Democratic Consolidation in Latin America
Democratic consolidation in Latin American countries has been a very drawn out process, beginning with the introduction of a liberal-democratic governmental system in the 1970’s and 1980’s when the strong grip of the military began to loosen throughout the region, and spanning until the present day. Although many factors have been at play throughout the past decades, the various types of media outlets throughout Latin American countries have played a crucial role in the integration of democracy into society. While it is difficult to determine exactly how these media outlets have contributed to democratization in a general sense, Rick Rockwell introduces five factors to help establish the influences each type of media has on the society as a whole:
“(1) The distance in time from particular watershed political-military events (e.g. civil wars, guerilla wars, major military invasions), (2) general economic conditions for journalists, (3) demonstratable general shifts in ideology and ethics, (4) genuine state policies aimed at curtailing corrupt practices, and (5) the political and cultural influence of the United States in a particular country (e.g. U. S. support for educational programs for journalists, cultural exchange, or other international assistance programs” (Rockwell, 183).
Each media outlet contributed to democratic consolidation through its own subsequent actions, as well as the ways in which the practices of the archaic authoritarian regime were brought into question. Both television and the print media have filled many of these criteria throughout the area’s history as a democratic region. The introduction of telenovelas gave Latin American citizens a chance to both escape their corrupt world, and also question the wrongdoing throughout their society. The explosion of tabloid news programs that permeated Latin American’s television broadcasts put the crime, corruption and scandal at the top of citizens’ minds. The emergence of watchdog journalism eventually gave reporters the chance to challenge governmental officials without fear of persecution.
The escape through Telenovelas
“The origins of telenovelas can be traced back through a series of popular forms, beginning with the folletin, or newspaper serial, itself transitional in that it was the first step whereby traditional oral themes and styles entered the medium of print at the same time as their audience negotiated literacy” (Ortega, 67). The most important influence of telenovelas was the radio soap opera. Cuba was the first Latin American country to produce radionovelas, which were imported from the United States at first. “At a structural level, the Brazilian telenovela works with a complex series of plots and subplots, whereas Argentine, Mexican, or Venezuelan telenovelas are more linear and tend to focus on the male and female protagonists” (Ortega, 69).
Telenovelas work as an escapist medium, helping their audiences to break away from the realities of their daily lives. “[Telenovelas] change in precisely the same fashion in every single novella, which is as it should be, and during the daily three hours of first run telenovelas programming viewers can fantasize that the real Brazil is not the hopeless swamp of moral confusion and economic chaos that it sometimes feels like” (Guillermoprieto, 291). Brazilian telenovelas are valued for their realism; they are written and broadcast simultaneously, which allows writers to incorporate current events into each plot. The political themes of these telenovelas help the actors (as well as the audience) to comment on the diegetic politics of the show, as well as current events throughout Brazil.
Although this process forces the audience to delve into the country’s political arena, it also leads to the delegitimazation of the country’s political processes by portraying politics as a corrupt and scandalous endeavor. This fact has led to many critiques of Brazilian telenovelas; they are said to blur the lines between reality and fiction. This fact was exemplified in the media coverage of the murder of a popular novella star, which occurred on the same day as the impeachment of Brazil’s first elected president in twenty-six years, Collor de Mello, and also received an overwhelmingly higher percentage of news coverage than the announcement of the impeachment. “The murder of Daniella Perez, the eerie resemblance between onscreen and off, was thrilling, breathtaking evidence that reality could, even if only once, resemble the marvelous, lavish universe of the telenovela” (Guillermoprieto, 291). The impeachment of a corrupt politician, therefore, seemed like a minor detail in the eyes of Brazilians longing for an escape into the world of telenovelas where every situation ultimately ended in happiness.
The denunciations of tabloid news
While the telenovelas helped Latin American viewers think about various events occurring throughout the region and at the same time helped them to escape the desolute situations occurring in their own lives, tabloid journalism put the destitute situations of most Latin American citizens in the forefront of their productions. Since print media in Mexico, as well as many other Latin American countries, is lacking in mass circulation, tabloid news found its home in television. Due to both democratization throughout the country as a whole and the commercialization of Mexico’s television industry, tabloidization has taken a strong hold in television journalism. The increasing popularity of Televisa’s main competitor, TV Azteca, was enhanced by the introduction of its tabloid news program, Cuidad Desnuda (Naked City) in 1995. The popularity of this television program only increased until 1997 when Televisa introduced its new tabloid news show entitled Fuera de la Ley (Outside The Law).
