During this period, journalists and media outlets experienced verbal attacks from President Javier Milei, national government officials, and militants from his political space.
The Argentine Journalism Forum warned that a third of all attacks in the first months of the government came from Milei. More than fifty journalists were discredited in television interviews or social media messages with epithets such as "bribed" (referring to alleged conditioning of their work by state advertising), "liars," "defamers," "henchmen," "manipulators," "extortionists," and "accomplices of the violent."
One of the most serious episodes in which offenses by the president were recorded occurred on September 28. During a campaign event, Milei dedicated some of the most emphatic parts of his speech to shouting insults at journalists. He ended by leading a chorus of thousands of supporters who repeatedly chanted "sons of bitches."
The power asymmetry between the highest authority and any journalist is compounded by the contagion effect manifested in digital hordes that amplify the insults, including death threats, generally under anonymity, which creates an inhibitory impact and degrades public debate.
"Every official has the right to disagree, deny, respond to, and criticize published information or opinions," stated the Argentine Association of Journalistic Entities (Adepa) in a statement, but emphasized that "they must do so honoring their institutional responsibility."
Journalist Jorge Lanata announced that he would file a lawsuit for being called "bribed" by President Milei, which, in his opinion, implies the imputation of the crime of bribery. Editorial Perfil and editor Jorge Fontevecchia are pursuing legal cases in the same direction, also for advertising discrimination and for the damages caused by the president's statements regarding the economic viability of that media outlet. The first lawsuit was dismissed by Judge Sebastián Ramos, with an express acquittal of the president. Fontevecchia appealed the ruling, proposing Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders, FOPEA, and ADEPA as amicus curiae.
At the beginning of the new government administration, the president announced the suspension of official advertising due to state budget adjustments. However, decentralized agencies and public companies used funds for advertising with commercial criteria, sometimes with budgets higher than in previous years. A group of national deputies requested a detailed report from the Executive Branch on the amounts used, the results, and those who intermediated in these operations.
An executive decree introduced restrictions to the Public Information Access Law that are out of tune with international standards and the spirit of the principle of "maximum disclosure." The decree aims to relax legal criteria with an ambiguity that affects the consistency of the law under the argument of protecting the privacy of officials and specific aspects of management. The government established that "information containing private data generated, obtained, transformed, controlled, or guarded by private individuals or legal entities or by the absence of a committed public interest will not be considered public information."
When secrecy is extended beyond what is provided for in the legislation, it jeopardizes the ability of journalism and citizens to oversee management and affects transparency levels.
The enactment of the Access Law in 2017 was one of the milestones in the expansion and consolidation of freedom of expression and press in the country, adding to the elimination of contempt, the constitutional protection of journalistic sources, the decriminalization of slander and libel, and judicial rulings that prohibited the discriminatory use of official advertising. The Access Law is also in line with the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, as outlined in rulings such as the "Menem vs. Noticias" case, in which the court overturned the Argentine judiciary's ruling that condemned a media outlet and its editors for violating privacy by publishing photographs and information related to an extramarital child of then-President Carlos Menem.
President Milei has not held press conferences since taking office in December 2023, preferring to use the social network X to express opinions and restricting interviews to a small group of television and radio journalists.
The presidential spokesperson informs accredited journalists at the Government House daily.
Other relevant cases:
After criticism from organizations linked to the defense of press freedom and national legislators, the Chief of Cabinet admitted before Congress that the government might need to review the modifications introduced in the access decree. However, the presidential spokesperson indicated that the government did not contemplate any review.
In June, a public announcement from the Ministry of Human Capital about requiring a license to practice journalism raised alarms. The announcement was later discarded.
The decision to cancel journalist Silvia Mercado's accreditation to the Government House press room also generated criticism. The journalist said she would take her case to court, and the government renewed her accreditation.
In August, tobacco businessman Pedro Otero sued journalist Andrés Sanguinetti and the directors of the media outlet Professional for two million dollars over an article about allegations of tax evasion, smuggling, and money laundering. The businessman's lawsuit is outside the Supreme Court's jurisprudential standards and presents characteristics that constitute a Slapp case.
In mid-August, Judge Lucila Córdoba issued a ruling that prohibited any reference to journalist Lanata, who has been hospitalized for four months and around whom family conflicts have arisen, leading to lawsuits. The unconstitutional measure, as it constituted a case of prior censorship, was overturned after objections from various organizations that defend freedom of expression.
Adepa has highlighted the need to protect the copyright of journalistic content. Two major tech companies reached payment agreements for using certain content with about a hundred media outlets. One of them, Meta, decided not to renew these agreements. The other, Google, renewed them. Adepa noted that these latest agreements constitute a positive precedent but are insufficient to configure fair compensation.
