Hungary: the anti-media model loved by the Right

Now, Orbán’s government is pushing a new bill that threatens to take Hungary’s repression to unprecedented levels. The proposed ‘On the Transparency of Public Life’ legislation would establish a powerful new body, the Sovereignty Protection Office, charged with identifying and punishing organisations deemed a threat to “national sovereignty.”

It would be empowered to cut off funding to foreign-supported media and civil society organisations, including those receiving support from the European Union, and subject them to punitive measures. These organisations would be required to produce legal declarations from every donor confirming that no foreign funding is involved. Existing grants could be frozen indefinitely, pending drawn-out government reviews.

The office would have sweeping powers to conduct unannounced inspections, including at private homes, and could call on the police to assist in these operations. This means work by any organisation, including media organisations, political parties, and intergovernmental bodies that report abuses by the Hungarian government could be liable to sanctions.

Human Rights Watch has warned that such authority poses serious risks to both privacy and due process.

Hugh Williamson, Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch, described the proposed legislation as part of an escalating campaign to “silence dissent and dismantle independent civil society ahead of next year’s elections.”

“The European Union has to recognise the grave threat to the rule of law the Hungarian government poses, and act firmly before the flame of democracy is snuffed out,” he said.

Human Rights Watch likens Hungary’s proposed bill and attempts to frame public debate and criticism of the government as existential threats to the state, to the infamous Russian foreign agent legislation.

Media censorship: part of the far-right’s DNA

Russia’s “foreign agent” law was rolled out in 2012 just after Vladimir Putin began his third presidential term. The law followed a wave of mass anti-government protests. It began by targeting foreign-funded NGOs, much like Viktor Orbán’s proposed bill in Hungary.

The two strongmen, united by nationalism and disdain for liberal democracy, have reshaped their countries through repressive legislation and media control.

In Russia, the law has ballooned in scope. Today, it can be used against journalists, activists, even ordinary citizens, regardless of any foreign ties. Since a 2022 amendment, merely criticising the Kremlin is enough to earn the “foreign agent” label. Over 900 names are now on the blacklist, updated weekly by the Justice Ministry, according to Novaya Gazeta Europe.

Novaya Gazeta Europe tells its own story as a Russian media casualty. Born in exile in Latvia in 2022 after Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and sweeping censorship, the outlet continues the legacy of Novaya Gazeta, which was one of Russia’s most respected independent newspapers.

Founded in 1993 with Gorbachev’s Nobel Peace Prize money, Novaya Gazeta has long been a Kremlin target. Six of its journalists have been murdered under Putin’s rule. Its editor-in-chief, Dmitry Muratov, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2021 for defending free speech, something both Putin and Orbán see as a threat to their grip on power.

Israel tightens its media grip

Similarly, in Israel, the right-wing government’s history of stifling dissent has intensified during the war on Gaza. Netanyahu’s government shut down Al Jazeera’s office in Israel, invoking a new law that allows the government to ban any foreign outlet it deems a threat. The same law was soon used to cut the Associated Press’s live feed from northern Gaza. Despite global backlash, the ban on Al Jazeera was extended, then followed by a bill to make the shutdown permanent. This bill can be arbitrarily used against any foreign media outlet deemed unwelcome by the government.

The crackdown comes as Netanyahu’s ties with Hungary’s Viktor Orbán grow stronger. In April, Netanyahu went on a four-day visit to Hungary, his first trip to Europe since the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued a warrant for his arrest over alleged war crimes in Gaza. Orbán wasted no time declaring he’d ignore the warrant, telling reporters that he would “guarantee” the ICC’s ruling would “have no effect in Hungary.”

Echoes of Orbán in Trump

Then there’s Donald Trump, who has openly admired Orbán, calling him “the boss” during a 2024 visit to Mar-a-Lago. The EU Observerdescribed the pair  as “two peas in a pod,” and with good reason.

Ahead of the presidential election, Human Rights Watch warned that Orbán’s cosy relationship with Trump should raise red flags for people in the United States who care about “preserving and building an inclusive, healthy, US democracy.”

The parallels are already playing out. Trump is suing media outlets and vowing to “straighten out the press.” Even before the election, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times declined to endorse a candidate, a decision that was widely believed to be driven by fear of retribution. 

“To see how Trump will control the US media,” wrote Guardian columnist Owen Jones, “look at Viktor Orbán’s Hungary.”

Orbán backs Polish nationalist at CPAC 

Meanwhile in Poland, where a presidential election is taking place, Donald Trump’s officials and allies descended on the country this week, rallying support for far-right candidate Karol Nawrocki, ahead of Sunday’s ballot.

On May 27, several keys MAGA figures, including Trump’s head of homeland security, attended Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) 2025 in Poland and Hungary, urging Poland to elect Nawrocki of the Law and Justice party and calling the vote a “battle for Western civilisation.” 

Addressing attendees at the opening session, Orbán championed Nawrocki, and announced a “patriotic plan” that he said should “transform” the European Union. He described Trump as a “truth serum” and emphasised his vision of a new Europe, in what he calls “the Age of Patriots,” based on the nation, the traditional family, and his version of Christianity.

Britain and the Orbán playbook

Britain isn’t immune to Viktor Orbán’s growing influence on the global right. In 2023, Conservative MP Sir Edward Leigh tweeted a picture  of himself and fellow Brexit-backing MPs Christopher Chope and Ian Liddell-Grainger grinning alongside Hungary’s far-right leader in Budapest. The tweet praised Orbán’s “effective” approach to illegal migration.

But the more urgent figure to watch is Nigel Farage, whose political clout appears to be rising week by week, with worrying implications for press freedom.

Just over a year ago, Farage and Suella Braverman spoke alongside Orbán at the National Conservatism Conference (NatCon) in Brussels.

Byline Times reported that the line-up for NatCon Brussels “further demonstrates Orbán’s influence on the right of European politics and also includes many speakers with links to radical right networks in Europe and the US…”

The irony is not hard to miss. Farage and his allies claim to champion free speech, yet they undermine media plurality at every turn.

At Reform’s 2024 party conference, several outlets, including Byline Times, DeSmog, and the Observer, had their press passes rejected. Months earlier, pro-EU campaigner and writer Femi Oluwole was forcibly removed from a Reform rally without explanation.

Michelle Stanistreet, head of the National Union of Journalists, called the move “a bad look” for any party claiming to stand for media freedom, warning that cherry-picking media access harms the breadth of diversity reporting on events.

Farage paints the media as undemocratic

Farage’s hostility to the press escalated during the election campaign. After a Channel 4 undercover report caught a Reform canvasser making racist remarks about then prime minister Rishi Sunak, and calling for asylum seekers to be shot, Farage called it a “stitch-up,” claiming the canvasser was a planted actor. Reform accused Channel 4 of election interference and even filed a complaint with the Electoral Commission.

The next day, appearing on BBC Question Time, Farage faced questions about extremism in his party. He responded by accusing the BBC of “rigging” the audience and branding it a political actor. Days later, at a rally in Birmingham, he declared both the BBC and Channel 4 partisan institutions unfit to be called public broadcasters.

For a self-proclaimed defender of free speech, Farage’s record tells a very different story, one that echoes Orbán’s well-worn path of silencing critics and controlling the narrative.

The real danger is that Farage is using anti-media populism, not just to win headlines, but to rig the narrative and build momentum for the next election. Such a calculated long-game will need scrutiny.

Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead is author of Right-Wing Watch