Oxycocet Street Value

state of emergency and informational diversity

Gustavo Abad

Just a couple of days, in a dialogue notif and journalists, academics and students, some considered the need to understand that the guarantees of democracy are not mediated information but in politics, and that any action to alter the balance of forces in the field of communication is, ultimately, a political action.

as few hor later, Ecuador dawned with the news of the uprising by a group of police arguing that the government had reduced some of their privileges of employment. The conflict took shape when President Correa left-unnecessarily for many-to "put the chest to the bullets and ended up wounded and kidnapped by twelve hours at the Police Hospital.

Then enter swamp for most of the media because, among other things no end to assimilate the relationship between communication and politics in terms of public service, ie have failed to consider or respond to the question "What type of information needed by the country in these trances? Does it contribute to maintaining the democratic order or magnifying the chaos and instability?

The answer seems easy, but not for the entrepreneurs of the Ecuadorian Association of Newspaper Editors (AEDEP) in a statement today rejecting, inter alia, "the government's decision to force all media to fold to a national chain 'indefinite and continuous ", because under state of emergency has prevented the citizens have other versions of events than officers."

Surely they mean that, as President Correa was heading to the country by state media to explain his state of health, private channels broadcast live looting that were subject to some shops in Guayaquil and endlessly repeated shots that seemed to reflect the nervousness over the street. The defense of informational diversity is not always consistent with the demand for a public service.

They forget to lords AEDEP which means a "state of emergency." Articles 164 and 165 of the Constitution are clear on that. They note that in case of a "grave internal commotion" the President may "suspend or limit (...) the right to freedom of information ...." In addition, "Having prior censorship of information media with strict regard to the reasons for the state of emergency and national security. "

So the chain that both employers complain of media was not only legal but necessary. In other words, a decision was not only informative, but political. There's the relationship that they hardly see the owners of newspapers, radio and private channels. At this point, I do not do so in ignorance of the rule, but by some other gaps or meanness. Rebelling against a state of emergency dictatorship is heroism, but in democracy it is coup.

course We regret that strict journalistic management did state media in this chain. One thing is that television and public radio make arrays in a critical condition and another is that some of the journalists believe they can harangue people with a partisan speech. One thing is to reinforce the general order to ensure the integrity of the president and another to subject us to hours of apology for a political leader and encourage the population to be exposed to bullets, as did a public radio broadcaster.

forms can sometimes get to blur the principles. That is both dangerous and irresponsible public and private media, State of emergency for more than obliging us.