Good afternoon and welcome back to GBU, where we look back on a blistering week that saw a Saharan "heat dome" settle over Europe.

This week gave many of us cause to appraise the position of media within the Schuman environs, and the point at which business and public service overlap. As professionals directly concerned with this debate, representatives of the Fourth Estate are ever ready to add their two cents to the conversation.

And discussion was lively after Euractiv revealed that the EU is putting rather more money into a coterie of outlets than had previously been acknowledged. If journalists are to hold authorities to account, to what extent is this mission compromised by subsidies that allow them to carry out that task? And even if you don't depend on public funds, does this not make you beholden to commercial interests? Such questions could keep Brussels media circles animated until the cows come home.

Having spent most of my time in Brussels managing a small media outlet, I know the struggle of competing with far larger operations. Not everyone has the luxury of a multi-million-euro parent company backing them, and it’s a tough war of attrition. For all the canny efforts small media use to attract an audience and deliver a fresh take on current affairs, it is disingenuous to overlook the structural advantages that big media enjoy. Should we not provide a helping hand to smaller initiatives in the name of media plurality?

And setting aside the question of how media manages to be commercially viable, subsidies are surely not the main barrier to critiquing our legislators. More problematic is the closeness of journalists and public officials, where friendliness is rewarded with insider access to valuable information. This pursuit of leaks is incentivised by the concentration of lobbies that cluster around the institutions.

These are issues most of us will be familiar with, though how we address them – and the tenor of that argument – depends largely on the stakes, which are inevitably personal. Still, we could certainly design a more democratic way of dispensing with public money. Which is kind of the whole point, if we are to accept that the media's primary duty is to the demos.

A dull Danish presidency

Denmark took over the EU presidency on Tuesday, during which it will focus on a secure, competitive, and green agenda. The generally discreet Scandinavian country also champions a hardline approach to migration – which puts Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen at odds with other European Socialists .

But Denmark's guiding principle during its six-month stint at the helm of policy-making will be running a tight ship – which, as Magnus Lund Nielsen writes, means no fuss, limited expectations, and a plea to opposition parties to lay off domestic spats until the duty has been served.

Are you not entertained? Not if Denmark can do anything to help it.

Tariff countdown

With Trump's "reciprocal" tariffs on EU goods due to kick in on 9 July, negotiations to strike a deal were led by trade chief Maroš Šefčovič in Washington. At last week's EUCO summit, France's Emmanuel Macron argued Europe should not bend to the punitive levies. But with the deadline now so near, Germany has pushed for a quick compromise to prevent the worst-case scenario.

The latest hope is that the EU pulls off the same deal as the UK – an "agreement in principle" that would keep Trump's 10% baseline tariffs in place. It's something trade ministers had scoffed at a few weeks ago but looks much more appealing when faced with the imminent alternative.

And it's not only ministers who have shifted in their attitude towards the negotiations; journalists, too, have lacked consistency in reporting on the saga – as Thomas Moller-Nielsen points out.

2040 climate targets

The EU revealed on Wednesday its 2040 target for greenhouse gas emissions, which must be reduced by 90% compared to 1990. The scale of ambition is huge: it will mean cutting emissions to less than a sixth of what they are right now.

Achieving the goals will need a massive effort from all sectors – and citizens won't be spared the knock-on costs. Indeed, the project won't be managed solely through efficiency gains and scaling up renewables; it will require a complete change in mindset. And politics, as Robert Hodgson writes.

Bulking up the budget

In two weeks, the Commission will propose a new budget (MFF), one that is substantially larger (€1.2 trillion) to respond to growing geopolitical instabilities.

But with an investment gap of at least €750 billion a year and new defence demands, the discussions about how funds are allocated will be tense.

Jacob Wulff Wold highlights the five key fights that must be resolved by 2028.

Today's issue of The Brief was brought to you by Orlando Whitehead.