NODIO and Censorship Concerns

BY: Emma Maher

NODIO: What it is and what it does

The Argentine government recently created an agency called NODIO: the Observatory of Disinformation and Symbolic Violence in digital media and platforms. The Defender of the Public announced it on October 9, 2020. Their website explained that it was created to do work on “detection, verification, identification, and dismantling of malicious news argumentative strategies and the identification of their dissemination operations”. It operates under the Office of the Public Defender, headed by Miriam Lewin. She stated that in a time of isolation, messages about civic-military dictatorship, misogyny, racism, and other forms of hate harm democratic debate and increase polarization. The site also highlights that massive access to information in the digital world has had adverse effects on democratic life because of misinformation encouraged by the way digital networks operate. It emphasizes NODIO as a democratic commitment to protect citizens and the human right to communication (Office of the Public Defender of Audiovisual Communication Services, 2020). It is not entirely clear yet what exactly NODIO has done or plans to do and there have not been many news stories on its actions. Its ambiguity has been indicated by critics. The Inter-American Press Association said that the agency is “obscure” and questioned how exactly it would “protect citizens”. The Juntos por el Cambio coalition also emphasized the lack of information on its objectives and functions, to which the Office of the Public Defender said it was still in the formation stage and will be “a line of work” that will involve multiple actors of the media sector (EFE News Service, 2020). Lewin also explained that the agency will not require additional funding and all workers will be those who are already in the Office (Mercado, 2020). NODIO has not been in existence for long so its impact on the information society in Argentina remains to be seen. However, one particular action it has taken received media attention: Limay TV channel covered acts of violence that occurred in Villa Mascardi and received an “intimidating note” from Lewin who said the channel should “‘privilege the position and the voice of the neighbors who consider themselves harmed’” (CE Noticias Financieras, 2021). Lewin also shared in 2021 that NODIO monitored speech about Argentina’s Day of Remembrance for Truth and Justice and provided support for “‘the drafting of recommendations on informed coverage’ of the pandemic”. She also said that freedom of expression should have a limit when it “damages health, when it generates panic and when it causes death” (Ramos, 2021).

Political Context

Argentina is a presidential republic and its current period of civilian-run democracy began in 1983 after the end of a military dictatorship. Its executive branch is referred to by some political experts as ‘hyperpresidentialist’. The dominant political ideology is Peronism, and there are two main political parties. The Justicialist Party (formerly the Peronist party) is center-left and mainly subscribes to populist politics. It is part of the Frente de Todos Coalition, which was formed for current president Alberto Fernández’s campaign. The Radical Civil Union is a centrist progressive party and half of the Juntos por el Cambio coalition. The Republican Proposal Party is also part of Juntos; it is a third party, of which former president Mauricio Macri is a part. It is center-right, often favoring business (Roy, 2022). The current administration of Alberto Fernández and Cristina Fernández de Kirchner are in Frente de Todos.

The Office of the Defender of the Public is an autonomous public organization whose power comes from Congress; it is under the Bicameral Commission for the Promotion and Monitoring of Audiovisual Communication (currently led by the national representative of the Frente de Todos, Gabriela Cerruti). The Office receives complaints from the public related to audiovisual media, channels them to proper authorities, keeps track of results, makes public reports, and submits an annual report to the Bicameral Commission. It also gathers organizations and think tanks for discussion, holds public hearings and can submit recommendations to “competent authorities” (Office of the Public Defender of Audiovisual Communication Services, n.d.). It essentially works between the citizenry and the government and legal change could occur if their recommendations are taken into account in Congress, as one of the Bicameral Commission’s objectives is to propose changes to public regulations and policies. Miriam Lewin was elected as the Defender of the Public in May 2020 with nine in-favor votes from the governing party (Frente) and six from the opposition (Zommer and Tardáguila, 2020). She is an investigative journalist mainly on radio and television, and is also an author and speaker; she survived detainment in a detention center during the last civic-military dictatorship and has shared her and other women’s experiences (“Miriam Lewin”, 2022).

