There is so much freedom of the press here. Here, the opposition press is suppressed like King Arthur suppressed the member of the anarcho-syndicalist community in the Foot Gallop. “Did you see how oppressed I was? You saw it, didn't you?"

This oppressed opposition press, which has been deprived of its freedom, thanks you because it is doing well. He's just lying that he's not well. He writes what he wants, if he likes, he can lie anything with impunity and, they believe, he can hold anyone accountable for anything at any time. Because this is their human right. Feel free to be unfair to the ruling party, because that's fair. And you can keep silent about the opposition, because the press is free, isn't it - even if it isn't.

Their favorite claim is that the government doesn't talk to them, while they charitably keep quiet about two things. One: none of the opposition politicians condescend to what they call "the lackey media" to answer their questions. Two: if it is pointed out that they are providing information unilaterally, they have the image to claim that "We asked, but we didn't get an answer."

As for how they "ask," Tamás Deutsch's social media page serves as an "example to follow" of "healthy manipulation":

"The journalist of index.hu contacted me with the following letter today at 4:31 p.m.:
"Our editorial team is writing an article about the resolution adopted by the European Parliament condemning the Hungarian government for the pedophile law.
We found an opposition Hungarian representative on social media, whose post we use. However, in order to provide balanced information, it would be necessary for the ruling party's opinion to be included in the article. To this end, I would like the Representative to answer the following questions: - How do you judge the resolution adopted in the EP today?
Given the topicality of the topic, we would need a reaction as soon as possible.
The editors may decide to sharpen the article, in which case we will subsequently update our article with the representative's statement. Please reply to this email address with your answer.
Thank you for your help!"

The article was edited by the editors, as anyone can see, long before the letter was sent, at 16.09.
Obviously for the sake of balanced information. That's it."

Clever, isn't it? Thus, it can even be stated that the independent Index also asked for a pro-government opinion, but "we did not receive an answer until the publication of our article".

Let both sides listen. Only one is much better.