These two new programs introduced a great deal of debate among the various groups of elites throughout Mexico. “Most blamed these programs for contributing to the problem of crime by encouraging a culture of violence, though some on the left criticized them – perhaps more accurately – for promoting authoritarian political ideology” (Hallin 2000A, 268). Although these critiques resulted in the cancellation of both shows in November of 1997, both stations released new (almost identical) programs soon after (Televisa’s Duro y Directo and TV Azteca’s Vision Urbana). In reaction to the criticisms mentioned above, these new television shows stressed the importance of the ordinary person, as well as their role in the crusade against crime.
“Much of the look and feel of tabloid shows has been imported into the most prestigious [mainstream news] broadcasts: breathless headlines, sound effects, dramatizing narrative devices, reconstructions, slow-motion video, and moralistic condemnations of criminal suspects by the journalists – although formal shifts are frequent as the two networks try to establish a new form of journalism and a new relationship with their audiences” (Hallin 2000A, 272). Not only did the appearance of mainstream news programs shift toward that of tabloid news, but a shift also occurred in the topics of discussion. In his brief study, Hallin observed that the amount of political coverage dropped while the amount of crime and “individual experience” coverage rose between the years 1994 and 2000.
“Ordinary people played a limited and clearly subordinate role in Televisa’s representation of Mexican society and politics. Most often they appeared in representations of the clientalistic system by which the government delivered benefits to select groups of citizens as a reward for their political loyalty” (Hallin 2000A, 275). Tabloid news program offered an outlet for the ordinary person. Although the “ordinary” citizen appeared in these shows as criminals or other types of wrongdoers, these citizens appeared in the spotlight, in stark contrast to the mainstream news programs in which the ordinary citizen remained overshadowed by the elites. “Most of the time the ordinary person appeared on Mexican TV news in a passive or subordinate role, and in this sense the news reflected an authoritarian political culture” (Hallin 2000A, 277).
Although the introduction of popular journalism into mainstream news has brought about a clear difference in the appearance and content of these news programs which ultimately led to the introduction of the ordinary person in a more positive light and a decrease in the discussion of political topics, this new type of news programming also had its problems that could possibly hinder the development of a democratic society in Mexico. The popularization of mainstream news, with a higher focus placed on crime, “has the potential to distort the political agenda” (Hallin 2000A, 279). The role of popularized news as a denouncer (of politics, crime, or any other topic that interests the majority of society) “creates the potential for journalism to contribute to social polarization. The ‘power bloc versus the people frame,’ moreover, with its constant denunciations of ‘do-nothing’ politicians, combined with the call for a mano dura against crime and disorder, seems potentially dangerous in a society where support for the democratic process is not deeply rooted” (Hallin 2000A, 280). A call for ordinary citizens to fight against crime and corruption could lead to a destruction of the weak democratic system of order and balance that most Latin American countries are striving to obtain.
The eye of “watchdog journalism”
“The primary issue regarding Mexican broadcasting today is not national integration or economic development (which is affected much more by telecommunications policy) or cultural authenticity, but access – the right of an increasingly plural civil society to have its voice heard in the public sphere” (Hallin 1998, 160). With its use of the ordinary person throughout its broadcast, tabloid news offered an outlet for these citizens to voice their opinion. Through tactics like call-in lines and interviews with the average citizen, popular journalism allows this sector of society to feel as though their opinion is as valid as that of the elites who pervade the mainstream news. The rise of civil society helped make this phenomenon possible.
Due to growing disappointment toward governmental decisions, civil society slowly began to break through the many barriers toward national prominence. Although the alternative press of Latin America began as a partisan press aimed toward the support of opposition parties, this small group of newspapers also helped to legitimized the rise of civil society because these civil groups were also rallying against the overpowering reign of a single-party. “[The alternative press began to] define its mission in terms of defending and championing specific causes such as democracy, human rights, social justice, national interests, and socialism” (Waisbord 2000B, 28) – the very same mission of many civil groups. This alignment, according to Chappell Lawson, worked as a support beam for both sectors involved – civil society gave the alternative press something to write about and the alternative press gave civil society legitimization through its reporting.
