Mészáros donates media outlets to the KESMA foundation

In November 2018 Lőrinc Mészáros and other pro-government owners donated hundreds of media outlets to the newly created Central European Press and Media Foundation, known as KESMA. The government exempted the merger from competition review, and critics said it centralised pro-Fidesz media in one structure.

The transfer of hundreds of Hungarian media titles into KESMA

In late November 2018, owners of hundreds of Hungarian media outlets transferred their businesses to the newly created Central European Press and Media Foundation, known as KESMA. Enterprises associated with Lőrinc Mészáros, a businessman close to Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, took part in the transfers. The donations were unusual because profitable or valuable properties were conveyed into a common foundation without an ordinary competitive sale.

The concentration followed years of acquisitions by owners aligned with Orbán's Fidesz government. Local newspapers, which had previously been operated by several companies, were increasingly supplied with centralised pro-government news and editorial messages. The November 2018 consolidations intensified concern about media freedom in a market where state advertising had already helped sustain friendly publications. Media watchdogs argued that concentrating distribution and commercial control reduced the diversity of available political information, especially outside Budapest.

In December 2018, the government declared the merger a transaction of national strategic importance, exempting it from ordinary competition scrutiny. Critics argued this protected a politically connected media structure from review. The legal exemption was a separate government action after the November donations, not evidence that every original ownership transfer was unlawful. The broader state-capture process combined commercial concentration, state communications spending and friendly ownership patterns. Reported totals describe the number of titles placed within the network; they do not establish that all titles had identical editorial practices or prove the effect on each voter's political choices.