Media Environment in Argentina

Argentina was ranked 69th in the 2021 World Press Freedom Index, placing it in the ‘problematic’ category (Reporters without Borders, n.d.). Freedom House gave it a Freedom of the Net score of 71/100 for 2021, with Violations of Users Rights as the lowest-scoring category at 25/40 (n.d.). The tension between state and private media is the main challenge to democratic media in Argentina, as well as judicial system issues. Freedom House states that “‘Argentina’s judicial system has long been plagued by inefficiencies and accusations of politicization’” (n.d.). Censorship by judicial means can occur in civil defamation suits where damages awards hurt media companies financially (Reporters without Borders, n.d.). Courts consider lawsuits from requests for search engines or platforms to take down content, such as politicians complaining about their Google Knowledge panels.
In 2020, some proposed bills generated concern over encouraging censorship online, including a proposal for social media platforms to have to remove fake news and hate speech within a certain time frame or face fines or suspension. Freedom House considers NODIO to be a development that could encourage self-censorship (n.d.).

Relations between government and media have been unsteady since the 1983 return to democracy. One of the most prominent clashes was that of former president (2007-2012) and current vice president Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and Grupo Clarín when her administration spread the tagline “Clarín lies”. A 2012 report from Committee to Protect Journalists explored how journalism suffered from this government-media fight. Grupo Clarín owns the most widely-read newspaper in the country as well as radio, broadcast and cable TV, and an internet service provider. Much of the media in Argentina is owned by huge conglomerates such as Clarín. Rafsky, in a special report for CPJ states, “The government’s primary weapon is financial: It props up, through advertising, outlets with favorable editorial lines, while withholding that support from others, like Clarín. Critical media, in return, relentlessly hurl reproach at the administration”. This creates a polarized press. Critics accused Kirchner of suppressing freedom of expression by favoring supporters and harming opposition with regulation and advertising. However, many also believed Grupo Clarín had too much power. With two sides, “Argentina’s citizens are unable to trust publications and broadcasters for objective information on vital issues”. Government advertising is common in Latin America and is intended for citizens’ understanding of public policy, but the practice is generally unregulated and misused, becoming a form of soft censorship. A Clarín spokesman called it a “‘colonization of the media space’” where public resources are used to create a network of outlets that are “‘para-official, co-opted, or pro-government’”. La Nación journalist Laura Zommer said, “‘the climate is so charged that journalists are censoring themselves out of fear of how their reporting will be interpreted’” (Rafsky, 2012).

In 2009, Law 26.522 on services for audiovisual communication was passed. The most controversial aspect was its limits on broadband for private companies. Kirchner’s administration claimed the law was to “curb monopolies, making radio and television more democratic”, while media owners and the political opposition argued that it was intended for the government to have more control over content by forcing companies to divest holdings. The “Media Law” was criticized for targeting Grupo Clarín specifically, which had started criticizing Kirchner’s policies in 2007. CPJ claims that the law is an improvement from the 1980 (dictatorship-era) law it replaced, but, “its provisions could be misused for political purposes”. It also shared that “Free press advocates have contended that manipulative government advertising violates Articles 14 and 32 of the Argentine Constitution, which bar censorship and guarantee press freedom, respectively; and Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights” (Stern, 2010).

In the context of the pandemic and accompanying infodemic, traditional news outlets have been struggling financially and trust in media has been declining. Argentine news outlets have asked the government for bailouts, but as Hale writes for the Wilson Center, “despite the critical role of the news media in covering the pandemic’s public health, economic and political impacts, scrutinizing government emergency measures and sniffing out public corruption, many Latin American governments are taking advantage of the crisis to crack down on the press” (Hale, 2020).

Backlash to NODIO

The creation of NODIO and concern over what it could mean for the future of media in Argentina has garnered backlash from both journalistic organizations and political actors. The Inter-American Press Society and The Association of Argentine and International Journalistic Entities have both called for NODIO to be reversed. President of IAPA Christopher Barnes said, “‘We regret that once again an Argentine government, as other governments in the country have tried at various times, seeks to judge the behavior and editorial criteria of the media, deciding what is good or bad for society’”. ADEPA is concerned that it is an official body: “‘the establishment of such monitoring bodies by the State carries a certain risk that they will be used as a subtle method of discipline or reprisal for reasons beyond the principles they claim to promote’” (EFE News Service, 2020).