The increased popularity of both civil society and the alternative press throughout the region eventually helped both groups to slowly gain access to other media outlets. Due to the strong ties between television conglomerates and the ruling party in countries like Mexico and Brazil, the entrance into television was a slow process. “The development of small-format video has made it possible for popular organizations to produce their own television, and this has probably accelerated the conceptual shift away from an assumption that culture must emanate from the center outward” (Hallin 1998, 159).
Along with the growing force of civil society, watchdog journalism has also helped Latin American countries make this “conceptual shift”. Watchdog journalism is linked to the liberal value of press freedom. This concept developed from the idea that the press must be market-based entity with independence from the state. Since the concept of a liberal press revolves around economic conditions, it is evident that the state of the press throughout Latin American countries tended to lean toward the more radical, opinion based press popular throughout Europe, due to its poor economic conditions. Factors such as a weak market economy, a more interventionist state, a late transition to democracy and a system of clientalism provide close links between Latin American and Southern European countries. The historical roots of Southern Europe involved a division between nations with legal-rational authority and nations with patrimonialism where lines between public and private domains were blurred. The latter division also describes many Latin American regimes; this type of government played a major role in the media systems of these countries as well. Since the government plays such a large role in the processes of media organizations, clientalistic relationships also take a strong hold in the decision-making processes of the media elite. The fact that many media owners do not fulfill their legal obligations is ignored unless the media outlet becomes too independent of the state. (Hallin and Papathanassopoulos)
Stemming from Latin America’s reliance on European traditions, “journalism of opinion” reigned throughout the region, but unlike its European counterpart, Latin America’s partisan press became strong supporters of the dominant political parties in each region, and lacked support for the abundant, but weak, opposition parties. Although the strength of this partisan press has declined due to the de-alignment of various political parties, as well as the legitimization of other weaker opposition parties, other aspects of “journalism of opinion” remain intact (prose-style writing, opinion over fact, etc.). (Hallin and Papathanassopoulos)
The military regimes that spread across Latin America during the 1970’s and 1980’s were strong deterrents on the road to a free press. Along with complete control of the country, these governments also controlled a wide variety of corporations, including media conglomerates, as well as a large number of other companies that could provide a substantial amount of advertising revenue for non-government sanctioned media outlets. The oldest form of watchdog journalism in Latin America began in Columbia due to the fact that it was one of the few countries that was not ruled by the military during the 1970’s and 1980’s. Although Columbia’s press suffered a set-back in the 1980’s due to violence and terrorism from the left-wing guerilla movement, countries like Mexico and Brazil began to pick up where Columbia left off. While the majority of watchdog journalism in these countries began in underground alternative newspapers, its heightened popularity soon pushed investigative journalism into the mainstream news. The move to watchdog journalism throughout the rest of Latin America was made possible by the transition from military regimes to liberal democracy throughout the late 1980’s and early 1990’s. Although violence and attempts to control the media continued throughout this transition, state censorship began to decrease. The transition to democracy also triggered a wave of privatization of previously state-owned companies, as well as a decrease in advertising revenue provided by the state. With a weaker hold on the media market, state interference was, therefore, drastically reduced.
The paradox in the news making process is that for watchdog journalism to emerge, there must be distance between the state and the media, but the media needs some proximity to the state for watchdog journalism to occur. The key interaction in the development of true investigative journalism lies in the relationships between journalists and their official sources. Due to its long history of public corruption, the emergence of watchdog journalism in Latin America was hindered (and also helped) by this very relationship. The lack of proper training, limited access to public documents, and lack of resources and funding helped to delay the emergence of a liberal press, but strong relationships to government elites also allowed journalists to gather stories through information leaks during inter-elite conflicts.
