Audiovisual policies in the MERCOSUR (1991-2007) 1

: The reasons for which the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR) rejected the radio and television regional policies design from its crea2on in 1991 to the year 2007 are ques2oned in this paper. The methodological strategy involves the case study for regional analysis and the applica2on of compara2ve methods for the na2onal cases (Argen2ne, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay) and for other contemporary processes of regionaliza2on (European Union and the North American Free Trade Agreement). The radio and TV na2onal public policies implemented by full members and those produced within the framework of the regional bloc are analysed. Besides, a second interregional comparison is traced supposing this contrast provides valuable elements for the evalua2on. The results show that though isolated a[empts, the radio and television regional policies were not present at the strategic agenda of MERCOSUR during the analysed period.

This ar2cle explores the reasons why the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR) dismissed between 1991 and 2007, the design of an integrated body, explicit and sustainable of regional policies for radio and television, when the evidence shows that: 1) other contemporary processes of regionaliza2on, such as the European Union (EU) or the Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), have explicitly included the subject in their agendas, either in order to exempt or to liberalize its exchange; 2) members of MERCOSUR are producing since 2003, in parallel, readjustments in their legal systems based on most progressive and lawgiving worldwide trends that consider broadcas2ng 2 as a materializa2on of the human right to freedom of expression and 3) if not explicitly exempted, broadcas2ng -as cultural industry-will be included as a tradable service based on service trade agreements signed between MERCOSUR members.
Among this work hypothesis there is one that postulates that MERCOSUR did not formulate regional policies for television and radio because they did not iden2fy the treatment of cultural industries as a controversial issue for which specific strategies are required.At the same 2me, MERCOSUR members acted independently from their partners in the formula2on of na2onal policies on broadcas2ng and gradually moved, towards the end of the period, to more complex rules in which the basic principles of the struggle for the democra2za2on of communica2ons can be recognized.However, the analyzed period is not characterized by a lack of legal framework, but by an explicit regula2on that, at least during the first decade, favors the interests of the commercial and private sector and then re-allocates to the incorpora2on of the demands of other sectors.This process recognizes reciprocal influences between countries and a strong mo2va2on linked to the change since 2003 of the poli2cal trend in the region.Moreover, regulatory frameworks on broadcas2ng implemented between 1991 and 2007 in the countries of MERCOSUR have enabled, by act or omission, significant changes in the structure of media ownership in favor of the commercial and private sector, and in detriment of the public and social community sectors.
The study proposes a double comparison between the Na2onal Communica2on Policies (NCP) of the four countries of MERCOSUR as full partners and the Regional Communica2ons Policy (RCP) of three contemporary regionaliza2on processes.In this sense it is original, as no similar study is recorded in the field of socio-poli2cal communica2ons.Its main contribu2on is the integrated reading of phenomenon that have been studied in an isolated way and in the produc2on of keys of interpreta2on about the strategic relevance acquired by strategic communica2ons in the MERCOSUR region.
The results indicate that un2l 2007 there was no explicit objec2ve in MERCOSUR to advance on the design of regional policies for radio and television, and there was not principle of cultural excep2on in European style, either.Only Specialized Mee2ngs and a Working Sub Group specialized in the treatment of communica2on and broadcas2ng have made progress in some par2al policies 3 .Therefore we could not speak of a MERCOSUR policy on audiovisual produc2on in general or radio broadcas2ng in par2cular, but of ac2ons and ini2a2ves that could eventually come together in a general policy but un2l then remained fragmented.That is, the outlook through 2007 was not composed of explicit regional policies but by "absent policies" or in terms of Bustamante (2003), "policies by omission," because not making policies is a poli2cal mode.
However, in 2009, the status quo begins to grind.The standard defini2on on digital terrestrial television (DTT) that will be unified in the MERCOSUR region between October 2009 and December 2010 to the Nippon-Brazilian 4 standard modifies, for the first 2me since its crea2on, the way to build regional communica2on policies addressed by MERCOSUR countries.However, it is a fact outside the block the one that triggers the decisions of the members.The impulse of Brazil, the most powerful economy in the region, coupled with strategic alliances that the Empire of Japan and the business of this country get to hatch in the South American region create condi2ons conducive to the adop2on of the standard.Although Brazil had made the choice in 2006, it is in 2009 when a sort of domino effect takes place and in less than a year the adop2on map of Nippon-Brazilian DTT standard in South America is as follows: Peru adopts it in April 2009, Argen2na in August of that year, Chile in September and Venezuela in October.Then follow, in this series: Ecuador in March 2010, Paraguay in June of that year, Bolivia in July and, finally, Uruguay in December.This alignment around the DTT standard cons2tutes a finding.It is eye-catching -both in rela2on to the strengthening of the regional market as to the defini2on of a joint posi2on on the treatment of cultural industries, in the EU style-that the formula2on of a controversial but fundamentally strategic issue for a regional market of around 250 million people has been postponed for so many years.
