Double Go Kart Blueprints

TV Azteca and freedom of expression vs lenses

For some time ago over here, TV Azteca (Televisa also do not know if I do not see a lot of their news), we have been bombarded with hundreds of short reports alleging that the deputies and senators, parties and other individuals we want to apply a law which we can not complain, parody, mock, disparage, laugh, confront, and spit (well maybe that last no) to any political party. And that according to TV Azteca, is against freedom of expression

Well, for starters ... and those who do not know that I speak. Electoral reform is a bill that is being supported from the Senate to make some changes in Mexican democracy, particularly in political campaigns. There are several points that includes the Reformation, but TV Azteca directly attacks this:

are prohibited campaigns and messages that denigrate institutions, political parties, candidates or persons.

Well, of course in a modern democracy as we pretend to be, should not be disqualifying walking or cursing to the opponent (cof.. .. Cof cof cof 2006). Sounds like a good idea what is intended, to end once and for all the dirty war. The problem is, and someone who reads this is a lawyer, laws tend to be interpreted in many ways, and if some politician does not like to be recognized to make a parody Sunday program, puts demand, based on this law and the dude who came up parody ... He loads the clown!

course, TV Azteca trying to "inform" reports that, according to his notes, "Great intende to apply the gag rule." But do not say, is that they are against the law for this one point that touches:

is established that during the electoral process, political parties, their candidates and candidates have access to radio and television through official time (time and time state prosecutors).

And this:

It decreases the duration of the campaign (90 days when selecting the President of the Republic and 60 days when only elected federal representatives).

One more:

Brought out campaigns advanced.

And finally:

It limits the influence of money on the outcome of elections (the earmarks 60% of their resources to buy space on radio and television), establishing a new relationship between radio and television and parties and candidates.

All these points lead us to cite only one thing .... less money for television.

• The first, the official time is not charged, which means that elections will not receive broadcast stations large amounts of money on advertising than in the past.
• The second, well the more the campaign lasted, the longer commercials vendeían.
• Third, some pre-pre-pre-candidates began broadcasting commercials you (Most of the time showed his family embraced under the Christmas tree ..... in a nutshell, they wanted to look good) what that meant some extra money.
• And last, some genius thought that the more you spend on commercials, more votes would have .... FALSE! (Dr. Simi you heard!). The great enthusiasm for the games had to spend money to invest outside the only offer 60% of funding granted to them by IFE in advertising.

To give you an idea, IFE according to this document were issued 4.926 billion pesos, which translates into 2,955.6 million in money to media. If we see it with some logic, to split into 3 (Televisa, TV Azteca and the lot), because we see that 1000 million is what you play to the signal value. Already

to finish, not bad to try to report on Freedom of Expression, I doubt if you ask me to apply as they say, so if that bothers me is if you try to use your signal to desinformal population and not tell the whole story.

And so it has always been TV Azteca, remember the campaign against Casa Saba? Owned pharmaceutical group Isaac Saba, a businessman who dared to break the duopoly television to try to bring a third string open to Mexico as between TV Azteca and Televisa, literally ate it up, and then we know the end of the story with the television So nobody messes monopolistic. Erick Diaz