This has been a turbulent year for press freedom. Reflecting on and analyzing the actions of the government in an independent and critical manner has turned out to be a task full of obstacles and risks. As in the past three years, the government has employed resources and state agencies to reward or punish media depending on their editorial stance. A vast semi-official media apparatus designed to discredit the independent press has been mounted and there has been an increase in attacks on and restrictions of those who seek to question a government that intends to establish its own version of the facts, casting alternative views aside.
At the same time, the government is moving ahead on laws and abusive intrusions into control of media content, supplies and licenses.
Official advertising has undergone notable growth since 2003 and its placement has distorted its objective. Instead of its being used to communicate how the government is working through the most appropriate channels for the message to reach the citizens, it has become fuel for media compliant with the government or hostile to the non-supporting press. This negligent and arbitrary use of public funds becomes evident on looking into the percentages of distribution of the official advertising.
In the first six months of this year 48% of the official advertising to be placed in newspapers in Buenos Aires was twice as much as that of the same period last year and was concentrated in two editorial groups close to the government. The two newspapers with the largest circulation, which together represent more than 60% of the total readership in the capital, received 2.5%, as opposed to 38% that went to two papers with a combined press run 10 times less than that of these two. Among newspapers in the interior a group of those supporting the government received 44% of the official advertising in that sector. In the magazines category 59% went to three low-circulation publications, while the best-selling one received not one cents worth. Official advertising in the on-air television segment grew in the first half of the year by 282% over the same period last year; 48% went to the third most-watched channel, as compared to 0.5% that the one with the biggest audience received. Among radio stations, an AM station close to the government was given 41% of the funds distributed in that segment, against 2% received for the one with the second-largest audience.
In March, the Argentine Supreme Court in a ruling in a case regarding discrimination in placement of official advertising brought by the Perfil publishing company it was established that official advertising may not be placed in a discriminatory manner nor used as an indirect means of restricting freedom of expression. The government, in a clear mockery of the justice system and national balance limited itself to publishing a libelous advertisement in a newspaper belonging to Perfil and it maintained its system of distribution of official advertising.
In addition to the discriminatory placement of official advertising the government abusively employs various channels to get its message across from the use of publicly-owned media as proselytizing organs to the propagandistic use of soccer game broadcasts, which were brought under state control, filled with official ads and sustained with funds in excess of 2 billion pesos. To this should be added the distribution done by the official news agency whose head declared that he belongs to a militant or partisan sector of the press of free-of-charge content to more than 7,000 media outlets.
A number of bodies acting within the orbit of the executive branch of the federal government engaged in persecutorial policies against those who sought to show figures different from the official ones. The Interior Commerce Ministry, basing its actions on an interpretation of a legal provision and clearly making an attack upon freedom of expression, ordered privately-owned consulting firms that reported inflation indices to pay onerous fines. Within the framework of a formal complaint filed by the Commerce Minister against one of those firms a judge ordered various news media to identify those journalists who in the last five years had written about levels of inflation different from those of the official statistics agency. This was a requirement that amounted to a clear attempt at intimidating the journalists and media and carried with it a risk of indirect censorship. Other agencies also, such as the National Communications Commission and the Federal Public Revenue Authority, have carried out persecutory actions against media or individual journalists.
The verbal attacks made by public officials are fueling an oppressive climate for the practice of journalism. Among the numerous attacks or provocations aimed at media and journalists there can be mentioned as an example those of Interior Minister Florencio Randazzo, who accused the newspapers Clarín and La Nación of threatening democracy, or the remarks of Gabriel Mariotto, a candidate for the role of deputy governor of Buenos Aires province, who said that those beaten in the primary elections were editorial writers for the big newspapers. In the interior of Argentina there have also been defamatory remarks that went beyond the bounds of civil discourse, such as those made by Salta provincial governor Manuel Urtubey, whose spoke in a defamatory manner about the newspaper El Tribuno. This climate of hostility, extended throughout the country, provided a fertile ground for the proliferation of defamatory campaigns mounted by media supporting the government or for the posting of libelous posters on public streets.
This year has seen crude and extraordinary onslaughts through sophisticated and dangerous attacks on the press. In March and April copies of the newspapers Clarín, Olé, La Voz del Interior and Día a Día were prevented from reaching their readers due to a of lack of action by the authorities. Today, the possibility of practicing journalism independently is confronted by the governments attempt to regulate the supply of newsprint and newspapers content, the grant of operating licenses and the establishment of penalties in the audiovisual media arena.
A legislative bill introduced by the executive branch that seeks to declare as a matter of public interest the production, commercialization and distribution of newsprint could become law towards the end of this year, when the government and supporting legislative blocs will have a majority in the legislature. The initiative, which would prohibit newspapers from having a role in the production of their principal material, would require the current majority shareholders of the only factory in Argentina now producing newsprint to leave the company. The possibility of the government controlling materials vital for graphic media through local production and regulations governing imports would put in check any possibility of autonomy for the press.
In mid-August Gabriel Mariotto, head of the office for compliance with the Law on Audiovisual Communication Services, numerically dominated by government supporters, publicly called on a judge to rule on one of the clauses of the law, whose application has been suspended for being regarded prima facie as unconstitutional in that it retroactively affects the rights of those holding licenses legally granted. The media law, which gives the government wide powers of intervention that limit pluralism of information sources in proposing the creation of a conglomerate of official and semi-official media, has been applied selectively. What is apparent is a greater laxity in the intervention of the compliance agency with respect to media close to the government.
Among other measures linked to the work of the press, the national government issued a decree that prohibits advertisements promoting sexual offers. The newspaper Rio Negro brought suit because it considers the decree to be unconstitutional, based on two laws that have the exclusive purpose of preventing and punishing human trafficking and forced prostitution, but do not impede the free and voluntary practice of prostitution, and therefore, of its advertising. This converts the decree into an act damaging to freedom of expression that led the paper Rio Negro to bring a suit that was rejected at the first level, not for its content but for the channel utilized. Rio Negro appealed the decision and the appeal was granted.
.
The second lawsuit is against the resolution of the Secretariat of Public Communication that establishes new sanctions removing official advertising from papers that publish advertising for sexual offers.
The first resolution set high fines and confiscation of the publication, which implies double punishment for a single act.
Among other actions concerning the role of the press, the federal government issued a decree banning legal advertisements that offer sex and a regulation that provides for big fines and the seizure of publications. The newspaper Río Negro filed a lawsuit arguing that the decree damaged free speech and the freedom to publish lawful commercial offers. The claim was rejected on first hearing and the newspaper has appealed the decision.
There are media in the country that may criticize those in governance. But free speech and press freedom are restricted by a host of systematic attacks on the media through which those freedoms can be realized. The combination of fear of reprisals, the seduction of public funds and the growth of official discretionary powers in regulations has already stained most of the media picture with a pro-government tinge.
With presidential elections on the near horizon that according to the polls will give rise to a strong government with a majority in the legislature and a diluted opposition, there will be weak institutional counterbalances to contain excesses of those in power. Against this background, the progressive decline in independent press voices sends a signal of alarm concerning the vitality of the peoples democracy.
next events
Madrid, Spain
