{"id":8636,"date":"2012-12-14T08:49:24","date_gmt":"2012-12-14T08:49:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/uncut.indexoncensorship.org\/?p=8636"},"modified":"2012-12-14T08:49:24","modified_gmt":"2012-12-14T08:49:24","slug":"argentina-media-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/?p=8636","title":{"rendered":"Argentina: President Kirchner law set to punish critical media group"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong><em>Attempts to push through a media law in Argentina could end up destroying one of the country&#8217;s most critical broadcast outlets. Ed Stocker reports<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A bitter battle between Argentina\u2019s largest media empire, Grupo Clar\u00edn, and the government shows no signs of ending. President Cristina Fern\u00e1ndez de Kirchner, continues to try and <a title=\"AP \/ Guardian - Argentina tries to enforce anti-media monopoly law \" href=\"http:\/\/www.guardian.co.uk\/world\/feedarticle\/10562458\" target=\"_blank\">force through a media law<\/a> that would see the break up of the conglomerate, the most critical voice against her administration.<\/p>\n<p>Three years ago Congress passed an anti-monopoly bill with broad aims of making the Latin American country\u2019s audio-visual landscape a more democratic, plural environment. But critics argue that its real aim is to stifle dissenting voices, including Clar\u00edn.<\/p>\n<p>The law has positive aspects on the surface, argued Guillermo Mastrini, a professor at Quilmes University specialising in media. He said the new bill allows non-profit organisations a third of Argentina\u2019s much-coveted broadcast licences for the first time &#8212; potentially setting a benchmark for regional press standards.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cBut the real idea that needs to be understood,\u201d he explained, \u201cis that the media law has been much more democratic in its drafting than its implementation. The government has used a decent law to punish broadcast media that doesn\u2019t toe the official line.\u201d<\/p>\n<div style=\"width: 522px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\" \" title=\"Cristina Fern\u00e1ndez de Kirchner. Hugo Passarello Luna | Demotix \" src=\"http:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/12\/cristina-fernandez-de-kirchner.jpg\" alt=\"Cristina Fern\u00e1ndez de Kirchner. Hugo Passarello Luna | Demotix \" width=\"512\" height=\"340\" \/><p class=\"wp-caption-text\">Argentinian president Cristina Fern\u00e1ndez de Kirchner. Hugo Passarello Luna | Demotix<\/p><\/div>\n<p>The implementation of the law has proved difficult since Clar\u00edn went to a tribunal over the constitutionality of a clause stating that companies with too many licenses &#8212; the right to broadcast in a certain region &#8212; would have to divest.<\/p>\n<p>While a ruling on the constitutionality is still pending, Clar\u00edn was granted a temporary injunction.\u00a0<strong>[Update 17\/12: a judge has\u00a0<a title=\"AP - Judge Sides With Argentina Against Grupo Clarin \" href=\"http:\/\/abcnews.go.com\/International\/wireStory\/judge-sides-argentina-grupo-clarin-17979723#.UM8CweSUPJI\" target=\"_blank\">ruled this clause<\/a>\u00a0constitutional, and\u00a0Clar\u00edn will\u00a0now appeal. In the interim the federal media authority says\u00a0it will now forcibly step in and start the transfer of licences.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>What has ensued has been a complex and heated legal scuffle, with the government initially arguing that the injunction would end on 7 December, citing advice handed down by the country\u2019s highest judicial body, the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n<p>The government prepared for the <a title=\"New York Times - Media Firm Wins Reprieve \" href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2012\/12\/07\/business\/global\/grupo-clarin-of-argentina-wins-reprieve-on-new-media-law.html?_r=0\" target=\"_blank\">7 December deadline<\/a> &#8212; when the law would apparently come into force &#8212; with fervour, saturating pro-government channels with adverts about a date they had renamed \u201c7D\u201d to give it a catchy ring. Clar\u00edn retaliated on its networks.<\/p>\n<p>Then, at the last moment, an appeals court extended the injunction, despite the Supreme Court\u2019s stance, thwarting the law once again.<\/p>\n<p>For Daniel Dessein, freedom of expression president at the Argentine\u00a0Association\u00a0of\u00a0Journalistic\u00a0Entities (Adepa) group, 7D was part of the government\u2019s increasingly confrontational stance towards the media.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe government elected the date of 7 December as a historic and symbolic moment when the application of the law would allow democracy to triumph,\u201d he said. \u201cIt chose a number and a letter for the day, 7D, which clearly alludes to D-Day and the Normandy invasion. The government was basically announcing an attack.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>That \u201cattack\u201d hasn\u2019t gone the government\u2019s way, and it has launched an appeal while strongly questioning the judiciary\u2019s objectivity. The Permanent Council for the Protection of Judicial Independence, a national body of judges, in turn denounced what it called \u201cinstitutional aggression\u201d against judges.<\/p>\n<p>According to Afsca, the body charged with implementing the media law, the proposed legislation isn\u2019t singling out one group. Earlier this month, its president Mart\u00edn Sabbatella said that \u201cthe spirit of Afsca has always been that no one is different and the rules are the same for everyone\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Afsca argues that Grupo Clar\u00edn is the only media conglomerate that has refused to present divestment plans, from among the some 20 companies that exceed the new licence rule.<\/p>\n<p>The media law continues to divide international opinion. The Florida-based Pan-American Press Society (SIP) sent a delegation to Argentina for the failed 7 December deadline. It later released a statement denouncing what it saw as \u00a0\u201cserious problems regarding the free exercise of journalism in the country\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, <a title=\"UN - Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression \" href=\"http:\/\/www.ohchr.org\/EN\/Issues\/FreedomOpinion\/Pages\/OpinionIndex.aspx\" target=\"_blank\">Frank La Rue<\/a>, UN special rapporteur for freedom of expression, said on a visit to Argentina in October that the law was \u201ca model for the whole continent and for other regions in the world\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Clar\u00edn argues that its TV and radio stations are some of the few &#8220;independent&#8221; voices left in Argentina, a country where many stations are dependent on government advertising to stay afloat.<\/p>\n<p>Advocates of the law say it provides a much-needed overhaul of legislation that dates back to the last military dictatorship (1976-83). But for Guillermo Mastrini, the turf war with Clar\u00edn is holding up its progressive elements.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe government has focused its forces more on destroying Grupo Clar\u00edn than allowing new broadcast outlets, companies and ideas from civil society to flourish,\u201d he said. \u201cThat is the great failure of this law.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><em><a title=\"Ed Stocker\" href=\"http:\/\/www.edstocker.com\/\" target=\"_blank\">Ed Stocker<\/a> is a freelance journalist based in Buenos Aires. Follow him on Twitter: @<a title=\"Twitter - Ed Stocker\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/Ed_Stocker\" target=\"_blank\">Ed_Stocker<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>Read more of his work on censorship and free expression <a href=\"http:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/tag\/ed-stocker\/\">here<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Attempts to push through a media law in Argentina could end up destroying one of the country&#8217;s most critical broadcast outlets. Ed Stocker reports A bitter battle between Argentina\u2019s largest media empire, Grupo Clar\u00edn, and the government shows no signs of ending. President Cristina Fern\u00e1ndez de Kirchner, continues to try and force through a media [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":494,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_mi_skip_tracking":false},"categories":[744],"tags":[384,13685,2076,5920,743,3010,13686,5974,727],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8636"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/494"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=8636"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8636\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=8636"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=8636"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=8636"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}