On Wednesday, STT reported that an analysis of the Media Support Fund (MRF) has uncovered significant risks of bias in decision-making processes regarding the allocation of funding. The analysis indicated that the structure of the MRF's governing council allows for potential partiality, which in turn undermines the independence of decision-making and increases risks of corruption in the funding distribution process. Furthermore, the findings suggest that the current setup may lead to irrational use of public funds.

The composition of the MRF council is particularly troubling, as it consists of representatives delegated by private sector associations whose members are themselves applicants for MRF funding. This creates a conflict of interest that raises questions about the fairness and transparency of funding decisions. The council is responsible for distributing funding and setting the financial rules, but its structure could be leading to decisions that favor certain applicants over others based purely on personal or organizational affiliations rather than merit.

Additionally, the state, represented by the Ministry of Culture, holds only one-third of the votes in the council's assembly and has no rights to appoint members to the MRF council. This unequal power dynamic further exacerbates concerns about accountability and the potential for corrupt practices within the fund's operation. The revelations could prompt calls for reform in the governance of the MRF to ensure fair allocation of resources and restore public trust in the funding process.