A Fidesz retreat

FOR a small country concerned with its international image, Hungary has taken quite a drubbing lately. It doesnt need a communications genius to know that its probably not a good idea to pass a controversial media law on the same day, January 1st, that you take over the rotating presidency of the European Union. Especially when you are already under fire for an alarming centralisation of political power and the takeover or abolition of formerly independent institutions.

The bad publicity has certainly aroused furious passions. When Viktor Orbn, Hungary's prime minister, addressed the European Parliament in Strasbourg earlier this month, he walked into a firestorm of protest. According to Hungarian Spectrum, a liberal blog, there were a record 337 negative press reports.

Back at home the opposition delighted in what they saw as a defeat for Mr Orbn. More impartial observers, however, may have sensed a whiff of the playground bully here as the big kids ganged up on the new boy. But the prime minister, who relishes a good political bust-up, certainly gave as good as he got.

Still, even Mr Orbn knows when to back down. The trigger was a scoop by Npszabadsg, an opposition daily newspaper that last Friday obtained a copy of a letter sent by Neelie Kroes, an EU commissioner, to Tibor Navracsics, the deputy prime minister. The letter raised concern over three points of the media legislation:

• the obligation for balanced broadcast coverage, including a right of reply, being extended to on-demand services, including blogs with video. This, said the letter, may be in breach of the right of freedom of expression and information as enshrined in Article 11 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

• the "countr! y of ori gin" principle, which seeks to regulate broadcasts from outside Hungary if they infringe the rules on protection of minors or incitement to hatred, bearing in mind that broadcasts from EU countries are already well regulated

• the requirement to register all media, including press, internet sites and non-private blogs, with the National Media and Communication Authority (all of whose members were in effect chosen by the ruling Fidesz party). This, said the letter, would restrict non-Hungarian providers and create an unjustified restriction on the fundamental right of freedom of expression and information.

Hungarian officials at first claimed these were mere technical issues. But they clearly went further than that. Ms Kroes saved her most devastating criticism for last. The commission, she wrote, has serious doubts about the compatibility of the Hungarian legislation with Union law. She gave Hungary two weeks to reply.

The public pressure from Ms Kroes is clear enough. But behind the scenes, say Brussels insiders, Mr Orbn has been told to clear up the media issue as soon as possible, before it overshadows the whole Hungarian presidency.

The message appears to have got through. Jnos Martonyi, the foreign minister, Mr Navracsics and Pl Schmitt, the president, have now all said that Hungary is ready to review the law and find a solution acceptable to all.

But that is easier said than done. Had the law been passed this autumn, after Hungarys EU presidency was concluded, it would have received a fraction of the attention. But now both the commission and the European press can be expected to continue scrutinising every word.