“Truth is not decreed; rather, it is sought and recognized through free and pluralistic debate,” stated Mexico’s bishops as they questioned various aspects of the government’s proposal to regulate the rights of radio and television audiences.
In an Aug. 13 statement, the Mexican Bishops’ Conference (CEM, by its Spanish acronym) warned that the proposal could make freedom of expression contingent upon the government’s criteria of “truth” and also compromise religious freedom and the editorial independence of the media.
The public consultation, open from July 27 to Aug. 21 and conducted by the country’s Telecommunications Regulatory Commission, addresses a regulation that, according to the bishops, “will touch the daily lives of millions of Mexicans: what we hear on the radio, what we watch on television, and the spaces where information, culture, faith, opinion, and constructive criticism find a voice.”
The CEM acknowledged positive aspects of the proposal, such as the explicit prohibition of prior censorship, nondiscrimination based on religion, and the protection of vulnerable groups against manipulation, misleading advertising, and content that degrades human dignity.
“That these rights have clear mechanisms to be enforced is a good thing for everyone,” the conference highlighted.
However, the bishops warned that, although the purpose of protecting the rights of audiences is legitimate, the way in which the goal is attempted to be achieved also matters.
The CEM statement joins others made by the Catholic Church in Mexico. On Aug. 1, the Primatial Archdiocese of Mexico stated that “there can be no prior censorship” and that no administrative authority should determine the veracity or acceptability of opinions.
A week later, an editorial in Semanario, a publication of the Archdiocese of Guadalajara, questioned who would have “the authority to decide when information is true, false, or presented out of context,” and highlighted the importance of balancing state regulation with media independence.
No authority can act as an ‘arbiter of truth’
The bishops emphasized that “freedom of expression is a fundamental pillar of the democratic order” and noted that “no administrative authority can set itself up as an arbiter of truth, particularly regarding ideas, opinions, convictions, and beliefs, whether religious or otherwise.”
The CEM drew a distinction between the veracity required of journalistic information and personal convictions, which cannot be subjected to administrative verification.
“The truthfulness legitimately required of journalistic information is a duty of due diligence: to cross-check, verify, distinguish fact from opinion, and rectify errors,” the CEM explained.
Something different, the conference noted, is “the truth of convictions, which admits of neither administrative verification nor sanction, and whose assessment by the state would be, in itself, incompatible with freedom of conscience and freedom of expression.”
The episcopate expressed particular concern regarding the possibility that a governmental authority might classify and potentially sanction the dissemination of information deemed “false” or “taken out of context,” given that the bill does not clearly define the boundaries of these concepts.
In the bishops’ view, such a mechanism could “make freedom of expression contingent upon the government’s criteria for truthfulness” — something “incompatible” with the Mexican constitution, international treaties, and “various judicial precedents.”
Religious freedom and editorial independence
The CEM pointed out that by Mexican law “religious associations may not own or manage radio and television licenses.” Consequently, it called for the pluralism envisioned by the guidelines to “also include the pluralism of religious convictions and beliefs.”
This protection, they added, must benefit all faiths as well as those who profess no religion, to prevent them from being subjected to “administrative judgments regarding truthfulness” or “compulsory labels.”
The bishops also expressed reservations regarding the powers the bill would grant the governmental authority “to review and validate media codes of ethics,” review the decisions of audience ombudsmen, and order the rectification or modification of content.
“Ethical self-regulation is a good that flourishes in freedom; when permanently subject to governmental validation, it ceases to be self-regulation,” they pointed out.
Participation in consultation encouraged
The CEM deemed it “essential” for the public to participate in the consultation before Aug. 21.
“Citizen participation is not merely a procedural step in the regulatory process, but an exercise of co-responsibility for the common good; a democracy is strengthened when citizens participate, not when they remain silent,” it stated.
The bishops also expressed their “willingness to engage in frank and constructive dialogue” with authorities and license holders, and offered their educational and pastoral network “to collaborate on media education and literacy programs, the development of audiences that exercise critical thinking, and the dissemination of mechanisms for defending rights.”
The CEM also noted that no regulation can replace the responsibility to discern information, verify it before sharing, and avoid spreading content that harms others or creates confusion.
“The primary defense of the truth is not a regulation; it is a well-formed conscience,” they emphasized.
This story was first published by ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.