards. The forum is designed for chief accounting officers, controllers and ESG controllers to exchange insights, challenges and responses to sustainability issues among peers. Our initial meeting had a focus on double materiality a topic that is new to many in the finance and accounting community."

Part of the learning curve for those outside the EU will be navigating the differences in accounting standards, investor expectations and legal systems that underpin EU regulation and norms outside the EU. "Finance and accounting professionals in the United States are seeking additional guidance to help with the emerging standards," Sparks said. "In general, global accounting standards are typically principles-based, while U.S. accounting (GAAP) is typically rules-based. This is similar with the ESRS following a more principles-based approach, which some in the U.S. view as more challenging to implement."

Although adjusting to a CSRD world will take time and resources, in the end, the goal is to provide investors, policymakers, civil society and companies themselves with better information. It may move sustainability reporting more to the mainstream, which has both positive and negative implications.

Preparing for CSRD reporting will be a step change in managing and measuring sustainability data for many companies outside the EU. Companies that need to report under the CSRD standard will need to start now if they havent already: January 2025 isnt that far away. There are steps companies can take to get ready. Here are just a few places to start:

"I see this possibly driving companies toward more integrated reporting," Librie said. "I think ultimately we will see more 10-Ks and sustainability reports that merge, so we will have a one-stop shop for all this information. That is a positive but a potential negative is that in a 10-K type document, you cant be as verbose. You have to be more economical about telling your story, and that might make ESG engagement more challenging."

"Companies are seeking to understand how they can comply with reporting requirements in an effective, efficient and impactful manner," Sparks said. "They want to understand what best practices are and are looking for more guidance." Sparks noted that A4S plans to hold more workshops around CSRD in the future, as it sees increasing demand from the CFOs and financial professionals they meet with.

[Continue the dialogue on emerging sustainable investment trends at GreenFin 23 the premier sustainable finance event taking place June 26-28 in Boston.]

Excerpt from:
How the new EU directive will rewrite ESG reporting - GreenBiz

With an eye to securing European Union support against Iran and calming tensions over the Palestinian conflict, Foreign Minister Eli Cohen is slated to visit Brussels on Tuesday to meet with EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell.

Israel and the European Union have many common interests in the Middle East, chief among them is stopping the Iranian nuclear program and the threat of terrorism, Cohen said on Sunday.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Cohen have heavily lobbied Europe over the Iran issue. Tehrans alliance with Moscow has opened a window for Israel to try and align Brusselss policies with that of Jerusalem when it comes to the strategy for preventing the Islamic Republic from developing nuclear weapons.

Israel in particular wants the International Atomic Energy Agencys board to vote in June to ask the UN Security Council to reinstate crippling sanctions against Iran.

Cohen will ask the EU to take a hard line against Iranian uranium enrichment and to add Irans Islamic Revolutionary Guards to its list of terrorist organizations.

The Foreign Ministry stressed that Irans pursuit of nuclear weapons and its being the global sponsor of terrorism is top on the agenda.

At the governments weekly meeting, Netanyahu said, We will not allow Iran to tighten a ring of terrorism around us to strangle us.

We are taking action on this matter around the clock, at all times, even now, and we will continue to take both offensive and defensive action against Iranian aggression and that of its terrorist proxies.

In Brussels, Cohen also plans to tackle tensions between Israel and the EU over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, particularly in his meeting with Borrell, who has taken a particularly harsh stance and made comments that have riled Netanyahus government.

In March, the Foreign Ministry barred Borrell from making a diplomatic visit to Israel to protest statements he made that appeared to equate Israeli terror victims with Palestinians killed by the IDF.

Israel and Brussels have also been at odds over the EUs support for the construction of illegal Palestinian structures in Area C, particularly for Palestinian and Bedouin herding communities.

The EU sees this move as a humanitarian gesture on an issue of basic rights, the provision of housing. It has noted in particular the dearth of housing permits for Palestinians in Area C of the West Bank, which is under IDF civilian and military control.

Israel has also been concerned by EU support for Palestinian civic groups that it has deemed to be associated with terror activity.

It is important for me to make it clear to our friends in Europe that Israel is not opposed to humanitarian aid coming from European countries and the union to the Palestinian Authority, Cohen said.

Despite this, he added, Israel will not allow European aid to indirectly reach terrorist organizations and incitement against Israel and Israelis.

Last week, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen angered the PA when she spoke of how Israel made the desert bloom when she issued a congratulatory statement on the countrys 75th birthday. The PA said her words were racist and it demanded an apology.

View post:
Cohen to meet Borrell in Brussels on Iran, Israel-EU tensions - The Jerusalem Post

Brexit

The Derbyshire business has its playing cards for sale at Buckingham Palace, but getting them over the Channel is now a nightmare

Sat 29 Apr 2023 08.00 EDT

With products on sale at Buckingham Palace, Westminster Abbey and museums across the country as well as in European capitals Jeremy Shaw, the managing director of Derbyshire-based Heritage Playing Cards, has particular reason to hope the coronation will be good for the business he set up 30 years ago.

The past few years have been anything but. First, the Covid pandemic shut all museums and their shops, meaning an almost total collapse in domestic and overseas sales. Then the countrys leading producer of heritage playing cards whose popular kings and queens of England pack has been updated ahead of the coronation to include one of Charles III saw its export business almost completely wiped out by Brexit.

The effect of Britain leaving the European Union has destroyed 85% of his companys trade with EU customers which accounted for 35% of its total turnover.

