Audience Rights / 'The Other Side', column by Omar Rincón

They say that audiences have rights vis-à-vis the media and networks . According to Mexican law and the defenders of freedom of expression, these are:

Right to receive content that reflects the political, social, cultural, and linguistic pluralism of society.

The need for human rights, the best interests of children, gender equality, and non-discrimination to be respected.

Any discrimination that violates human dignity based on ethnic or national origin, gender, age, disability, social or health status, religion, opinions, sexual preferences, marital status, etc., is prohibited.

The right to receive timely programming that includes different genres that reflect diversity and plurality.

Right to have program schedules respected and parental advisories included.

Obligation to provide elements to distinguish between advertising and content.

If we analyze our media, we must conclude that they do not respect the rights of their audiences, since the majority of their content, especially in the news, discriminates, violates human dignity, and fails to respect diversity and pluralism. Therefore, as Observacom, the think tank on freedom of expression in Latin America, suggests, "regulation is a duty of States, since the sustainability of the industry and business models cannot be built at the expense of the rights of children and adolescents."

On the other hand, fulfilling these rights for producers and channels is impossible, since we communicate as mirrors of society, and in that context, we are sexist, racist, classist, homophobic, and xenophobic. And because it's not just what is said, but also how it is said, the tone, the framing, and the way in which it is told.

Perhaps we need rights that are closer to home and more accessible to the people. That's why I asked my students what their rights as audiences were, and they answered: the right to criticize, to receive reliable and verified content, quality of the content, and to be told what political bias (Uribe, Petrista, etc.) is being reported on. These criteria are more feasible for radio stations and broadcasters.

It seems to me that audience rights can be reduced to three: the right to entertainment, that is, to enjoy what I want and have my dignity respected; the right to change the channel or platform; and the right to turn off the device and do something else. If we followed these three principles, we wouldn't need laws.

What should be the law is for the channels to stop saying that this content is so much about sex and violence; that's useless and morally foolish. Instead, they should indicate before each program what their political stance is (Petrista, Uribe, Charista, Fiquista, Galanista) and the percentage of machismo, classism, racism, and sexism in the content (this is the serious thing about our media!). It would be very educational!