Guillermo Valdés Castellanos
For democracy to exist, there must be a great deal of public discourse, based on citizens being able to express—without any restrictions—how they want to live, what they want to achieve as a society, who can govern and how, and so on. That is why freedom of expression is a necessary condition for democracy. In today’s societies, this public discourse is made possible by traditional media (newspapers, radio, TV) and, more recently, by social media; however, because there is a risk that these platforms might control and manipulate it in their own favor or that of others (governments, power brokers), audience rights have emerged. Their goal is to prevent misinformation, single truths, post-truths, and so on, by limiting the power of the media and social networks.
The Mexican telecommunications law defines these rights: to receive content that reflects society’s ideological, political, social, cultural, and linguistic pluralism; diverse and pluralistic programming; to distinguish between advertising and program content; to differentiate between news reporting and opinion; and to exercise the right of reply, among others. Therefore, for democracy to exist, freedom of expression and audience rights must be complementary, not mutually exclusive. The guidelines proposed by the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (CRT) are a masterstroke intended to nullify audience rights and freedom of expression in one fell swoop—and to do so in the name of democracy. It is both brazen and an aberration.
The best way democratic societies have found to guarantee and protect the rights to information, audience rights, and freedom of expression is through State bodies in which society participates—such as the INAI and the IFT—rather than government agencies. They were not perfect, but were more effective—or at least less harmful—than when these matters are left in the hands of government appointees or unregulated private media outlets.
Sheinbaum’s guidelines have the audacity to grant certain employees of hers working at the CRT the following powers: a) to participate in drafting the guidelines; b) to interpret them administratively; c) to register codes of ethics and audience ombudspersons; d) order that a complaint be accepted; e) review and overturn the decision of the ombudsman appointed by the media outlet; f) determine whether a recommendation was followed; g) monitor the media; and h) initiate and resolve disciplinary proceedings. Thus, the CRT becomes the regulator, interpreter, review body, supervisor, and enforcer of our audience rights. And by exercising such control over the media, it incidentally forces them into self-censorship, severely limiting freedom of expression.
Thus, the 4T—which for the past eight years has devoted itself without interruption every morning to lying, concealing information, and flooding us with fake news; the regime that “pays the media so they won’t attack it”; the one that has done nothing but stigmatize, discredit, intimidate, leave unprotected, and sow hatred against the media, journalists, and critics—the one that destroyed the INAI and the IFT—now wants to set itself up as the defender of our right to be well-informed. What a nerve.
They have already subjugated the Legislative Branch; they have already brought the Judicial Branch under their control; they have already nullified the constitutional order and the preeminence of human rights over their legislative decisions; they have already dismantled the autonomous bodies; they have already granted themselves unconstitutional powers such as espionage, arbitrary pretrial detention, and the freezing of bank accounts; they have already eliminated the amparo as a mechanism for citizens to defend themselves against their abuses, and the electoral authorities are eating out of their hands.
Given the irrelevance of the opposition parties, the only thing left for them to do is to crush the few media outlets, journalists, and critics of their regime who denounce their authoritarianism, question the official narrative, and expose the corruption and rot upon which they are building their hold on power. That is what their guidelines are all about—an anti-democratic aberration.
Further Reading: