Abstract
This chapter aims to outline the larger problem discussed over the following chapters. The central goal is to understand what is at stake when we talk about the “democratization of communication” in the context of Latin American mass media. Section 2.1 starts by laying out a normative theoretical foundation for the role of mass media in democratic society, based on Habermas’s concept of the public sphere. From there, the need for a regulatory approach is developed, resulting in a formal definition of “democratization of communication” (Sect. 2.1.2) and also discussing whether the rise of the internet has made this approach obsolete. Section 2.2 introduces the Latin American context by focusing on the region’s historical background and recent developments in the debate about the democratization of media structures. I show that mass media have developed as private enterprises, closely linked to the (conservative) political elite, resulting in a sharply concentrated and commercialized system. Since the 1980s, but more so since the political shift to the Left around the beginning of the twenty-first century, media activists and civil society have reacted by developing specific reform demands. Following this, Sect. 2.3 gives an overview on international norms and institutions that intervene in this otherwise mostly domestic policy domain. In Sect. 2.4, the central ideas of this chapter come together to conclude with the central research question.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The civil society of this public sphere thus has a fundamentally different character from other liberal or functionalist approaches. According to Habermas’s perspective, the civil society’s task is neither to control the public administration nor to attract policy makers’ attention to new problems or underrepresented perspectives. Rather, civil society is constitutive of a public sphere that is autonomous from the state. Civil society in this regard is not an undifferentiated manipulative mass; rather it enables a communicative space for discursive coordination (Costa 2004: 16–19).
- 2.
Despite their conceptual separation, the political and public spheres remain structurally dependent on each other—although this link is indeed a bit vague in Habermas’s theory.
- 3.
Originally, Gramsci’s notion of civil society was dominant in Latin America. It referred to a sphere comprising institutions like schools, church, or family—the “trenches” that stabilize modern capitalist societies—where the battle for hegemony is fought (Bobbio 1988; Callinicos 1999: 202–214). Civil society, according to Gramsci, is thus contested territory, and the objective of social action is its transformation (see also: Buchanan 1997). In the context of military dictatorships and the subsequent democratic transition, “civil society” grew ever more popular but simultaneously underwent a semantic transformation toward a classic liberal understanding. It was now associated with a free and critical press or independent election monitoring and served as a normative guideline in an anti-authoritative and state-critical sense. The purpose of political action was no longer the transformation of civil society but its consolidation and strengthening (Boris 1998: 18f). The concept of civil society underwent yet another transformation as neoliberalism became the leitmotiv for reforms in the economic and social sector (Teichman 2001; Gwynne and Kay 1999).
- 4.
The distinction between a liberal and a democratic perspective is common in discussions about the media’s role in societies (Costa 2004: 15f; Cammaerts and Carpentier 2007: xiii; Bresnahan 2003; Curran 1991; Crouch 2003: 26f). However, to describe the specific structure of media markets and the relation between the media and the state, other classifications exist, mostly from communication studies (Hallin and Mancini 2004; Freedman 2008: 24f; Siebert et al. 1956).
- 5.
During and after the screening of the Harry Potter movies, the discrimination against spectacle-wearing boys in schools and kindergartens diminished because the hero wore small glasses (Netzeitung 2008). Similarly, there are several examples from the dominant commercial O Globo network in Brazil. When a character appears in their prime-time telenovela who suffers from a specific illness, the acceptance rate of that illness in society rises abruptly (I072). After a telenovela subtly included pictures of missing persons, a general excitement for searching for missing people started in Brazil (Costa 2004: 13).
- 6.
- 7.
Some interesting debates include the consideration of regulation as a corollary to privatization efforts (Jordana and Levi-Faur 2005; Levi-Faur 2003); the causes and consequences of regulatory capture, as well as the nature of responsive regulation (Ayres and Braithwaite 1992; Braithwaite 2006; Coslovsky 2011; Mattli and Woods 2009); public-private regulation (Perez 2002; Scott 2002); and the effects of globalization on regulatory regimes (Lütz 2011; Levi-Faur and Jordana 2005).
- 8.
Examples include a regulation of advertisement (to not exceed a certain percentage, to be distinguishable from editorial content), requirements of national/regional content production, and protection of minors from inadequate content before a certain time of day.
- 9.
Michael Powell, head of the US Federal Communications Commission from 2001 to 2005 and son of Colin Powell, emphasized in a pointed commentary in 2001 that a digital divide is nothing to worry about and that communication technologies can be treated like any other (luxury) good: “I think there is a Mercedes divide, I would like to have one, but I can't afford one” (cited in Clewley 2001).
- 10.
While in the 1930s Argentina had a vibrant press sector including many periodicals and magazines, in Venezuela only four newspapers existed—all from the capital. In the mid-1980s, the newspaper circulation per 1000 people was 186 in Venezuela, 96 in Chile, 57 in Brazil, and 50 in Bolivia, compared to 268 in the United States and 350 in Germany (UNESCO 1989: 310ff). Despite having remained a niche sector, the print media are politically relevant because they address the political elite and are sometimes used by other media as news sources (Wilke 1992: 96f; Massmann 2007: 265f; I030: 221).
- 11.
Even in comparatively decentralized and federal Brazil, Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo are the uncontested hegemons when it comes to TV and also radio production, neglecting the cultural diversity of the country (Guedes-Bailey and Barbosa 2008: 50; Brock and Behn 2012: 1). In Chile, TV channels repeat the capital’s traffic reports even in regions almost two thousand kilometers away (I089: 38).
- 12.
There is quite some heterogeneity within “alternative” broadcasting media, and different concepts exist to analyze them (see Hintz 2007: 244; Brock 2012; Kleinsteuber 1991). For our context, however, it makes sense to use the term “community radio,” as it is widely employed and indeed best describes the prevalent type of non-commercial civil society media.
- 13.
Among other things, these laws prohibit declarations damaging the “national image” or the dignity of office holders. These stipulations can be (mis)used for political purposes against critical journalists to influence editorial lines and silence opposition (Buckley et al. 2008: 107; IACmHR 2004; Pasqualucci 2006). In most countries, they were repealed during the 1990s.
- 14.
At that time, few countries still had public broadcasting stations. One of them was Argentina, which privatized the two large public television channels in 1989 (Baranchuk 2006: 211). Still, privatizations in other sectors, particularly in telecommunications, gave new impetus to the advertising market and in turn to concentration trends in the media sector itself.
- 15.
To see communication as a (human) right was first proposed in 1969 by Jean d’Arcy, a French civil servant and official at the UN Office of Public Information. He saw the “right to communicate” as a necessary extension of the right to information in light of technological developments that allowed for citizens’ direct and full interaction with governance processes (Mueller et al. 2007: 270f). This rights perspective stood for the attempt “to politicize media and communication and to move this debate away from economic interests towards a human rights and citizen-centered perspective” (Cammaerts and Carpentier 2007: 5). However, this “third generation” right is not yet included specifically in any major rights accord (Jacobson 1998: 398f).
- 16.
The CRIS campaign was founded in late 2001 in the context of preparations for the World Summit of the Information Society (WSIS). Organized by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) and UNESCO, the WSIS conferences were held in 2003 in Geneva and in 2005 in Tunis. Struggling to shape global norms on communication issues and guide policy advice by emphasizing the social role of communication, the CRIS campaign successfully mobilized civil society actors, but its success within the WSIS was rather limited (Hintz 2007: 259f; Mueller et al. 2007: 279f, 268). “Communication rights” were not mentioned in the official declaration of the participating governments and did not even appear in the Civil Society Declaration. In this regard, the shadow of the polarizing debate of the 1970s proved to be rather prohibitive: “the historical baggage it carried from the NWICO battles made the phrase ‘right to communicate’ a clear target for ideological enemies of CRIS such as the World Press Freedom Committee” (Mueller et al. 2007: 291).
- 17.
The Inter-American System for human rights is based on the “American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man” (applicable to the U.S., Canada and some Caribbean states) and the newer “American Convention on Human Rights” (ratified by the rest of the Americas; also known as the Pact of San José) (Grossman 2000: 451).
- 18.
“I am among those who think that … in the majority of countries … the greatest violation of the freedom of expression arises not from the state, but from the private sector. What violates the freedom of expression is the lack of intervention by the state so that everybody can exercise the right to communicate” (I040: 31, author’s translation).
References
Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2009). The governance triangle: Regulatory standards institutions and the shadow of the state. In W. Mattli & N. Woods (Eds.), The politics of global regulation (pp. 44–88). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Aguirre Alvis, J. L., Torrico Villanueva, E. R., & Poma Ulo, B. (2009). Bolivia. In AMARC (Ed.), Las mordazas invisibles. Nuevas y viejas barreras a la diversidad en la radiodifusión (pp. 87–112). Buenos Aires.
Aitken, H. G. (1994). Allocating the spectrum: The origins of radio regulation. Technology and Culture, 35(4), 686–716.
Amaral, R. (2002). Mass media in Brazil: Modernization to prevent change. In E. Fox & S. Waisbord (Eds.), Latin politics, global media (pp. 38–46). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Anderson, S. P., & Coate, S. (2005). Market provision of broadcasting: A welfare analysis. The Review of Economic Studies, 72(4), 947–972.
Avritzer, L. (2002). Democracy and the public space in Latin America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Avritzer, L., & Costa, S. (2004). Teoria Crítica, Democracia e Esfera Pública: Concepções e Usos na América Latina. Dados, 47(4), 703–728.
Ayres, I., & Braithwaite, J. (1992). Responsive regulation: Transcending the deregulation debate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Baker, C. E. (2002). Media, markets, and democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Baranchuk, M. (2006). Canales 11 y 13: La primera privatización de la década menemista. In G. Mastrini (Ed.), Mucho ruido, pocas leyes. Economía y políticas de comunicación en la Argentina (1920-2004) (pp. 211–234). Buenos Aires: La Crujía.
Barendt, E. (1995). Broadcasting law: A comparative study. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Bartley, K., & O’Briain, D. (2003). Chavez: Ein Staatsstreich von innen (The revolution will not be televised). Documentary, 63min, arte. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--tuUUc3PHQ. Accessed 08/13/2013.
Becerra, M., & Mastrini, G. (2009a). Los dueños de la palabra. Acceso, estructura y concentración de los medios en la América Latina del Siglo XXI. Buenos Aires: Prometeo.
Becerra, M., & Mastrini, G. (2009b). Un escenario para pocos: Estructura, efectos e indicadores de concentración infocomunicacional latinoamericana. In AMARC (Ed.), Las mordazas invisibles. Nuevas y viejas barreras a la diversidad en la radiodifusión (pp. 317–334). Buenos Aires
Becerra, M., & Mastrini, G. (2010a). Concentración de los medios en América Latina: Tendencias de un nuevo siglo. Contratexto Digital N° 18. Lima: Universidad de Lima.
Becerra, M., & Mastrini, G. (2010b). Crisis. What Crisis? Argentine Media in View of the 2008 International Financial Crisis. International Journal of Communication, 4, 611–629.
Benhabib, S. (1992). Models of public space: Hannah Arendt, the Liberal Tradition, and Jürgen Habermas. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere (pp. 73–98). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Bennett, W. L. (2004). Global media and politics: Transnational communication regimes and civic cultures. Annual Review of Political Science, 7(1), 125–148.
Bertoni, E. (2007). Libertad de expresión en el Estado de derecho. Doctrina y jurisprudencia nacional, extranjera e internacional. Buenos Aires: Editores del Puerto.
Beviglia-Zampetti, A. (2005). WTO rules in the audio-visual sector. In P. Guerrieri, P. L. Iapadre, & G. Koopman (Eds.), Cultural diversity and international economic integration: The global governance of the audio-visual sector (pp. 261–284). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Black, J. (2008). Constructing and contesting legitimacy and accountability in polycentric regulatory regimes. Regulation and Governance, 2(2), 137–164.
Bobbio, N. (1988). Gramsci and the concept of civil society. In J. Keane (Ed.), Civil society and the state (pp. 73–99). London: Verso.
Bolaño, C., Mastrini, G., & Sierra, F. (2004). A Latin American perspective for the political economy of communications. The Public, 11(4), 47–58.
Boris, D. (1998). Soziale Bewegungen in Lateinamerika. VSA: Hamburg.
Boris, D. (2001). Zur Politischen Ökonomie Lateinamerikas: Der Kontinent in der Weltwirtschaft des 20. Jahrhunderts. Hamburg: VSA.
Braithwaite, J. (2006). Responsive regulation and developing economies. World Development, 34(5), 884–898.
Bresnahan, R. (2002). Radio and the democratic movement in Chile 1973-1990: Independent and grass roots voices during the Pinochet dictatorship. Journal of Radio Studies, 9(1), 161–181.
Bresnahan, R. (2003). The media and the neoliberal transition in Chile: Democratic promise unfulfilled. Latin American Perspectives, 30(6), 39–68.
Bresnahan, R. (2007). Community radio and social activism in Chile 1990-2007: Challenges for grass roots voices during the transition to democracy. Journal of Radio Studies, 14(2), 212–233.
Brock, N. (2012). Der Teufel im Detail. Eine genealogische Spurensuche zur Legitimation unabhängiger Radios in Brasilien. In H. Bruchmann, A. Dobelmann, A. Hartmann, A. Kruse, M. Schulz, & S. H. Sott (Eds.), Medien und Demokratie in Lateinamerika (pp. 154–176). Berlin: Karl Dietz Verlag.
Brock, N., & Behn, A. (2012). Infoblätter community radio: Brasilien. Berlin: Nachrichtenpool Lateinamerika.
Buchanan, P. G. (1997). Counterhegemonic strategies in neoliberal Argentina. Latin American Perspectives, 24(6), 113–132.
Buckley, S., Duer, K., Mendel, T., & O’Siochrú, S. (2008). Broadcasting, voice, and accountability: A public interest approach to policy, law, and regulation. Washington, DC: The World Bank Group.
Burri-Nenova, M. (2008). Trade versus culture in the digital environment: An old conflict in need of a new definition. Journal of International Economic Law, 12(1), 17–62.
Cabral, A. V. (2009). Brazilian community communication initiatives in radio and TV digital switchover. International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics, 5(1/2), 55–68.
Calhoun, C. (1992). Introduction: Habermas and the public sphere. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere (pp. 1–48). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Calhoun, C. (1993). Civil society and the public sphere. Public Culture, 5, 267–280.
Callinicos, A. (1999). Social theory. A historical introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Cammaerts, B., & Carpentier, N. (Eds.). (2007). Reclaiming the media. Communication rights and democratic media roles. Bristol: Intellect.
Cañizález, A., & Lugo-Ocando, J. (2008). Beyond national media systems: A medium for Latin America and the struggle for integration. In J. Lugo-Ocando (Ed.), The media in Latin America (pp. 209–225). Berkshire: Open University Press.
Clewley, R. (2001). I have a (digital) dream. http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2001/04/43349. Accessed 07/18/2013.
CNTV (2011). VII Encuesta Nacional de Televisión. Consejo Nacional de Televisión, Santiago de Chile.
Cohen, J. L., & Arato, A. (1992). Civil society and political theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Collins, R. (2000). Realising social goals in connectivity and content. The challenge of convergence. In C. T. Marsden (Ed.), Regulating the global information society (pp. 108–115). London: Routledge.
Coslovsky, S. V. (2011). Relational regulation in the Brazilian Ministério Publico: The organizational basis of regulatory responsiveness. Regulation and Governance, 5(1), 70–89.
Costa, S. (2004). Der Kampf um Öffentlichkeit: Begriffe, Akteure, politische Dynamiken. In B. Hoffmann, & u.a. (Eds.), Jahrbuch Lateinamerika. Analysen und Berichte 28: Medien und ihre Mittel (pp. 13–31). Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot.
Couldry, N. (2004). The productive ‘consumer’ and the dispersed ‘citizen’. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 7(1), 21–32.
Crouch, C. (2003). Postdemokratie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
CtIADH (1985). Opinión consultiva OC-5/85: La colegiación obligatoria de periodistas. Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, San José (Costa Rica).
Curran, J. (1991). Rethinking the media as a public sphere. In P. Dahlgren & C. Sparks (Eds.), Communication and citizenship. Journalism and the public sphere in the new media age (pp. 27–57). London: Routledge.
Curran, J. (2000). Rethinking media and democracy. In J. Curran & M. Gurevitch (Eds.), Mass media and society (pp. 120–154). London: Arnold.
Czada, R., & Lütz, S. (2003). Einleitung - Probleme, Institutionen und Relevanz regulativer Politik. In R. Czada, S. Lütz, & S. Mette (Eds.), Regulative Politik. Zähmungen von Markt und Technik (pp. 15–38). Leske + Budrich: Opladen.
Dahlgren, P. (1995). Television and the public sphere: Citizenship, democracy and the media. London: Sage.
Dorfman, A., & Mattelart, A. (1975). How to read Donald Duck: Imperialist ideology in the Disney Comic. New York: I. G. Editions.
Downing, J. (1984). Radical media. The political experience of alternative communication. Boston, MA: South End Press.
Duarte, L. G. (1999). The impact of regional trade pacts on Foreign TV enterprises in Latin America. Transnational Broadcasting Studies (3). http://www.tbsjournal.com/Archives/Fall99/Articles3/Duarte/duarte.html. Accessed 12/15/2009.
Feintuck, M., & Varney, M. (2006). Media regulation, public interest and the law (2nd ed.). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Fischer, K. (2009). The influence of neoliberals in Chile before, during, and after Pinochet. In P. Mirowski & D. Plehwe (Eds.), The road from Mont Pèlerin. The making of the neoliberal thought collective (pp. 305–346). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Foucault, M. (1984). The archaeology of knowledge. New York: Pantheon.
Fox, E. (1995). Latin American broadcasting. In L. Bethell (Ed.), The Cambridge history of Latin America (pp. 519–568). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fox, E. (1998). Latin American broadcasting and the state: Friend and Foe. In P. H. O’Neil (Ed.), Communicating democracy: The media and political transitions (pp. 21–39). Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
Fraser, N. (1993). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. In B. Robbins (Ed.), The phantom public sphere (pp. 1–32). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Freedman, D. (2008). The politics of media policy. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Galperín, H. (1999). Cultural industries policy in regional trade agreements: the cases of NAFTA, the European Union and MERCOSUR. Media, Culture and Society, 21(5), 627–648.
Galperín, H. (2002). Transforming television in Argentina. Market development and policy reform in the 1990s. In E. Fox & S. Waisbord (Eds.), Latin politics, global media (pp. 22–37). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Garnham, N. (1986). Contribution to a political economy of mass-communication. In R. Collins, J. Curran, N. Garnham, P. Scannell, P. Schlesinger, & C. Sparks (Eds.), Media, culture and society. A critical reader (pp. 9–32). London: Sage.
Garnham, N. (2000a). Emancipation, the media, and modernity. Arguments about the media and social theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Garnham, N. (2000b). The role of the public sphere in the information society. In C. T. Marsden (Ed.), Regulating the global information society (pp. 43–56). London: Routledge.
Giudici, S. (2008). Libertad de expresión. Madre de todas las libertades. Buenos Aires: APOC.
