Bajo cero, sadly you are right about many things you say about the US becoming a police state, fake democracy and all that. Again it's sad but you're right. It's one of the reasons I dislike Obama so much. He fools people into believing he's a savior when he's just another Bush with a different t shirt. That being said, the fact that our situation back home sucks doesn't mean you have to be so passionate about defending the K people. Sure they might not be 100% bad, but they also lie a lot and they did the whole vote buying thing apparently. You need to try to be objective. This isn't we're good they're bad. This isn't a Argentina vs US in the world cup. This is a situation in which we BOTH have governments that are not what they claim to be and the bottom line is that both Argentina and the US deserve better governments.
Internationalguy, I don´t defend the K people, I just clarify what is true and what is a lie.
Somebody asserted the media law was enforced only to Clarin and I showed that it wasn´t like tha, there are 29 companies under the media law and Clarin is the only rebel. Somebody else with somekind of moral superiority said than in a real democracy blablabla and I evidence that the democracy he/she was refering is not better than this one, in fact, a lot worst. It was said too, that this law wasn´t needed because children was dying like cockroaches because of this government. I evidenced that he/she was wrong because child mortality fall 27%.
There are many things to critize to this government without to lie.
Freedom of press is a topic I know from first hand.
I worked on a leading case some years ago that we won at Supreme Court where the government of a province suddenly took away all the official advertizing as a punishment for an article of a newspaper. Supreme Court said that to manipulate the official advertizing as the carrot and the stick violates the freedom of press.
http://www.adc.org.ar/sw_contenido.php?id=530
So, I have some idea about freedom of press.
There are 3 different issues with the freedom of press. 1) to use the official advertizing to punish or reward newspapers 2) the monopolie of paper press 3) the monopoly of the media.
In 1) is the goverment who abuse of power using the official advertizing as a reward for media addicted or as a punishment to free press (no giving official advertizing).
Here is where serious criticism should be focus.
The SC also decided in favor of a newspaper in the following leading case "Editorial Perfil":
http://www.perfil.com/docs/0302_fallo_corte_perfil.pdf
Here is the government who jeopardizes the freedom of press and the SC put a limit.
I read recentrly that SC is going to decide again against the government in another case on this subject.
2) Clarin and La Nacion had the monopoly of press paper. They dictators kiddnaped the familly of the former owner of the factory to force him to sell the company.
a) During the dictatorship Clarin was brived with the factory of paper and they censorship other newspapers just don´t selling the paper.
B) During democracy, Clarin used to sell the paper to himself under the cost. This illegal maneuver sent to buncrupsy most of the others newspapers. Now it is administrated by the State. The other newspapers had to pay the paper 58% more expensive than Clarin.
Here is Clarin who jeopardizes the freedom of press and the government put a limit.
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papel_Prensa_S._A.
3) The third issue is the monopoly of the media.
The American Convention on Human Rights is part of the Argentine National Constitution. Article 13 says:
3. The right of exp<b></b>ression may not be restricted by indirect methods or means, such as the abuse of government or private controls over newsprint, radio broadcasting frequencies, or equipment used in the dissemination of information, or by any other means tending to impede the communication and circulation of ideas and opinions.
http://www.oas.org/dil/treaties_B-32_American_Convention_on_Human_Rights.htm
The Clarin Group lost the case because of art. 13.
Facts.