The National
Broadcasting Council

The Chair recalled that the past year had been a time of particular challenges for the media market. The rapid growth of digital media, the presidential election campaign, the situation of public media, and the changing legal environment all required a major commitment from KRRiT.

‘The Constitution of the Republic of Poland entrusts the National Broadcasting Council (KRRiT) with the special mission of safeguarding freedom of speech, the right to information, and the public interest in radio and television. In 2025 we carried out these tasks through monitoring the media market, protecting viewers, listeners and internet users, overseeing the fulfilment of the public service mission, licensing activities, and educational initiatives’, said Dr Agnieszka Glapiak.

As the KRRiT Chair emphasised, ‘in public debate it is increasingly forgotten that the KRRiT was not established to fulfil the expectations of any political majority. It is a constitutional body of the state that safeguards freedom of speech, the right to information and the public interest’.

‘Paradoxically, attempts to limit the powers of the National Broadcasting Council are the best proof of this institution's importance for the functioning of a democratic state. An independent regulator has no obligation to please politicians. It has a duty to uphold the law’, she added.

The KRRiT Chair also addressed the situation of public media companies currently in liquidation. She presented data on the decline in viewership of Telewizja Polska S.A. (in liquidation) programmes, the worsening results of its main news programmes, and the problems associated with fulfilling the public service mission.

‘In 2025 the combined audience share of TVP S.A. (in liquidation) channels was 20.5%, compared with 26.8% before the company was placed into liquidation. This represents a fall of more than 6 percentage points. The decline affected both the flagship channels TVP1 and TVP2, as well as the thematic and regional channels’, the KRRiT Chair stressed.

As Dr Agnieszka Glapiak pointed out, the decline was particularly pronounced at TVP INFO, whose market share stood at just 1.71%, down from 4.93% in 2023 – a near threefold drop that cost it its position as market leader in news to private broadcasters.

‘The audience for the main news programmes – ‘19.30’, ‘Teleexpress’ and ‘Panorama’ – fell drastically, with hundreds of thousands of viewers lost, which points to an exodus of audiences and a dramatic weakening of public media's information function’, she added.

One of the important areas of KRRiT's work was monitoring coverage of the election campaign. KRRiT carried out extensive research into the news services and current-affairs programmes of the largest television broadcasters.

‘KRRiT's analysis revealed significant problems in maintaining standards of impartiality, pluralism and journalistic reliability. The monitoring showed clear political preferences among individual editorial teams and the marginalisation of most candidates for the office of President of the Republic of Poland’, the KRRiT Chair stressed.

The National Broadcasting Council also responded to controversies surrounding the organisation of election debates, asking the National Electoral Commission to clarify doubts about the debate held at the sports hall in Końskie, and objecting to restrictions on some broadcasters' access to coverage of the presidential debates.

KRRiT also intervened in cases where journalists from TV Republika and wPolsce24 were blocked from attending government press conferences.

‘I would remind you that Article 6 of the Press Law states that it is forbidden to hinder the press from gathering critical material, or to suppress criticism in any way. Above all, however, equal access to information about the actions of the government and other state institutions follows from Article 61 of the Polish Constitution. The courts have confirmed that those in power cannot block any media outlet's access to information’, Dr Agnieszka Glapiak noted.

KRRiT also monitored how the media operated during crisis situations. A particular test of responsibility was the coverage of the violation of Polish airspace by drones in September 2025. KRRiT's analysis found that the news media acted responsibly and did not allow the spread of disinformation that could have caused panic or threatened state security.

In her address, the Chair also summarised KRRiT's actions to protect media audiences. In 2025 the Council received more than 18,000 complaints. These concerned mainly a lack of objectivity and journalistic reliability, the protection of minors, the presence of vulgar language, commercial communications, and instances of hate speech. 379 investigative proceedings were launched and 167 decisions imposing financial penalties were issued. These actions concerned, among other things, the protection of minors, illegal commercial communications, the operation of VoD services, and broadcasters' compliance with regulations.

The KRRiT Chair also discussed the Council's licensing activities in 2025, the development of terrestrial digital television, preparations for the launch of MUX-5, and efforts to increase the accessibility of programmes for people with disabilities and to improve the safety of internet users.

During the committee sitting, Dr Agnieszka Glapiak addressed work on implementing the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) and the Digital Services Act (DSA), pointing out that new obligations placed on national regulatory authorities should go hand in hand with ensuring they have the appropriate powers and tools to carry them out.

‘The National Broadcasting Council wants to remain a regulator, not become a censor. Implementation of the DSA must take place with full respect for the constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and the right to information, while maintaining a balance between protecting internet users and ensuring that the new rules do not lead to arbitrary administrative decisions or amount to a form of censorship’, she stressed.

The Chair also drew attention to the fact that KRRiT has been left out of legislative work concerning the future of the media market, even though the proposed solutions relate directly to the powers of the constitutional regulator.

During the sitting, the Committee on Culture, National Heritage and Public Media adopted a resolution rejecting KRRiT's 2025 activity report. The statement of reasons took into account only the ‘dissenting opinion’ of Tadeusz Kowalski, a member of the National Broadcasting Council, rather than the substantive report itself, which runs to almost 200 pages.

The statement of reasons accompanying the Committee's resolution contains false allegations, including claims that courts had overturned penalties. One example cited in the ‘dissenting opinion’ concerns an alleged fine of PLN 550,000 imposed on TVN over the broadcast of the programme ‘The Power of Lies’. No such fine was imposed, nor was there any such court proceeding.

The allegation of inaction and delay in disbursing licence-fee funds is likewise unfounded. In 2025 the National Broadcasting Council promptly disbursed subscription-fee funds that had been returned by the courts from deposits. Importantly, case law on these matters remains inconsistent, and some proceedings have still not been finally concluded.

The allegation that KRRiT's internal regulations are inconsistent with the Broadcasting Act is likewise absurd. The Act does not address matters relating to the National Broadcasting Council's internal organisation at all.

KRRiT also disputes the allegations concerning its oversight of compliance with licence obligations. Where licence fees are in arrears, the Council takes the same action against all broadcasters, as provided for by law. In the case of Telewizja Republika, monitoring and enforcement proceedings were carried out, and the outstanding amounts, together with interest due, were ultimately settled.

In the National Broadcasting Council's assessment, the statement of reasons for the resolution lacks substance and fails to take into account either the extraordinary legal circumstances in which the body carried out its statutory duties in 2025, or KRRiT's constitutional responsibility for protecting public funds, freedom of speech, and the public interest in the media market.