Goldstein, A. A. (2011). Los conflictos entre los medios y los gobiernos sudamericanos: el caso del primer gobierno de Lula Da Silva en Brasil. Argumentos. Revista de crítica social (13), 110–133.
Gómez, G. (2011). Los gobiernos progresistas entre dos modelos de políticas de comunicación: ¿convivencia pacífica o confrontación hegemónica? Paper presented at the Die Macht der Medien oder die Medien der Macht? Pressefreiheit in Lateinamerika, Berlin, 04/05/2011.
Gómez, G., Aguerre, C., & Elíades, A. (2009). Síntesis Regional: Regulación de las Concesiones de Radiodifusión en América Latina. In AMARC (Ed.), Las mordazas invisibles. Nuevas y viejas barreras a la diversidad en la radiodifusión (pp. 21–51). Buenos Aires.
Gott, R. (2008). Venezuela under Hugo Chávez: The originality of the ‘Bolivarian’ Project. New Political Economy, 13(4), 475–490.
Graber, C. B. (2004). Audiovisual media and the law of the WTO. In C. B. Graber, M. Girsberger, & M. Nenova (Eds.), Free trade versus cultural diversity: WTO negotiations in the field of audiovisual services (pp. 15–64). Luzern, CH: Schulthess.
Grossman, C. (2000). Freedom of expression in the Inter-American system for the protection of human rights. Nova Law Review, 25, 447–478.
Grossman, C. (2012). Challenges to freedom of expression within the inter-american system: A jurisprudential analysis. Human Rights Quarterly, 34(2), 361–403.
Guedes-Bailey, O., & Barbosa, O. F. J. (2008). The media in Brazil: An historical overview of Brazilian broadcasting politics. In J. Lugo-Ocando (Ed.), The media in Latin America (pp. 46–60). Berkshire: Open University Press.
Guerra, F.-X. (1992). Modernidad e independencias: Ensayos sobre las revoluciones hispánicas. Mexico City: Editorial Mapfre.
Gwynne, R. N., & Kay, C. (1999). Latin America transformed: Changing paradigms, debates, and alternatives. In R. N. Gwynne & C. Kay (Eds.), Latin America transformed: Globalization and modernity (pp. 2–30). London: Arnold.
Habermas, J. (1990). Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit. Untersuchungen zu einer Kategorie der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Habermas, J. (1992). Further reflections on the public sphere. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere (pp. 421–461). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Habermas, J. (1995). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Suhrkamp: Frankfurt am Main.
Habermas, J. (1996). Drei normative Modelle der Demokratie. In J. Habermas (Ed.), Die Einbeziehung des Anderen: Studien zur politischen Theorie (pp. 277–292). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Haje, L. (2007). Comunicação, esfera pública e poder. In M. C. Ramos & S. dos Santos (Eds.), Políticas de Comunicação. Buscas teóricas e práticas (pp. 127–146). São Paulo: Editora Paulus.
Hall, A. (2012). South America: A panorama of media democratization. NACLA Report on the Americas, 45(3), 56–57.
Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hallin, D. C., & Papathanassopoulos, S. (2002). Political clientelism and the media: southern Europe and Latin America in comparative perspective. Media, Culture and Society, 24(2), 175–195.
Hargittai, E. (2008). The digital reproduction of inequality. In D. Grusky (Ed.), Social stratification (pp. 936–944). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Harju, A. (2007). Citizen participation and local public spheres: an agency and identity focussed approach to the Tampere postal services conflict. In B. Cammaerts & N. Carpentier (Eds.), Reclaiming the media. Communication rights and democratic media roles (pp. 92–106). Bristol: Intellect.
Hart, J. A. (2004). Technology, television, and competition: The politics of digital TV. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Herkman, J. (2010). Re-evaluating the relationship between politics and popular media. Media, Culture and Society, 32(4), 701–710.
Herman, E. S., & McChesney, R. W. (1997). The global media: The new missionaries of corporate capitalism. London: Cassell.
Herrera, M. J. (2001). La segmentación digital en México. Perfiles Latinoamericanos, 18, 29–58.
Hervieu, B. (2010, 10/20/2010). Defender la ley SCA no es traicionar nuestro mandato. Página/12.
Hintz, A. (2007). Civil society media at the WSIS: a new actor in global communication governance? In B. Cammaerts & N. Carpentier (Eds.), Reclaiming the Media. Communication Rights and Democratic Media Roles (pp. 243–264). Bristol: Intellect.
I010: Personal interview with professor for Communication Studies, Universidad Nacional de Quilmes. 12/08/2012, Buenos Aires.
I020: Personal interview with former official at the Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the OAS. 01/19/2012, Buenos Aires.
I021: Personal interview with former regional coordinator of AMARC. 01/20/2012, Buenos Aires.
I025: Personal interview with former representative of AMARC; former official in Uruguayan regulatory agency. 01/26/2012, Montevideo.
