In the name of democratizing mass media, these governments have promoted new frameworks for the media sector, which have been criticized by U.
The number of channels considerably increased, not only in Latin America but on a global scale, with a corresponding decline in attention to audience quality, and TV programs straying from topics that had the potential to generate positive social change.
corporation in Colombia are further examples of enormous and influential conglomerates.
A new framework should also install independent regulatory agencies above polarization.
This system must effectively include the public in the conception, diffusion and creation of its content, thereby promoting more independent and diverse media content.
Argentina Bolivia Brazil Central America COHA Recommends Cuba Dominican Republic Economics Ecuador Haiti Human Rights In the News Mexico North America Publications South America The Caribbean United States Venezuela facing limited competition.
However, due to the rise of left-wing governments throughout Latin America within the last 15 years, media rules have been re-drawn through new reforms.It is urgent that a new regulatory framework be restructured through the creation of a shared resources system, aimed at liberating journalism from the bonds of money, private or state-owned.This system could be financed by public and private contribution, subscriptions by consumers, and administrated by a college of representatives from every actor, including the State, the private sector, journalists and consumers.We consider media as “freed” when its editorial content is not subject to any pressure, being from the private sector or the State.This freedom ensures equal access for every social class to the media’s content and minimizes self or externally imposed censorship.The data used by the CEPR highlights that “for the years 2000-2001, the state channels averaged about 1.9 percent of the market, as compared to 5.9 percent for 2009-2010,” showing that the private channels still earn a comfortable majority of the audience. The facts, however, show that only highly conflicting political content was forbidden, and that TV or radio stations have never been closed by the State.