The responsibility of supervising and guaranteeing the Rights of the Audiences falls on the Federal Institute of Telecommunications (IFT). However, the implementation of the user defense has been complex, since the radio and television media have argued that this regulatory power can be interpreted as censorship. This led the Legal Counsel of the Presidency of the Republic and the Senate to present constitutional controversies to settle the apparent invasions of powers between public institutions.
What has happened to Audience Rights since then?
In 2017, modifications were made to the original wording of article 256 of the LFTyR. Initially, the article called for “clearly differentiating between news information and the opinion of the presenter.” However, the revision simply indicated that dealers should refrain from broadcasting advertising or propaganda presented as journalistic or news information. This modification meant that the media had to self-regulate, regardless of the IFT guidelines.
But in 2019 the Mexican Association of Audience Defenders (AMDA) filed an appeal to reverse this counter-reform. The process of this amparo lasted for two years. In May 2021, the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) decided to restore to the IFT the authority to impose guidelines that would protect the rights of audiences against radio and television concessionaires.
“What the SCJN achieved was to return to the IFT the role of guardianship and power to establish guidelines in relation to the rights of audiences. In addition, this represented a strengthening of the Institute,” according to Jorge Bravo, president of the Mexican Association of Right to Information (AMEDI).
However, since the Supreme Court resolution, the situation of the Rights of the Hearings is still not completely clear. The IFT explained to Expansion which is in the “analysis process” to issue new guidelines from which a preliminary draft can be prepared that will be submitted to public consultation. Once the comments have been collected, the technical team will integrate them into the draft, which will finally be presented to the IFT Plenary.
The lack of guidelines regarding Audience Rights limits the effectiveness of this law. The director of AMEDI points out that this lack of guidelines leaves users in a vulnerable position, since there is no clear mechanism for them to enforce their rights. “The only option left is to participate in debates or discussions on certain topics, while the guidelines do not exist.”
The risk is amplified with the approach of the election year. “The media could spread covert propaganda as news without any oversight body. We are really facing one of the worst possible scenarios,” laments Bravo.