I029: Personal interview with collaborator of Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. 02/01/2012, Montevideo.
I030: Personal interview with director of daily newspaper. 02/01/2012, Montevideo.
I040: Personal interview with community radio activist from FARCO (Argentina). 02/15/2012.
I041: Personal interview with professor for Communication Studies, Universidad de Buenos Aires. 02/17/2012, Buenos Aires.
I043: Personal interview with professor for Communication Studies, Universidade Federal Fluminense. 03/01/2012, Rio de Janeiro.
I044: Personal interview with leading representative of AMARC Brazil. 03/05/2012, Rio de Janeiro.
I048: Personal interview with professor for Communication Studies, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. 03/07/2012, Rio de Janeiro.
I049: Personal interview with development expert on media democratization and social movements. 03/07/2012, Rio de Janeiro.
I055: Personal interview with community radio activist, collaborator of commercial radio network. 03/23/2012, Rio de Janeiro.
I060: Personal interview with journalist and community radio activist. 03/28/2012, São Paulo.
I062: Personal interview with journalist of EBC, professor for communication studies Universidade de São Paulo. 04/03/2012, São Paulo.
I072: Personal interview with legal manager of ABERT. 04/11/2012, Brasília.
I089: Personal interview with legal manager of regulatory agency SUBTEL. 05/07/2012, Santiago de Chile.
IACmHR (2004). Horacio Verbitsky et al. vs. Argentina (Report N° 3/03, Petition 12.128). Inter-American Commission on Human Rights: Washington, DC.
Jacobson, T. L. (1998). Discourse ethics and the right to communicate. Gazette, 60(5), 395–413.
Jelin, E. (2007). Public memorialization in perspective: Truth, justice and memory of past repression in the Southern Cone of South America. The International Journal of Transitional Justice, 1, 138–156.
Jin, D. Y. (2008). Cultural Coup d'État: The changing roles of UNESCO and local government on cultural sovereignty. Javnost – The Public, 15(1), 5–22.
Jordana, J., & Levi-Faur, D. (2005). The diffusion of regulatory capitalism in Latin America: Sectoral and national channels in the making of a new order. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 598(1), 102–123.
Just, N. (2009). Measuring media concentration and diversity: new approaches and instruments in Europe and the US. Media, Culture and Society, 31(1), 97–117.
Kaiser, S. (2002). Escraches: demonstrations, communication and political memory in post-dictatorial Argentina. Media, Culture and Society, 24(4), 499–516.
Kaplún, G. (2011). Participación social y políticas de comunicación: experiencias innovadoras. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the International Association for Media and Communication Research, Istanbul, July 13–17.
Kitzberger, P. (2009). Las relaciones gobierno-prensa y el giro político en América Latina. PostData, 14, 157–181.
Kleinsteuber, H. J. (Ed.). (1991). Radio - Das unterschätzte Medium. Erfahrungen mit nicht-kommerziellen Lokalstationen in 15 Staaten. Berlin: Vistas.
Klinger, U. (2011). Democratizing media policy: Community radios in Mexico and Latin America. Journal of Latin American Communication Research, 1(2), 4–22.
Koschützke, A., & Gerber, E. (Eds.). (2011). Progresismo y Políticas de Comunicación. Mano a la Obra. Buenos Aires: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.
Kößler, R., & Melber, H. (1993). Chancen internationaler Zivilgesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
La República. (2013, 04/21/2013). ¿La mejor ley de medios es la que no existe? Diario La República.
Lamas, E. (2011). Medios audiovisuales comunitarios: legitimidad y legalidad. Un reconocimiento merecido. In M. Baranchuk & J. R. Usé (Eds.), Ley 26.522. Hacia un nuevo paradigma en comunicación audiovisual (pp. 143–159). Buenos Aires: AFSCA.
Landes, J. B. (1998). The public and the private sphere: A feminist reconsideration. In J. B. Landes (Ed.), Feminism, the public and the private (pp. 135–163). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Latinobarómetro (2013). Informe 2013. Santiago de Chile. http://www.latinobarometro.org/latContents.jsp. Accessed 02/07/2014.
Lechner, N. (1996). Staat und Zivilgesellschaft in lateinamerikanischen Demokratisierungsprozessen: Überlegungen zu einem Beziehungswandel. In F. Kolland, E. Pilz, A. Schedler, & W. Schicho (Eds.), Staat und zivile Gesellschaft. Beiträge zur Entwicklungspolitik in Afrika, Asien und Lateinamerika (pp. 39–54). Frankfurt am Main: Brandes & Apsel.
Levi-Faur, D. (2003). The politics of liberalisation: Privatisation and regulation-for-competition in Europe’s and Latin America’s telecoms and electricity industries. European Journal of Political Research, 42(5), 705–740.
Levi-Faur, D., & Jordana, J. (Eds.) (2005). The rise of regulatory capitalism: The global diffusion of a new order. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 598 (1), 102–24.