As it will be revealed throughout this paper, na2onal regulatory systems of the MERCOSUR countries, and the regional union itself, have experienced a symptoma2c lag during the study period, delaying the discussion about the exclusion of radio broadcas2ng of rules of services trade, an impera2ve that is generalized on a global scale, promoted by the World Trade Organiza2on (WTO).The other side of this state of affairs is expressed in the radical transforma2ons that have suffered the media ownership structures in the past 20 years, reaching alarming levels of concentra2on on interna2onal standards, with more than 90% of the radio broadcaster sector exploited for commercial purposes in the four countries examined in this study (Mastrini-Becerra, 2006) and, concomitantly, with a secondary role played by public sector and social community sector that for decades has grown in condi2ons of illegality.
Confronted to this, we understand that the treatment of cultural industries in general, but especially those of point-mass type included in the audiovisual sector, is controversial to the extent that it is required to discuss in an ar2culate way their economic and cultural dimensions from a delicate balance that does not ignores this duality but try an approach different from those used in other commodi2es.Underlying this dispute of senses are the defense of freedom of expression, guarantees for the cons2tu2on of diverse collec2ve iden22es and the right to informa2on and communica2on, all aspects that are condi2ons of possibility for the democra2za2on of communica2ons .

2.-2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Over the past 20 years there was a reconfigura2on of the media ecosystem on a global level which is part of liberaliza2on of capital processes, trans-na2onaliza2on of the distribu2on, increase of the financial and technological convergence (Zaller, 1988;Garnham, 1991;Van Audenhove, 1999, Mastrini andBolan, 1999).This change was maintained over a wide legal framework designed to measure the regulated (Van Cuilenburg and McQuail, 2003).
In this context, cultural industries -among which is the broadcas2ng industry-entered a valoriza2on process that transformed the industry in an area of growing interest to capital investment from other industry branches.This ship was a significant muta2on in the tradi2onal logic of produc2on, circula2on and consump2on of goods and printed new dynamics to processes of social produc2on of meaning (Mastrini and Becerra 2006;Bustamante, 2003, Becerra andMastrini, 2009).Cultural Industries (CI) have been defined by Ramon Zallo (1988) as: a number of branches, segments and auxiliary ac2vi2es producers and distributors of goods with symbolic content, designed by a crea2ve work, organized by a capital that is valued and intended ul2mately to the consumer, with a func2on of ideological and social reproduc2on."(P.26).
Goods produced by these logics not only require a significant investment of capital and the division of labor implicit in any process of industrializa2on, but also have the peculiarity to shape and influence the meanings of contemporary cultures.This duality is controversial.Indeed, as stated by Galperín (1998), we must recognize that cultural industries are integral to the global economic system, but also have important sociopoli2cal implica2ons, while helping to reproduce and sustain the cultural iden2ty and to maintain social 2es of a community while helping to regulate the circula2on of poli2cal discourse in modern socie2es (p.14).
Garnham had foreseen this bivalence in 1979, when he stated that "culture has become a commodity", because the market displace the State's func2on of ideological reproduc2on, from the transforma2on of a historically unproduc2ve area, as culture, into a high profitability area.So, without invalida2ng the structure-superstructure model, he worked on the hypothesis of industrializa2on of the superstructure.
In this sense, broadcas2ng has been developed through support and expansion strategies related to the processes of concentra2on of ownership that have occurred throughout La2n America in the last 20 years.This process, unlike what happened in Europe with state monopolies-has been almost exclusively on the commercial private sector relega2ng the state to a subsidiary supply role 5 .
