Who does the 35% limit really affect?

The Government has approved the draft Bill on Public Sector Advertising, which sets a 35% limit on the income a media outlet can obtain from institutional advertising. According to the Executive, the measure seeks to strengthen transparency, objectivity, and editorial independence.

The news, published by DIRCOMFIDENCIAL, also introduces a public register of media outlets managed by the CNMC, the obligation to make public the distribution of advertising, and greater clarity in prices and digital audience measurement.

But beyond the headline, the debate runs deeper.

Who does the 35% limit really affect?

Large publishing groups —Godó, Prensa Ibérica, or Vocento— are well below that threshold, with percentages hovering around 10-13% of their total income.

Therefore, the immediate impact does not seem directed at the major players.

The focus is on outlets with heavy institutional dependence or projects whose sustainability relies mostly on public investment.

And here a structural question arises:

Can a media outlet sustain its independence if more than half of its income comes from the Administration?

Transparency and registration: a new control framework

The draft bill does not only set an economic limit. It also introduces:

• A public registry with information on ownership and financing.
• The obligation to publish the investment breakdown by media outlet.
• Greater transparency in advertising prices.
• The inclusion of digital platforms, which were non-existent in the 2005 law.

This represents a significant change in terms of governance of the media ecosystem.

Especially considering that the General State Administration —the largest public advertising investor— has not systematically published the details of its investment until now.

Regional exceptions: balance or risk of distortion

The law provides exceptions for regional media with a turnover of less than 2 million euros and audiences concentrated in specific territories.

The argument is to protect territorial diversity and prevent the closure of local media.

The question will be how that exception is articulated and what annual certification mechanisms are applied.

Because the challenge always lies in the execution.

More than an advertising law, a model debate

This draft bill is part of the Action Plan for Democracy and the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA).

However, the underlying debate is economic:

• Revenue diversification.
• Dependence on public investment.
• Structural transparency.
• Editorial independence.

In a context where organic traffic is falling and digital monetization is increasingly complex, institutional advertising remains a relevant piece for many media outlets.

The 35% limit introduces a new framework: it does not prohibit, but forces a balance.

The key question

The regulation must still undergo public hearing and parliamentary processing. Its real application will depend on regulatory development.

But the message is clear:

Media sustainability cannot rest on a single pillar.

The question is not whether the measure is restrictive or protective.

The question is whether the sector is prepared to operate with greater transparency and less structural dependency.