29 MARTINDALE CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF PRIVATE ENTERPRISE atia (Peruško, 2010). Nova TV officially launched in 2000, marking a monumental shift in Croatia’s television market from a monopoly to a mixed system (Galetić & Dabić, 2020). Croatia’s first national commercial broadcaster, it has changed foreign hands multiple times, notably passing from Central European Media Enterprises to its current owner, United Group, a telecom and media conglomerate registered in the Netherlands. The second major foreign-owned media conglomerate in Croatia’s newly privatized system, RTL Hrvatska, was launched in 2004, initially part of the German RTL Group before it was sold in 2022 to Central European Media Enterprises. Croatia’s media market consists of 11 national TV channels, 9 of which are owned by the 3 major broadcasters. Together, HRT, Nova TV, and RTL hold around 80% market share, with approximately 20 local TV stations that serve specific cities and regions making up the remaining 20% (Galetić & Dabić, 2020). All three media giants offer free terrestrial broadcasting; thus, anyone with a television set and antenna can access them. Although all are available to the public, their sources of funding differ greatly. HRT charges a monthly license fee to every household with a broadcast-capable device. These fees pay for ongoing operations, including production costs and administrative expenses (Jusić et al., 2021). Nova TV and RTL, by contrast, are commercial networks, funded through advertising, sponsorships, content licensing agreements, carriage fees, and digital streaming services. Their market consolidation provides outsized political power to foreign institutions. National discourse is shaped by a few key voices, mirroring the centralized structure of the socialist media system, now driven by foreign concentration instead of direct state control. Vulnerabilities in Croatia’s media system Croatia is not the only European country that suffers from high levels of centralized control in broadcast television. Other European countries like Finland, Ireland, and Sweden all show a similar pattern; however, political independence, social inclusiveness, and fundamental protection risk remain low compared to Croatia. The Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM) risk score, shown in in Table 1, is calculated by taking the average of four subcategories: market plurality, which assesses market concentration and ownership structures; political independence, which evaluates political leverage over media institutions; fundamental protection, which measures safeguards for journalists and press freedom; and social inclusiveness, which examines the representation of minorities and gender equality in the media. The MPM measures the level of risk present in a specific area of the media system using a 0–100% risk scale. Lower scores correspond to a lower level of risk in that category, suggesting a healthy media environment. For example, Turkey’s 76% aggregate pluralism risk score stems from a severe lack of its media’s political independence. By contrast, Sweden boasts a 28% overall risk score, thanks to high political independence and an emphasis on fundamental protection regarding journalists (Bilić, 2025). Furthermore, the 2025 data in Table 1 suggest market concentration alone does not undermine democratic accountability; the country’s higher aggregate risk score reflects shortcomings in more than media control. The primary issue lies in how effectively Croatia’s institutions protect media from political control and ensure transparency for the public, not merely the number of broadcasters operating in a market. The question is why these vulnerabilities exist in the Croatian media market when numerous European countries cope with similar pressures. Ownership transparency The small number of media institutions exposes the system to vulnerabilities. Although these organizaTable 1 Media Pluralism Monitor risk scores for selected EU countries, 2025 Adapted from: European University Institute, 2025. Overall media pluralism risk score (%) Market plurality risk score (%) Political independence risk score (%) Fundamental protection risk score (%) Social inclusiveness risk score (%) Croatia 54 67 51 44 56 Finland 38 68 30 21 32 Ireland 43 73 26 32 42 Sweden 28 62 20 15 17 pluralism risk plurality risk Political protection risk inclusiveness risk
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTA0OTQ5OA==