As the CI represent areas of high profit, they have received in recent decades migra2on of capital and investments from other sectors of the economy and admi[ed the logic of interna2onal trade in terms of commodi2es 6 or tradable goods.As a counterpart, from UNESCO emerges a proposal known as "cultural excep2on" that presents specific background from November 2001, the year that Universal Declara2on on Cultural Diversity is published.There specifies that cultural goods and services, as vectors of iden2ty, values and meaning, "should not be treated as mere commodi2es or consumer goods like any other" (Art.8).This policy has been validated by subsequent public statements and ac2ons of this organiza2on and is fixed as a norm of interna2onal law from 2005 through the Conven2on on the Protec2on and Promo2on of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions of UNESCO, which came into force in March 2007.The strategy of preserva2on of cultural property of the European Union against requirements of the WTO has been based on this Conven2on.
However, the UNESCO-led ac2ons have failed to alter the direc2on of a flow that has produced great benefits, both economic and cultural, in the configura2on audience's taste and preferences, globally.Logically, those who have benefited most from this movement have been the major interna2onal operators, who not only possess the capacity to generate economies of scale and scope but have done so, mainly under widespread processes of ownership concentra2on.
In this scenario MERCOSUR, as a contemporary regional integra2on process, appears as a big ques2on as its interna2onal posi2on with regard to cultural industries is unclear.We understand that the keys provided can be valuable to formulate ques2ons about the status that broadcas2ng had achieved in the framework of the regional union and in each of the countries that integrate MERCOSUR as full members.
As for interna2onal trade in audiovisual goods and services, we can say, following Marc Raboy (2002), that currently we see the configura2on of a "global regulatory arena," which implies that States have lost some degree of autonomy in the defini2on of its regula2ons and that require to pay a[en2on to the logic of the nego2a2on of these rules at the transna2onal level, where the guidelines to which they should then be accommodated are debated and stated.
In the case of radio broadcast media, the imprint of tradi2onal media does not exclude them of these logics because the technological conversion and digital convergence have equated their scope possibili2es and diversity of content to new media.The point to define and defend by the States is whether the broadcas2ng will be part of the cultural or economic sphere, because "(...) globaliza2on itself does not mean the end of regula2on: it means a change in where and how this regula2on occurs.This implies that the regula2on of broadcas2ng has gone global " (Raboy, 2002, p. 24).This reflec2on is in contrast to the observa2ons made by Lacroix in 1999, who argued that interna2onal regulatory ins2tu2ons had failed so far to transcend the mode of regula2on imposed by the Fordist-Keynesian matrix (based on the intensifica2on of produc2on and consump2on and growth in the State interven2on) to what he called a discussed-programmed mode which sought to regulate from social consensus reached between the State, economic power and society.Lacroix diagnosed a crisis in na2onal regulatory capaci2es "from the access to power of transna2onal corpora2ons and the concentra2on and centraliza2on of capital (...) result of close coopera2on between States and economic power, par2cularly for developing interna2onal trade" (1999, pp. 89-90) recognizing that in regional unions such as MERCOSUR, NAFTA and the European Union there was evidence of ins2tu2onal forms for a new matrix that had not yet come to frui2on.
Ten years aper of this analysis, and in line with the contribu2on made by Raboy in 2002, we can say that changes in pa[erns of regula2on are happening in an accelerated mode.The actors who drive them are not only, as in the past, States or the regional unions they form, but also worldwide organiza2ons in which States and economic groups par2cipate, as in the case of the World Trade Organiza2on or transna2onal corpora2ons as in the case of the Internet Corpora2on for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).This new balance of power should be a warning to a regional union such as MERCOSUR.

OBJECT OF STUDY AND METHODOLOGY
The research on which this ar2cle is based had as its object of study public policies for radio and television developed between 1991 and 2007 by the founding partners of MERCOSUR: Argen2na, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay, and by the regional union itself.Therefore, we studied both Na2onal Communica2on Policy (NCP) and Regional Communica2on Policy (RCP).We considered, on one hand, the main policy-making processes for broadcas2ng, and on the other, norma2ve-legal framework designed and implemented in each country and the regional union during the period, with special emphasis on the ac2vity of actors who have disputed senses in the construc2on of policies.Thus, it was sought to ar2culate the regulatory system with ins2tu2onal prac2ces involved in the design and implementa2on of regula2ons as two inseparable levels in the analysis of radio broadcas2ng policies.
Regarding this subject we designed a methodological strategy that combines the case study and the compara2ve method.
While preliminary inves2ga2ons showed a small and disjointed design of broadcas2ng policies in the MERCOSUR region, and considering the difficulty of defining a clearly demarcated area of interest, we chose to apply the case study not as a technique, but as a strategy in the research design.As such, the case study focused on understanding the dynamics that occurred within par2cular scenarios (Eisenhardt, 1989).