Zommer and Tardáguila, in an article from Poynter originally published in La Nación, pointed out that the Public Defender’s Office was created to deal with public issues with radio and television and as a public agency, the reach of its legal conduct is established by law. For that reason, one of its main critiques of NODIO is that digital platforms are not considered within the framework of the Law on Audiovisual Communication Services, and neither are graphic or digital media outlets (2020).

Critics in Argentina have compared NODIO to the Ministry of Truth and question how it will be able to disarticulate the argumentative strategies of spreading malicious news without infringing on freedom of expression. Silvana Giudici, a Macrist (supporter of former president Macri and Republican Proposal Party) and director of ENACOM (National Communications Agency), said it could “‘become an arm of ideas of ideological supremacy, which would lead to the removal of critical voices from public discourse’”. Journalist Ernesto Tenembaum said there is “‘an understandable sensitivity to know what direction this government is going to take with journalism, given what happened in the government of Cristina Fernández, when things got very aggressive’” and “‘I think good journalism finally manages to have a greater influence on people’” (Vilcachagua, 2020). Gabriela Ocaña, deputy of the Juntos por el Cambio coalition, similarly said, “‘There are plenty of reasons to be wary of such programs created by Kirchnerism, a party that has attacked the media countless times’”, pointing to Cristina Fernández de Kirchner’s controversial Audiovisual Communication Services Law (EFE News Services, 2020). In response to criticism, Lewin said the work the agency does will be quantitative and qualitative studies, such as what universities and civil society institutions do. She said perhaps it should not be talked of as an observatory because they have no direct sanctioning power. It is rather a study center for promoting rights to free speech and communication. (Vilcachagua, 2020). Lewin also answered questions about NODIO in Congress to the Bicameral Commission for the Promotion and Monitoring of Audiovisual Communication, where there was back-and-forth between the two coalitions. Lewin was angry at being accused of restricting freedom of expression: “‘Never would I, who was kidnapped and disappeared, have ever accepted a charge that would mean to seize the freedom of expression of any of my colleagues…’”. Radical (Civic Union) Karina Banfi wanted it dissolved because it will “‘bring us a lot of headaches’”, is “‘a very bad idea that I find risky’” and “‘the state does not have to intervene, it has to promote that society self-regulates’”. She is worried about Argentina looking like Thailand, Malaysia, or Nigeria (CE Noticias Financieras, 2020). International precedents of government efforts to restrain disinformation have not been promising. The recent ‘infodemic’, has resulted in government initiatives in other Latin American countries as well and organizations against disinformation in Thailand, Indonesia, and India have resulted in censorship to some degree or fear of imprisonment (Zommer and Tardáguila, 2020). Banfi also pointed out that president Alberto Fernández recommended hot drinks to prevent COVID, and asked what NODIO would do with such “fake news” from the government. Pablo Carro from Frente de Todos Córdoba pointed out in defense of NODIO that universities, many of which are state-owned, do a similar analysis and monitoring of the media, to which radical Miguel Bazze responded that universities are not under political power. It would be a “‘very serious officialism mistake to embark on this project, one never knows where these things end, one never knows what the limits are’” (CE Noticias Financieras, 2020). In sum, critics are concerned about methodology, lack of transparency, and partisanship.

Conclusion

While NODIO has not been revealed to have done anything which is obvious or direct censorship, the immediate concern from multiple actors over what it could do or lead to proves that Argentina’s media environment is not entirely democratic. Reforms to the judicial system and the trend of ‘hyper-presidentialism’ are needed in Argentina as well as the issues with government funding of media as a soft form of control. Self-censorship may be more of a concern than direct censorship. The government often says they are acting in the name of democracy while critics argue the opposite. It is also important to consider that no country has clear answers to questions about regulating online content; governments around the world deal with these issues. Some questions to think about include: how to protect democratic ideals (there is a difference between having free expression in the constitution and then the practice of it), how to promote quality, trusted journalism, and how to define misinformation and balance regulation with freedom of expression. These are not only Argentina-specific questions but global ones.

References

Censorship in Argentina: NODIO shuts up those who denounce Mapuche terrorists in Villa
Mascardi. (2021, October 1). CE Noticias Financieras English. https://advance-lexis-com.proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu/api/document?collection=news&id=urn:contentItem:63RR-X241-DY1R-B4NY-00000-00&context=1516831.

Freedom House. (n.d.) Argentina: Freedom on the Net 2021 Country Report. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/country/argentina/freedom-net/2021

Hale, L. (2020, November 13). Breaking news. Wilson Center. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/breaking-news.

Mercado, S. (2020 October 13). Miriam Lewin sobre el observatorio NODIO: “Esto no será el ministerio de la verdad”. Infobae. https://advance-lexis-com.proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu/api/document?collection=news&id=urn:contentItem:612G-66R1-JBJN-M2GW-00000-00&context=1516831.

Miriam Lewin. (2022, March 26). In Wikipedia. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miriam_Lewin

Office of the Public Defender of Audiovisual Communication Services. (2020, October 9). NODIO, the observatory of disinformation and symbolic violence. Defensoría del Público. https://defensadelpublico.gob.ar/llego-nodio-el-observatorio-de-la-desinformacion-y-la-violencia-simbolica/

Office of the Public Defender of Audiovisual Communication Services. (n.d). Preguntas frecuentes. Defensoría del Público.

Polémica en Argentina por nuevo ente de control de noticias falsas en medios: ARGENTINA PRENSA. (2020, October 13). EFE News Service. http://proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/wire-feeds/polémica-en-argentina-por-nuevo-ente-de-control/docview/2450655379/se-2?accountid=9783

Rafsky, S. (2012, September 27). In government-media fight, Argentine journalism suffers. Committee to Protect Journalists. https://cpj.org/reports/2012/09/amid-government-media-fight-argentine-journalism-suffers/

Ramos, C. (2021 June 29). Lewin: La libertad de expresión tiene que tener un límite cuando lesiona la salud y provoca muerte. La Voz del Interior (Argentina). https://advance-lexis-com.proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu/api/document?collection=news&id=urn:contentItem:631P-N2G1-JBJN-M4N7-00000-00&context=1516831.

Reporters without Borders. (n.d.). Argentina: Endangered state media, police violence. RSF. https://rsf.org/en/argentina

Roy, D. (2022, February 7). Argentina: A south american power struggles for stability. Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/argentina-south-american-power-struggles-stability

Stern, M. (2010, February 16). Attacks on the press 2009: Argentina. Committee to Protect Journalists. https://cpj.org/2010/02/attacks-on-the-press-2009-argentina/

The opposition called in Congress for the dissolution of NODIO, the body created to oversee news that is published in the media. (2020, October 19). CE Noticias Financieras English. https://advance-lexis-com.proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu/api/document?collection=news&id=urn:contentItem:613S-1291-JBJN-M37B-00000-00&context=1516831.

They overessure Miriam Lewin in the cause of the creation of the Nodio observatory to control the media. (2021, March 23). CE Noticias Financieras English. https://advance-lexis-com.proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu/api/document?collection=news&id=urn:contentItem:628T-H371-DY1R-B25Y-00000-00&context=1516831.

Vilcachagua, P. (2020, October 18). Argentina and the alarms about the Nodio. CE Latin America Migration English. https://advance-lexis-com.proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu/api/document?collection=news&id=urn:contentItem:613J-1N41-JBJN-M0NK-00000-00&context=1516831.

Zommer, L. and Tardáguila, C. (2020, October 19). Argentina’s new government office is NOT a fact-checker. Poynter. https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2020/argentinas-new-government-office-is-not-a-fact-checker/