The issue of how to preserve and promote cultural diversity through
the mass media has been central in policy debates and regulations both
in Europe and in North America. In the beginning of the 21st century,
with the huge importance and technological developments of the mass
media, the debate about how to reconcile the commercial imperatives of
the media with the social goal of the promotion of cultural diversity
has become even more crucial. More than any other cultural medium, the
mass media (radio, television, and film, in particular) have become the
arena where cultural supply is structured and where cultural identities
are depicted and shaped. These media create, distribute, and promote the
symbols and resources that are appropriated and redesigned by audiences.
As Golding (1998) argued, the mass media "are unique in providing
both
goods that command a critical place in the modern economy as well as
providing the vehicles by which the symbols and values that people
deploy in making sense of their lives are delivered and
disseminated" (p. 16).
The idea of national audiences pertaining to a homogeneous group of
people with similar interests, backgrounds, and ideas has never been in
agreement with social reality and seems meaningless in the face of the
processes of migration and multiculturalism that characterize
contemporary countries and regions. This is the case in Mexico, with a
heterogeneous audience with diverse ethnic, geographic, and class
backgrounds that asks for plural public debates and access to the media.
What are the alternatives to promote and maintain cultural
diversity in a country closely integrated with the United States, not
just through economic trade but through the mass media? A starting point
may be to discuss whether the media should fulfill a social role and
whether they should be prompted or forced to promote cultural diversity.
The answer to this question seems to be clear. The legal framework of
Mexico, as is the case in Canada and the United States, expects the
media, in particular electronic media, to promote diversity. The
standing Radio and Television Federal Law in Mexico, although it does
not explicitly mention the promotion of cultural diversity as a goal,
mandates that radio and television stations foster gender equality and
respect for the rights of vulnerable groups (Reglamento de la Ley
Federal, 2003). It also explicitly prohibits any content that
discriminates against ethnic groups (Ley Federal de Radio y Television,
1962, Art. 63).
As Freedman (2004) argued, references to diversity and pluralism
appear in policy or legal documents that are highly deregulatory and
liberalizing in character. This is true in a U.S. case, where a recent
review by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) of media ownership
regulation ended in a decision to loosen ownership rules and sanction
further cross-media ownership (Freedman, 2004). It is also true for the
Mexican case, where federal administrations have advocated neoliberal
policies from the mid-1980s to the present day (Lozano, 2003). Mexican
audiovisual and telecommunications industries have experienced
significant changes since the early 1980s, consolidated in the 1990s,
and have dramatically transformed the supply and consumption of these
services in the early 2000s. Many years before the signing of the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Mexican government embraced
trends and economic policies geared toward liberalization, deregulation,
and privatization of the economy in general, and in particular the
audiovisual and telecommunications sectors (Crovi, 2000; Gomez Mont,
2000; Sanchez Ruiz, 2000a). In contrast with the nationalistic and
protectionist policies embraced by the different administrations since
Mexico's independence in 1910 up to the 1970s, the 1980s
represented a radical shift toward the adoption of neoliberal strategies
and models. After a severe economic crisis in 1982, the administration
of Miguel de la Madrid decided to open the economy in unprecedented
ways. In his administration, Mexico joined the General Agreement on
Tariffs and Trade, and the government privatized and deregulated many
aspects of production and commerce. This was also true of Mexico's
electronic media and telecommunications sector.
In the NAFTA negotiations, the Mexican government decided not to
ask for a cultural exemption clause, unlike Canada, which had decided to
exclude its cultural industries from the treaty to be better able to
protect them. Following the logic of the neoliberal policies espoused by
the Mexican administration, culture was considered strong enough to be
able to defend itself without any governmental policies safeguarding it
(Gomez, 2004). The only restrictions imposed by the Mexican government
in the NAFTA agreement were limits to the percentage of foreign
investment in paid television (49%); the requirement to dub imports in
Spanish, and a quota of 30% of screen time in theaters for Mexican films
(a quota that would decrease every year until reaching zero); and the
prohibition of foreign nationals owning any percentage of broadcasting
stations.
The consensus among communication scholars in Mexico--along with
many of their colleagues in Canada and the United States--is that much
more needs to be done to make sure the mass media will in fact promote
and maintain cultural diversity. In fact, what is needed is the
development and adoption of long-term communication policies because
Mexico has never had a comprehensive state policy on media and
telecommunications, only short-term reactions to what is already
happening in the media market (Casas, 2006; Lozano, 2003).
This article uses as a basis for discussing cultural diversity
policies in Mexico the analytical framework developed by Napoli (1999),
who distinguished among three broad components of media diversity:
source diversity, content diversity, and exposure diversity. Next,
Napoli's components and subcomponents are used to review
today's situation in Mexican television.
Dimensions of Diversity
Source Diversity
In many policy debates, source diversity is seen as the most
important factor to foster diversity in the mass media. According to
Napoli (1999), this dimension has been traditionally conceptualized by
policymakers in three separate ways: "(a) in terms of the diversity
of ownership of content or programming, (b) in terms of the diversity of
ownership of media outlets, and (c) in terms of the diversity of the
workforce within individual media outlets" (p. 9). The distinction
between content ownership and outlet ownership is relevant only if
networks buy their television content from independent companies that
sell their programs to the networks. This was the case in the United
States from 1970 to the early 1990s, due to the Financial Interest and
Syndication Rules (or "Fin-Syn") of the FCC that
"constrained the then three networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) from
producing all but a small amount of the programs they broadcast in prime
time and barred them from participating in the syndication of prime-time
series" (Bielby & Bielby, 2003, p. 574). The goal of this
policy was to force the owners of the channels of distribution to look
for independent producers for sources of programming. The rules
attempted to promote diversity and competition in the supply of
prime-time entertainment programming and to forestall vertical
integration. In the mid-1990s the FCC removed these regulations,
allowing the networks to either produce their own prime-time programming
or to continue buying it from independent producers. The result,
according to Bielby and Bielby, has been "a reduction in the number
of organizational settings in which those who create television series
are employed, and an increase in corporate control over the
circumstances under which they practice their craft" (p. 593).
Mexican regulations have never put any constraints on Mexican media
networks in relation to in-house productions. Television conglomerates
like Televisa and TV Azteca are free to produce whatever percentage of
programming they want, and there are no policies or incentives that may
prompt them to buy programming from national independent sources. In
fact, both networks handle their total national programming in-house
(Estrada, 2004). In its beginnings, due to its lack of experience and
capital to produce all of its programming in-house, TV Azteca made an
alliance with Argos Producciones, an independent producer that provided
the network with successful telenovelas like Nada Personal (1996),
Mirada de Mujer (1997), and Demasiado Corazon (1998). By the end of the
1990s, however, TV Azteca decided to produce all of its programming and
reduced the number of hours produced by Argos from 5 to 1 daily, and
later completely broke off its relationship with the independent
company. Televisa, on the other hand, had the tradition of producing
everything in-house and was not interested in buying content from
independent producers. In 2000, Argos signed an agreement with Telemundo
in the United States. Today, this network broadcasts Argos productions
on its TV affiliates and participates in their distribution and
commercialization in other countries (Lord, 2005). Argos president
Epigmenio Ibarra has publicly asked for a license to start a new TV
channel, criticizing the existing duopoly, but the government and
current regulations have not allowed that to happen.
COPYRIGHT 2006 Broadcast Education
Association Reproduced with permission of the copyright holder. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Copyright 2006, Gale Group. All rights
reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.
NOTE: All illustrations and photos have been removed from this article.