Lucas, C. (2006). Cultural policy, the public sphere, and the struggle to define low-power FM radio. Journal of Radio Studies, 13(1), 51–67.
Lugo-Ocando, J. (2008). An introduction to the maquilas of power: media and political transition in Latin America. In J. Lugo-Ocando (Ed.), The media in Latin America (pp. 1–12). Berkshire: Open University Press.
Lütz, S. (2011). Back to the future? The domestic sources of transatlantic regulation. Introduction to the Special Issue. Review of International Political Economy, 18(4), iii–xxii.
Magder, T. (2004). Transnational media, international trade and the idea of cultural diversity. Continuum: Journal of Media and Cultural Studies, 18(3), 380–397.
Marino, S. (2009). Argentina. In AMARC (Ed.), Las mordazas invisibles. Nuevas y viejas barreras a la diversidad en la radiodifusión (pp. 55-85). Buenos Aires: AMARC ALC
Mariscal, J. (2005). Digital divide in a developing country. Telecommunications Policy, 29(5–6), 409–428.
Marsden, C. T. (2000). Pluralism in the multi-channel market. Suggestions for regulatory scrutiny. International Journal of Communications Law and Policy (4), 1–57.
Massmann, A. (2007). Lateinamerika. In B. Thomaß (Ed.), Mediensysteme im internationalen Vergleich (pp. 259–278). Konstanz: UVK.
Mastrini, G., & Becerra, M. (2002). 50 years of media concentration in Latin America: from artisanal patriarchy to large-scale groups. Paper presented at the Panamerican Colloquium Cultural Industries and Dialogue between Civilizations in the Americas, Montreal, April 22–24th 2002.
Mattelart, A. (2005). Diversidad cultural y mundialización. Barcelona: Paidós.
Mattli, W., & Woods, N. (2009). In whose benefit? Explaining regulatory change in global politics. In W. Mattli & N. Woods (Eds.), The politics of global regulation (pp. 1–43). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Mauersberger, C. (2011a). Kurze Antennen. Über den Fortschritt eines neuen Mediengesetzes in Chile, der kaum einer ist. Lateinamerika Nachrichten (441), 27–30.
Mauersberger, C. (2011b). Whose voice gets on air? The role of community radio and recent reforms to democratize media markets in Uruguay, Argentina, and Chile. Journal of Latin American Communication Research, 1(2), 23–47.
Mauersberger, C. (2013). Commercial markets or communication rights? International norms and the democratisation of media markets in Argentina and Brazil. Journal für Entwicklungspolitik, 24(2), 51–68.
McQuail, D. (1992). Media performance: Mass communication and the public interest. London: Sage.
McSherry, J. P. (2005). Predatory states: Operation condor and covert war in Latin America. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Meinecke, S. (1992). Massenmedien in Argentinien. In J. Wilke (Ed.), Massenmedien in Lateinamerika (Vol. 1, pp. 19–81). Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert.
Moyses, D., & Gindre, G. (2009). Brasil. In AMARC (Ed.), Las mordazas invisibles. Nuevas y viejas barreras a la diversidad en la radiodifusión (pp. 113–142). Buenos Aires: AMARC ALC
Mueller, M. L., Kuerbis, B. N., & Pagé, C. (2007). Democratizing global communication? Global Civil society and the campaign for communication rights in the information society. International Journal of Communication, 1, 267–296.
Netzeitung (2008). Brillenträger profitieren vom Harry-Potter-Effekt. http://www.netzeitung.de/wissenschaft/1017537.html. Accessed 08/08/2013.
Nordenstreng, K. (2001). Epilogue. In N. Morris & S. Waisbord (Eds.), Media and globalization: Why the state matters (pp. 155–160). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
OAS. (2000). Declaration of principles on freedom of expression. Washington, DC: Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, Organisation of American States.
OAS. (2003). Annual report of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression 2002. Washington, DC: OAS.
OAS (2004). Background and interpretation of the declaration of principles. Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, Organisation of American States, Washington, DC. http://www.cidh.org/relatoria/showarticle.asp?artID=132&lID=1. Accessed 01/19/2012.
OAS. (2005). Informe anual de la relatoría para la libertad de expresión 2004. Washington, DC: OAS.
OAS (2007). Joint declaration on diversity in broadcasting. UN, OSCE, OAS, ACHPR, Amsterdam. www.cidh.org/relatoria/showarticle.asp?artID=719&lID=1. Accessed 01/21/2011.
OAS. (2009). Informe de la Relatoría Especial para la Libertad de Expresión 2008. Washington, DC: OAS.
Padovani, C., & Nordenstreng, K. (2005). From NWICO to WSIS: Another world information and communication order? Global Media and Communication, 1(3), 264–272.
Pasqualucci, J. M. (2006). Criminal defamation and the evolution of the doctrine of freedom of expression in international law: Comparative jurisprudence of the inter-American court of human rights. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 39, 379–433.
