Critical collaboration for flourishing media

Stichting Democratie en Media has a rich history as co-owner of journalistic titles in the Netherlands. 'Yes, we are a critical voice. This ensures that journalism continues to flourish within the company,' says director Nienke Venema.

It all started with the founders of the illegal resistance newspaper Het Parool (1940). They wanted to keep the daily newspaper independent after the occupation and founded Stichting Het Parool, a non-profit owner and publisher. After many acquisitions in the newspaper, book, and TV sectors, it would later become Stichting Democratie en Media. An organization that constantly reinvented itself in an ever-changing media landscape.

With the advent of television and later the internet, which were attractive to advertisers, the revenue model of newspapers shifted. They sought the advantages of economies of scale in an ever-larger publishing group, with SDM as the protector of their identity and survival. And although SDM is not a majority shareholder in DPG Media, it does have a priority share of 14.27 percent with unique rights. Under director Nienke Venema (42), the foundation is increasingly making its voice heard in the public debate.

In November 2025, you and the collective Dutch media sent an urgent letter to the informateur. This was unprecedented. How did this come about?
‘The idea arose at our annual Media for Democracy event. In Belgium, the three Flemish broadcasters had already sent such a letter. Those present felt it would send a powerful signal if the Dutch media also joined forces to warn about the power of American and Chinese Big Tech companies and the effect this has on our information landscape. We managed to get everyone on board fairly quickly. SDM has an independent position and no interest other than well-functioning media. This enables us, like no other, to bring parties together and emphasize their role in our democracy. The letter received a lot of media attention and was discussed in the Parliament. We are pleased with that.'

What exactly is the problem?
'A democracy can only flourish if people have access to diverse, independent, and truthful information. This requires a variety of media outlets that gather facts and shape public opinion, both public and private, national and regional. But for their online reach, they are now dependent on the big tech companies. These companies are unaccountable and determine, through opaque and profit-driven algorithms, what information people see and how. They also develop their models based on data, such as journalistic articles, for which they do not pay. Moreover, 80% of digital advertising in the Netherlands already goes to Big Tech. This puts the revenue model of private media under serious pressure. With the increasing popularity of AI chatbots, this is likely to get even worse. At the moment, you can't do without the tech giants, but they are also eating you alive.'

What can help combat this, apart from a letter? 
'Ensuring that the media can continue to innovate. Scaling up and working together will help in this regard. But politicians also need to understand what is at stake. Media and technology can only be approached in conjunction, because these policy areas can no longer be separated. Strict regulation helps in this regard. That is why the Dutch government must commit to the rapid and robust implementation of European legislation that curbs the concentration of power of big tech.'

Were you in favor of DPG's acquisition of RTL Nederland because of economies of scale?
'Partly, but only under strict conditions. We had to rethink things, because did DPG need to get even bigger? But the playing field is no longer national, but global. Media is no longer separate from the technologies of the tech giants. DPG pales in comparison. In that field, DPG's position would be much stronger with RTL and Videoland on board. As far as we were concerned, strong guarantees were needed for the independence of titles within DPG. Those guarantees were provided.

And perhaps even more importantly, there were no other attractive buyers. The German owner had put RTL Nederland up for sale, and Talpa was not allowed to take it over by the Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets. Other potential candidates were American parties such as Disney+ or Warner Bros, who were only interested in Videoland. They would not invest in RTL Nieuws, which provides millions of Dutch people with good, independently produced news. We really did not want to lose that source of freely accessible news for the Netherlands. Given our history, we realize how important a pluralistic media landscape is.'

So what is this historical realization?
'SDM was founded thanks to incredibly courageous people during World War II, who risked their lives to produce and distribute the illegal newspaper Het Parool. Every year on February 5, we commemorate the fallen Parool employees. A potato farmer, tram conductor, printer, or journalist; ordinary people who did not accept that their country could not continue in freedom. They believed that telling and interpreting what was really happening was a crucial form of resistance against a totalitarian regime. It is also necessary to prevent such a regime from coming to power.'

SDM now only has a 14.27 percent stake in DPG. What can you do with that? 
'As a minority shareholder, we have no say in the running of the business, but our priority share gives us a number of important rights. We can block the sale or closure of titles, or radical changes to their identity. We have the right to nominate a supervisory director. And the articles of association stipulate that our shareholding cannot be diluted below ten percent. This means that our consent is still required in the event of a merger, dissolution, demerger, or amendment to the articles of association of DPG, and we can take the matter to the Ondernemingskamer in the event of alleged mismanagement.'

Does SDM also fund third-party projects?
‘We have done so in the past. Our fund has supported courageous organizations with an underrepresented voice: against discrimination against Muslims, for the position of black Dutch people, for the protection of online privacy. But the current times demand something different from us. We believe that strong, independent players at the intersection of media and democracy are desperately needed, and that we owe it to our history to take on that role.'

Within DPG, or in the public debate?
‘Both. And in other ways too, by developing initiatives that contribute to this. Over the past two decades, SDM has worked hard to protect the rights that we and other media foundations have. We are proud of that. We are also proud of the charter that we signed together with the other shareholders and directors of DPG, in which we endorse the importance of independent journalism. All future shareholders and directors must sign it. There is no other media company in Europe, or perhaps even worldwide, with such governance. That is truly unique. It also requires us to set a good example, so that other media owners do not think: such a structure is not for us. Yes, we are there as a critical voice, we are there as guardians, and at the same time, the company is flourishing. Our media are not museum pieces. Guarding means not only protecting, but also innovating, moving with the times, understanding what your audience needs. We must continue to discuss this with the editors-in-chief. It is now up to us collectively to show that it works.'