Lithuania’s media support fund faces systemic risks of bias in funding allocation, corruption watchdog finds

A government corruption risk assessment has identified systemic flaws in Lithuania’s Media Support Fund (MRF) that create potential for bias, reduce independence in decision-making, and risk misuse of public funds, the Special Investigation Service (STT) reported on Tuesday.

The watchdog’s analysis found that the fund’s governing board—composed of private-sector association representatives whose members themselves apply for MRF funding—directly influences funding distribution, shapes financial rules, and develops programs not defined in the Law on Public Information. Meanwhile, the state, represented by the Ministry of Culture, holds only one-third of votes in the fund’s general assembly and lacks the right to appoint board members.

Between 2023 and 2025, STT documented cases where board members failed to recuse themselves from discussions on applications linked to their own organizations. In one instance, a member openly stated they had an “imperative to vote” according to their association’s position. The watchdog concluded that the current structure fosters potential bias and undermines impartiality.

The fund, which since 2024 has allocated financing across five programs for media projects, activities, and scholarships, relies on a panel of 51 experts selected by its board. However, STT noted that candidate evaluations for these roles were based largely on self-reported data, raising doubts about compliance with legal requirements.

Further risks were identified in the funding allocation process, including inconsistent interpretation of criteria—such as definitions for “cultural periodicals” or “investigative journalism”—as well as inadequate assessment of project budgets and value. The watchdog also flagged gaps in preventing political involvement in publicly funded media activities.

In one case, the MRF board adjusted evaluation scores for regional media applications by adding two points to averages, ensuring a significant portion of proposals met the minimum threshold despite initially failing impact assessments. The board also allocated nearly €4 million annually for 2025–2027 to a “Special Program” compensating for lost gambling advertising revenue—yet STT found the funds disproportionately benefited a few outlets whose declared losses (1–3% of total ad revenue) were minimal compared to overall industry earnings. Two board members involved in shaping this program were registered lobbyists.

STT additionally criticized the fund’s use of a foreign vendor’s platform for managing applications, which lacks transparency features such as decision rationales, clear status tracking, or version control. Some documents were instead exchanged via email, further reducing accountability.

The watchdog recommended that the Ministry of Culture and the MRF reform the fund’s governance model, strengthen conflict-of-interest safeguards, and improve transparency in funding procedures.