The Finger

[scotttswan]

You don't have to be a monopoly by definition to have a monopolizing effect. Out of the 264 radio and TV licenses in the country, Clarin has 70 percent, according to this journalist. Infonews (a K friendly outlet) says that they have 237 of the 264.Wiki says 150. It would be like GE owning NBC, ABC, and CBS, with News Corp hanging onto FOX.

I wish someone would have asked her why break up Grupo Clarin today when she and Nestor could have done it from 2003 on? That would have been a much better question.

I'm not up on Argentine radio or newspapers but most of them in the list appear to be local things?

The TV stations also appear to be local stations, do they also get TN and channel 13 in addition to the local stations or are they local equivalent to channel13/tn?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...n_accionaria_Grupo_Clarín_2011.svg?uselang=es

appears to show 13 is buenos aires only?

 

[BienTeVeo]

Au contraire. The digit is quite articulate. Its just that he has only one thing to say. He says that one thing very well.

Well, I have to admit that there was a moment in CFKs shameful performance at last night's Harvard event where I found myself reduced to an inarticulate state of nature. Just then, a certain digit jumped into the breach. Voilà! It said exactly what I wanted it to say.

 

[scotttswan]

So after a bit of investigation, ignoring the radio and newspapers, the tv stations are basically repeaters for channel 13 but they also have local programs instead of some shows (such as lanatas show which isn't shown in many places)

How is that a monopoly?

Its more like the affiliate stations in America is it not? (or ITV's regions in the uk)

 

[sesamosinsal]

So after a bit of investigation, ignoring the radio and newspapers, the tv stations are basically repeaters for channel 13 but they also have local programs instead of some shows (such as lanatas show which isn't shown in many places)

How is that a monopoly?

Its more like the affiliate stations in America is it not? (or ITV's regions in the uk)

The "monopoly" doesn't just refer to TV. The government has never made that claim. As I said above, it's about the licenses. Even at the most conservative estimates, 150 licenses out of 264 broadcast licenses is quite a bit for one media conglomerate. In the U.S., media ownership has heavily consolidated over the years, but it isn't nearly as consolidated as Argentina. http://www.freepress.net/ownership/chart

Grupo Clarin is the parent company of (owns) all of those channels. In the U.S., the parent company of many affiliates isn't the network. For example, KSDK-TV Channel 5 in St. Louis, MO is owned by Gannett Company, not by GE or Comcast.

 

[scotttswan]

The "monopoly" doesn't just refer to TV. The government has never made that claim. As I said above, it's about the licenses. Even at the most conservative estimates, 150 licenses out of 264 broadcast licenses is quite a bit for one media conglomerate. In the U.S., media ownership has heavily consolidated over the years, but it isn't nearly as consolidated as Argentina. http://www.freepress.net/ownership/chart

Grupo Clarin is the parent company of (owns) all of those channels. In the U.S., the parent company of many affiliates isn't the network. For example, KSDK-TV Channel 5 in St. Louis, MO is owned by Gannett Company, not by GE or Comcast.

They own the broadcast rights so without them places like Tucuman, Salta and Rio Negro wouldn't be able to see Tinelli's now stripper show?

Do the other channels we get in Buenos Aires not broadcast in other regions?
Are they national channels or do they have to buy up licenses to broadcast their shows around Argentina?

As for the radio, does clear channel not practically own all radio in the US?

With 850 stations, Clear Channel is the largest radio station group owner in the United States, both by number of stations and by revenue. The 850 stations reach more than 110 million listeners every week, and 237 million every month.

How many are local stations and how many are repeaters like channel 13?
Obviously if they own all the radio rights in one provincia that would be a monopoly and they should quite rightly get closed down, but if it is 1 or 2 stations out of 20-30 then how is it a problem that they also own a station in another province?

looking at http://www.infonews.com/nota.php?id=99388&bienvenido=1
they own FM 88.3 - Bahía Blanca and FM 106.3 - Bahía Blanca.
http://streema.com/radios/search:Bahía+Blanca has 5 other stations streaming online (this is just a quick search i'm sure there are many other stations that aren't on that site.) and none are clarin ones.
What about other cities?

FM 101.9 - Bariloche and FM 103.1 - Bariloche
http://streema.com/radios/search:San+Carlos+de+Bariloche has 2 stations listed and 1 "web". are those 2 included in the 264 licenses?

AM 540 - Puerto Madryn and FM 88.3 - Puerto Madryn
http://www.webmadryn.com.ar/radios-en-puerto-madryn.html
has 4 listed, 2 without frequencies so they may or may not be the clarin ones.

Are all these licenses included in the 264 broadcast licenses listed on that website or are these other stations broadcasting without a license?

150 licenses out of 264 would mean they would own more than half the licenses available and even in the 3 cities above that obviously isn't true.

Are you telling me that in Puerto Madryn there are only 4 radio stations and clarin owns 2 of them?

Also you have to get licenses to publish a newspaper in Argentina? Its not possible for someone to go out and start a new newspaper competing with Clarin's local ones?

