fedef starts in his blog postings a series of promises and I think is worth recommending. The first
, an extract, it would sign no problems (going to say I could have written but it should have the same talent):
What is in the media on the Media Law? Basically, misinformation.
is much talk, too. Little is said, nothing.
We suspect, if we really care what happens and what can happen around us, the missing information, which is ungrudgingly, is censored or not published in the media. But much more still we - and not just because it's easier - to suspect that he suddenly begins to flow like a ceaseless barrage, as a deaf Buzz given to Pavot handle without further argument or doomsday scenarios, too, promises colorful Edens and charms. There is no worse misinformation and subject me tooth and nail to my own opinion, that the excess of information is useless. (...)
Just as it is legitimate to hold that talk and talk about something as necessary corals and so steep, it is also legitimate to question, to suspect (I like "suspect" because mine is not blind faith) about what is spoken and what is said and what he believes. In short: what is the service value of all reporting on the project.
What is bringing out in the discussion of the Media Law is, in my opinion, a kind of discursive script scheduled diametrically varies according to the "camp" where actors militate each other, depending on who pays salary or bonus, depending on where it rains the advertising or the gift of the day. Here's the problem with most of the important political issues - and the media law is like no other, an important issue - which televised debate on democracy, this sort of naval battle whose coordinates are verbs and symbols: the problem is that we end up in arms and eyes around significant wild, empty and pointless (such as "freedom of speech," "human rights" "democracy," "dictatorship", "plurality of voices", "K ") but no one (or few) happens to read verbatim a poor section of law to air and discuss in depth - for days and under many lights - its implications, its possible outcomes, justice or injustice, something that makes "education" of the listener, the so called "ordinary people" who, because he has no other, always talking goose mouth. The goose is the media. (...)
bombarded with institutional Clarín self-pitying and put sockets in TN on "Media Law K" (the "K" kills you.) Your employees (almost pulling rather to "wallpaper") refer to "gag" journalism, the encroachments of the "free speech" and the imminent threat of the "acquired rights." Solá Morales speculated from the plain and from his column in The Nation with the creation of a media holding company owned by Kirchner to come to replace one monopoly for another, while denouncing the scrapping of existing media groups with the non-holy target to subject journalists to topical and "K authoritarian style." When the project does not compare with the policies of Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales (vile demons), people like Vila do nothing less than the last military dictatorship. Cobos Macri and wear the shirt and accuse the government of trampling the sanction of the law with a Congress that "it is chosen by the people in the last election" not hesitate to speak of "improvisation" when the law gets changes one of the cameras and accusing certain blocks of members (such as Socialism) to "sell" and "betraying their voters" when, after getting some changes explicitly requested by them, vote for the law. None of these spectacular accusations, conspiracies and apocalyptic scenarios appear never backed the appointment of an article Specifically, with number, section and paragraph of the letter of the law. No article appears to show either the gag or the attack on freedom of expression, or bribe or anything of the submissions.
Across the rhetoric is not necessarily more helpful. National Radio, ATC and Page 12 (scenarios of a more militant speeches - that's the word - in favor of the law) it is assumed that the new project is nothing short of a panacea simply because the current law is a decree issued by a genocidal dictatorship (ignoring the fact that some of the major shortcomings of the current regulations were introduced in democracy). Faced with opposition charges are limited to mock Macri or Cobos (easy target if any), talk about fascism, it's all a lie and you have to take it as who comes, that is, Grupo Clarín. None of these celebrations of joy and hope exalted displayed solved by any citation of the law to clear doubts. Both sides claim to be faithful convinced gallery, leaving key and useful information that could convince many more floating on a cloud.
In essence, we have a duel of symbols in the middle of a problem than symbolic - will incur a somewhat orthodox Marxism - has little or nothing (always big chop chop chop girl and not behind). The law is democratic or not democratic. The law encourages freedom of speech, or threatens it. The law monopolies dismantled or replaced by other even more sinister. The law is made in the image and likeness of the European powers or the image of Venezuela and Cuba. The law is of a people or nefastísimos "K". And so on. Who was able to read the bill and a minimum of technical knowledge on the issues are resolved it with the elements, with effort, to overcome these misleading dichotomies and decide with some knowledge of the facts on which side is the reason, Who will create more and who less (which personally I did). But the aforementioned "Average citizen" who never will read the whole law but ironically is who will compete over everything that is at stake, there is nothing clear and no one says anything. Instead, offer attractively marketed slogans as he goes door to door selling. Thus, there has to be grasped beyond the sympathetic or the degree of identification that PRODUZIR Mirtha Legrand or Sandra Russo, Joaquín Morales Solá or Victor Hugo Morales (each with their moral, let me in time of bad joke) or Cristina Macri , Merkel and Chavez. (...)
Go, read, think and be sure again that more than read to continue the cycle, hopefully more productive than others.
0 comments:
Post a Comment