Before Brexit, we got an order at nine in the morning and three days later it was sitting in a shop or museum in Paris or Brussels or Vienna, said Shaw. Now almost all of our EU customers have given up. The paperwork and the costs of getting packages over to the EU mean they think it is just not worth it. Brexit has been a complete and utter disaster.

As well as UK-themed packs the kings and queens, the prime ministers, the stately homes and many more subjects the company has supplied European markets with bespoke packs for different countries, such as German castles and a pack celebrating the Brothers Grimm fairytales.

But not for much longer. We are running down all our German and French stock and then we will finish. We will donate whatever we have left to schools as teaching materials for foreign language lessons, said Shaw.

We are just battering our heads against a brick wall. We spent so much time, effort and investment building up that market, and we might as well not have bothered.

The initial problem for EU shops or museums that order cards from the UK is the form-filling. Then the customers find themselves stung by extra VAT charges when the goods arrive. All in all, it is proving too much for many small operators.

We have to pay a fee to get the parcel out of this country something like 3, said Shaw.

Then, when it gets to their end, they have to pay a processing fee. Then customers are told there is a VAT charge on that parcel. They then refuse the parcel, which has to be returned to us and, to cap it all, we have to pay import duty to get it back again.

It is an administrative nightmare for us and the customers. None of this happened before we left the European Union.

Shaw said he recently received an order from the National Trust in Northern Ireland. Even this transaction involved post-Brexit form-filling, despite Northern Ireland being part of the UK, and London and Brussels spending much of the past two years trying to make intra-UK trade across the Irish sea easier. It is just unbelievable, he said.

Shaws company operates from the Derbyshire town of Ilkeston. Nearby is Cluny Lace, another small firm. It provided material for Royal wedding dresses, including that worn by Kate Middleton. It too has been in the headlines because of the disastrous effect Brexit has had on its business model.

The firms managing director, Charles Mason, says the taxman imposed an 8% duty on the return of all the lace it sent to France for dyeing. In a letter to the Financial Times he wrote: We have spent more than 200 years building our business, fought for 30 years against the global textile trend of moving to the far east and have now been killed off by our own side in a couple of years. We all lose.

The Office for Budget Responsibility has forecast that Brexit will result in the UKs trade intensity being 15% lower in the long run than if it had remained in the EU.

Shaw added: I have written to HMRC several times about all this and they dont reply. They just send out their pointless circulars. They never get back with any answers.

An HMRC spokesperson said: We have extensive guidance on GOV.UK to help businesses with all queries relating to importing and exporting. This includes detailed step-by-step guides and videos. You can also find information through our online services and HMRC app. For more complex queries, businesses can use our web chat to talk to an adviser or call us.

{{topLeft}}

{{bottomLeft}}

{{topRight}}

{{bottomRight}}

{{.}}

Link:
Brexit has been an utter disaster: the royal heritage firm that cant sell its wares abroad - The Guardian

Ahead of the European Parliaments vote on the AI Act in May, the European Union (EU) has a significant opportunity to regulate artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in order to protect and promote human rights, said Amnesty International in an open letter to Members of Parliaments leading committees.

The AI Act offers EU lawmakers an opportunity to put an end to the use of discriminatory and rights-violating artificial intelligence (AI) systems, said Mher Hakobyan, Advocacy Advisor on Artificial Intelligence Regulation at Amnesty International.

The EU must ban the use of discriminatory AI systems which disproportionately affect people from marginalized communities, including migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. Such technologies profile people and communities, claiming to predict crimes, or identify people who supposedly pose a security risk, even leading to them being denied the right to asylum. EU lawmakers must not miss this opportunity to prohibit the use of certain AI-based practices and protect the rights of migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers against harmful aspects of AI.

Use of mass surveillance technologies, such as retrospective and live remote biometric identification tools must also be banned. The proposed law must also ban discriminatory social scoring systems that prevent people from accessing essential public and private services, such as child support benefits and education.

EU lawmakers must not miss this opportunity to prohibit the use of certain AI-based practices and protect the rights of migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers against harmful aspects of AI.

The AI Act should also address the development of European technologies that are exported to third countries. Firstly, AI systems that are prohibited in Europe should not be allowed to be exported abroad. Secondly, permitted high-risk technologies that are exported must meet the same regulatory requirements as high-risk technologies sold in the EU.

Strong accountability and transparency measures must also be enforced when public and private bodies use AI systems in the EU. These actors must disclose their use of high-risk AI systems, and publish thorough human rights impact assessments. This is important, so that people harmed by AI systems can seek redress. The AI Act should establish a mechanism for this purpose.

The European Commission proposed legislation governing the use of artificial intelligence on 21 April 2021. The Council of the EU,representing EU national governments, adopted itsposition in December 2022. The European Parliament aims to finalize its position in spring this year, after which the two institutions,together with the European Commission,will have to agree on a common text for the Regulation.

Our latest open letter, written by our Secretary General, Agnes Callamard, urges members of the European Parliament to prohibit the use of certain AI systems that are incompatible with the human rights of migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers. The letter was published on 26 April 2023.

Amnesty International, as part of a coalition of civil society organizations led by the European Digital Rights Network (EDRi),has been calling for EU artificial intelligence regulation that protects and promotes human rights.

On 19 April 2023, Amnesty International and coalition partners published an open statement calling on the European Parliament to protect human rights in the AI Act ahead of the coming vote.

Mher Hakobyan, Advocacy Advisor on Artificial Intelligence Regulation at Amnesty International,is available for interviews and briefings.

11 May: Planned committee vote on the AI Act

[emailprotected]

Read the original:
EU: European Union must protect human rights in upcoming AI Act ... - Amnesty International