 

[ElQueso]

Another question (to which I don't know the answer) is - are the total licenses issued all the licenses that the government will issue? If someone else wants to start up a radio or TV network can they not apply for licenses as well? And if not, does it seem like maybe the government wants a monopoly (in reality, if not in fact of ownership), just not one controlled by Clarin?

And another point - if everyone but the Clarin group (for example) is touting party lines, no matter who owns the licenses, and Clarin is forced to give up its licenses and/or companies that hold them, does that not give an even larger control of the media to the government?

Does no one who thinks that the Clarin has a monopoly consider that the prime reason why they are in so much trouble all the time is because they are anti current administration?

We can split hairs all day long and just end up with twice as many, yet smaller, hairs. In the meantime, the government is trying to shut down independent (from the government) media or make them tow the party line, in my opinion.

 

[sesamosinsal]

Another question (to which I don't know the answer) is - are the total licenses issued all the licenses that the government will issue? If someone else wants to start up a radio or TV network can they not apply for licenses as well? And if not, does it seem like maybe the government wants a monopoly (in reality, if not in fact of ownership), just not one controlled by Clarin?

And another point - if everyone but the Clarin group (for example) is touting party lines, no matter who owns the licenses, and Clarin is forced to give up its licenses and/or companies that hold them, does that not give an even larger control of the media to the government?

Does no one who thinks that the Clarin has a monopoly consider that the prime reason why they are in so much trouble all the time is because they are anti current administration?

We can split hairs all day long and just end up with twice as many, yet smaller, hairs. In the meantime, the government is trying to shut down independent (from the government) media or make them tow the party line, in my opinion.

I would agree that Clarin is being pursued because it's not allied with the government. I'm fully aware that CFK, Nestor, and Magnetto were good friends once upon a time. However, even if the disagreement is the motivation, I personally see one company having 70 percent of the licenses as a problem.

The power of Clarin is undeniable. The question asked at Harvard about her saying that everyone should fear her was a great example of the control they have. Clarin is no more or less honest than her administration. Clarin is not "independent." It just represents different interests -- and there's no problem with that.

The idea that Clarin doesn't have freedom of expression is nonsense. They publish whatever they want. Some articles are blatant lies and/or manipulation. The Ley de Medios doesn't attack Diario Clarin's right to continue publishing what it wants. As far as I'm aware, the part of the law that deals with "monopolization" only downsizes the amount of radio and TV licenses that a conglomerate can have. None of it addresses print media.

How is it healthy for any one entity to control 70 percent of what the country sees and hears? How is that different from a government having control of the 70 percent? Do you truly believe that Clarin is "independent," that it works for itself? Is Grupo Clarin's freedom of expression hanging in the balance, or is it worried that it will have less of a reach to influence Argentines?

 

[sesamosinsal]

BTW, as she said her in her speech, it was CFK that decriminalized slander and libel in November 2009. If her goal were to deprive journalists of their rights to speak freely, why would she propose, support, and sign such a bill into law?

 

[scotttswan]

How is it healthy for any one entity to control 70 percent of what the country sees and hears? How is that different from a government having control of the 70 percent?

you keep on saying they control 70 percent of what the country sees and hears but even if they own all the stations/newspapers/tv channels on that list they don't appear to own 70 percent of the stations/channels.

On my cable box they have 2 channels. From the looks of it the other channels are just rebroadcasting the vast majority of channel 13 apart from when they show "local tv".

In each of the cities on that list they have a 1 or 2 radio stations out of god knows how many in that area.

Are the other stations broadcasting without licenses?

Maybe they have a monopoly on newspapers with Diario Clarin and the local ones in each area but is there anything stopping someone else starting a newspaper? why do you need a license to start a newspaper? Did Lanata need a license to start Página 12 or Crítica de la Argentina?

I have no doubt Clarin have an agenda and twist things to be very critical of the current government but all the other stations also have their own agendas, they have all slowly turned into puppets for Cristina since i moved to Argentina.
This was recently very clear for all to see in their coverage of the huge protests which happened all around the country.

Maybe they should seperate into different companies each running a separate media... i.e. clarin tv, clarin radio, clarin newspapers.....

Do any of the other media companies that run tv channels spill over into also running radio stations and newspapers?

 

[sesamosinsal]

you keep on saying they control 70 percent of what the country sees and hears but even if they own all the stations/newspapers/tv channels on that list they don't appear to own 70 percent of the stations/channels.

"La nueva Ley de Medios, establece que las empresas pueden tener hasta 24 licencias de televisión por cable y 10 de las denominadas "abiertas". El Grupo Clarín es el único que todavía no comenzó a regularizar su situación. Con más de 240 sistemas de cable, 9 radios AM, 1 FM y 4 canales de TV abierta, Clarín representa posee un lugar de poder que va en desmedro de la posibilidad de que nuevas voces puedan participar de la comunicación." - Link

Other sources put their licenses at 300 in total. Admittedly, I'm slightly confused.

Maybe they have a monopoly on newspapers with Diario Clarin and the local ones in each area but is there anything stopping someone else starting a newspaper? why do you need a license to start a newspaper? Did Lanata need a license to start Página 12 or Crítica de la Argentina?

As far as I know, you don't need a license to start a newspaper. The Ley de Medios doesn't regulate newspapers either.