Pauwels, C., & Loisen, J. (2003). The WTO and the audiovisual sector: Economic free trade vs cultural horse trading? European Journal of Communication, 18(3), 291–313.
Perez, O. (2002). Using private-public linkages to regulate environmental conflicts: The case of international construction contracts. Journal of Law and Society, 29(1), 77–110.
Piccato, P. (2010). Public sphere in Latin America: A map of the historiography. Social History, 35(2), 165–192.
Polan, D. (1993). The public’s fear; or, Media as Monster in Habermas, Negt, and Kluge. In B. Robbins (Ed.), The phantom public sphere (pp. 33–41). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Puhle, H.-J. (2004). Zwischen Diktatur und Demokratie. Stufen der politischen Entwicklung in Lateinamerika im 20. Jahrhundert. In M. Kaller-Dietrich, B. Potthast, & H. W. Tobler (Eds.), Lateinamerika. Geschichte und Gesellschaft im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert (pp. 27–43). Wien: Promedia.
Puppis, M. (2008). National media regulation in the era of free trade: The role of global media governance. European Journal of Communication, 23(4), 405–424.
Ramos, M. C. (2010). Possibilidade de uma nova agenda para as políticas de comunicação na América Latina. RECIIS Revista Electrônica de Comunicação, Informação & Inovação em Saúde, 4(4), 20–28.
Rosston, G. L., & Hazlett, T. W. (2001). Comments of 37 concerned economists before the Federal Communications Commission. Washington, DC.
Schindel, E. (2003). Desaparición y sociedad. Una lectura de la prensa gráfica argentina (1975-1978). Dissertation, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin.
Schönsteiner, J., Beltrán y Puga, A., & Lovera, D. A. (2011). Reflections on the human rights challenges of consolidating democracies: Recent developments in the inter-american system of human rights. Human Rights Law Review, 11(2), 362–389.
Schulz, M. S. (2001). Democracia y cambio de los medios en América Latina. Perfiles Latinoamericanos, 18, 9–28.
Scott, C. (2002). Private regulation of the public sector: A neglected facet of contemporary governance. Journal of Law and Society, 29(1), 56–76.
Siebert, F. S., Peterson, T., & Schramm, W. (Eds.). (1956). Four theories of the press. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Singh, J. P. (2008). Paulo Freire: Possibilities for dialogic communication in a market-driven information age. Information, Communication and Society, 11(5), 699–726.
Straubhaar, J. (2001). Brazil: The role of the state in world television. In N. Morris & S. Waisbord (Eds.), Media and globalization: Why the state matters (pp. 133–153). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Teichman, J. A. (2001). The Politics of Freeing Markets in Latin America. Chile, Argentina, and Mexico. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.
UNESCO. (1980). Many voices, one world. Towards a new, more just and more efficient world information and communication order. London: Kogan Page.
UNESCO. (1989). World communication report. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
UNESCO. (2005). Convention on the protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expressions. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Valdés, J. G. (1989). La Escuela de Chicago: Operación Chile. Buenos Aires: Editorial Zeta.
Varney, E. (2006). Regulating the digital television infrastructure in the EU. Room for citizenship interests? SCRIPT-ed: Online-Journal, 3(3), 221–241.
Veljanovski, C. (1989). Competition in broadcasting. In C. Veljanovski (Ed.), Freedom in broadcasting (pp. 3–24). London: Institute of Economic Affairs.
Wagner, S. (2014). Mobile inclusion in the information age: The relevance of indigenous media movements to M4D. Paper presented at the 4th international conference on M4D mobile communication for development, Dakar, April 7-9.
Waisbord, S., & Morris, N. (2001). Introduction. Rethinking media globalization and state power. In N. Morris & S. Waisbord (Eds.), Media and globalization: Why the state matters (pp. vii–xvi). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Walsh, R. (2006). Carta abierta de un escritor a la Junta Militar. In R. Walsh (Ed.), Operación Masacre (pp. 225–236). Buenos Aires: Ediciones de la Flor.
Wiley, S. B. C. (2006). Assembled agency: Media and hegemony in the Chilean transition to civilian rule. Media, Culture and Society, 28(5), 671–693.
Wilke, J. (1992). Massenmedien in Brasilien. In J. Wilke (Ed.), Massenmedien in Lateinamerika (Vol. 1, pp. 83–141). Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert.
WTO (2011). Negotiations on trade in services: Report by the Chairman, Ambassador Fernando de Mateo, to the Trade Negotiations Committee [TN/S/36]. 04/21/2011, World Trade Organization.
Zeuske, M. (2010). Von Bolívar zu Chávez. Die Geschichte Venezuelas. Zürich: Rotpunktverlag.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mauersberger, C. (2016). Democracy, Media, and Their Democratization in Latin America. In: Advocacy Coalitions and Democratizing Media Reforms in Latin America. Contributions to Political Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21278-4_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21278-4_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-21277-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-21278-4
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)