The influence of the U.S. model of objective reporting aided in the weakening of the of the partisan press in Latin America. “The origins of a market-oriented, U.S.-style press occurred in the years when South America economies were incorporated into the international order shaped by the second industrial revolution” (Waisbord 2000B, 12). The rise in population of the middle class and the boom of opposition parties began to show a progressive movement toward democratization throughout Latin America.
Although the conditions of Latin American countries seemed similar to that of the United States during the rise of the objective mode of reporting took hold throughout the country, the underlying factors throughout Latin America proved otherwise. “A limited number of readers, coupled with small advertising investments did not facilitate the transition to a market-based press” (Waisbord 2000B, 15). A strong reliance on government subsidies, as well as the large amount of government-based advertising income, the ability to grant for licenses for telecommunication and broadcasting services, and government control of media taxes and manufacturing of supplies (newsprint for example) also delayed the move to a more objective style of journalism.
The role of violence toward reporters also played a major role in slowing the move toward the watchdog style. “When publications did practice critical reporting, the result was the closure of newsrooms, the seizing and burning of editions, and the persecution and murder of dissident reporters” (Waisbord 2000B, 22). While the role of watchdog journalism is extremely important in patrimonial societies in which exposing wrongdoing and undermining clientalism can have a very strong effect, the overwhelming number of murders and other violent attacks on journalists forced reporters to question the importance of their lives over that of a strongly objective story. “In situations of heightened conflict, dailies have forsaken any pretense of objectivity and openly defended unmistakable economic and political positions” (Waisbord 2000B, 19).
Market competition and a growing “market-powerful media” have been the strongest pushes toward watchdog journalism throughout the region. “The expansion of the television audience, the privatization of broadcasting stations, and the explosion of cable and satellite television have made the media industry highly dynamic and extremely profitable for powerful conglomerates” (Waisbord 2000B, 71). With a stronger grasp of their economic future, these media companies are able to denounce political wrongdoing without fear of bankruptcy (due to a decrease in various government funding). This power has also forced politicians to shift their role in the relationship between politics and media to that of compliance instead of intimidation. “In an age when media visibility is indispensable for any upcoming or established politician, officials face an uphill battle in confronting media giants that scrutinize their shady dealings” (Waisbord 2000B, 73). In Brazil, for example, Folha de Sao Paulo published a story revealing Collor’s deviant behavior without fear of governmental punishment, and the story was later backed by the country’s leading television conglomerate, Globo, which further legitimized the denouncement along with the ability of the press to uncover other political scandals (Waisbord, 1997).
The move toward a hopeful future
While many barriers have slowed the process of democratization, such as weak communication laws, a hostile legal system, the dominance of family-owned broadcast companies, frail journalistic training, and constraints on media access (Hughs and Lawson), the strong impact that was made by media outlets on democratic consolidation throughout Latin America has proven that these channels of communication are on their way to complete autonomy. Argentina, Costa Rica, and Chile have succeeded in “abolish[ing] criminal defamation and desicato laws and replacing them with well-defined civil procedures for addressing libel and slander” (Hughs and Lawson, 11). Mexico, along with numerous other countries, has recently introduced “access to information laws and legal status for journalists to protect sources” (Hughs and Lawson, 12). With new company heads, the major television stations of Mexico (Televisa) and Brazil (Globo) have taken long strides away from the family-run business practices of the archaic regime. By weakening ties to the major parties, these stations have not only increased visibility of opposition parties, but have also given Mexican and Brazilian citizens a reasonably fair balance between each candidate (something that has never happened on these stations before). Many newspapers throughout the region now require journalistic training from their new employees, and the number of journalism societies is increasing rapidly. These examples go on and on.
With each effort to overcome the obstacles in the way of democratization, the media outlets of Latin America grow stronger in their goals. With the aid of outside factors (such as civil groups), outside influence (the United States in particular), and a new market-based outlook on the communications industry, these media groups have made a great deal of progress toward autonomy from the government, as well as pushing the society as a whole toward a stronger democratic regime. Although some aspects of the media systems are still weak, the advancements that have been made throughout the past decades can only invoke hope for the future. As the past has proven, the road to complete democratization in Latin America is long and rough, with many obstructions along the way, but each obstacle overcome is another step toward the ultimate goal of a free press, and a free society.