We worked on the assump2on that the MERCOSUR case could be addressed as an intrinsic case, not because it was representa2ve of other cases or because it served to illustrate a par2cular problem, but because it was itself of interest, because of its character.Thus, the purpose of research was ini2ally directed to reveal the intrinsic aspects of the case.Stake defines this strategy as "the study of the par2cularity and complexity of a single case, to get to understand its ac2vity in important circumstances" (1995, p. 11).
As methodological strategy, case study proceeds by induc2on: Generaliza2ons, concepts, hypotheses emerge from careful examina2on of the data [that characterize it]; is the discovery of new rela2onships and concepts rather than the verifica2on or checking of the hypothesis (...) which can lead to the discovery of new meanings, expand the reader's experience or confirm what we know." (Rodríguez Gómez et. Al, 1999, pp. 91-98) Considera2ng the policy by omission characteris2c of the MERCOSUR region with regard to radio broadcas2ng, the approach to MERCOSUR case components was necessary, that is, it became essen2al to know, compare and contrast the ac2ons and/or omissions in the area that took place in each of the four countries during the period of analysis.MERCOSUR case was formed in turn from a limited number of na2onal cases, and thus ended to conform as mul2ple case (Yin, 1984), i.e., from several single cases.The selec2on of these cases was naturally linked to the original signatories of the MERCOSUR agreement and sought to generate informa2on indica2ve of the processes of policy design that were followed at na2onal level during the period in order to establish a significant comparison between the cases and then make explica2ve hypotheses concerning the con2nui2es or discon2nui2es that these processes had at regional level.
From this conforma2on, we sought to recover the essence of the case studies, i.e., the a[empt to "illuminate a decision or set of decisions: why they were taken, how they were implemented and with what results"(Schramm to Yin, 1984, p. 23).From this point of view the chosen case study is of explanatory type (Yin, 1984).
The case study, as evalua2on research, can explain the causal links in real-life interven2ons, describe the contexts in which interven2ons took place, and explore those situa2ons in which such interven2ons did not produce clear results (op. cit., 1984).Ul2mately, the case study makes sense not to define what it resembles it to other cases, but what makes it unique and complex (Stake, 1995).
Based on case study as a methodology strategy, we proceeded to define two groups of meaningful comparisons: interregional and regional levels.For the first case, we chose two contemporary processes of regional integra2on: NAFTA and the EU.The criteria on which this decision is based are: 1) these processes are contemporary with each other and with MERCOSUR, 2) up from substan2ally different models, they conform the defini2on their regional radio broadcas2ng policies, internal and external, 3) have defined policies of radio broadcas2ng explicitly, and 4) represent the two ends of an arc of possibili2es for radio broadcas2ng policies as both use different strategies in protec2onism-liberaliza2on of their cultural industries of radio broadcas2ng, at member countries level and between regional union and the rest of the world.We iden2fied, following the compara2ve method of Mills (1986), the similari2es and crucial differences.
The terms on the basis of which the comparison was made combined the terms proposed by Galperín in his 1998 7 study and others that appear from the formulated objec2ves and hypotheses that clarify and focus the observa2on on the radio and television policies.
We worked at this stage with the compara2ve method of agreement and difference proposed by Mills (1986).This approach allowed us to establish how central or peripheral is the way in which the policies of radio and television are managed and the preeminence of economic, technological, poli2cal or cultural factors in each case.From this state of the art it was finally possible to make meaningful comparisons in terms of agreements and differences among the three selected cases.The analysis variables used were: 1) regional broadcas2ng policies 8 , 2) cultural distance 9 , 3) formulas used in integra2on processes related to cultural industries 10 and 4) structure of the C.I. 11 .
The second comparison was made on the basis of the poli2cal experiences of the four founding members of MERCOSUR: Argen2na, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay.In this case, the search was directed towards na2onal radio broadcas2ng policies that each country carried out during the analyzed period.The objec2ve was to determine correspondences and distances between na2onal prac2ces and regional policy.We sought to demonstrate that, during the period analyzed, there was a theming and an ac2ve and specific ac2on on legisla2ve and regulatory apparatus of the four countries, together with an ongoing debate and poli2c ac2ons faced by different social actors vying for spectrum use that had no counterpart at the regional level but also was not par2cularly favored or promoted by the suprana2onal level.
From this methodological framework were made the comparisons made between the radio broadcas2ng policies of the four countries of MERCOSUR as full partners.For a be[er presenta2on of cases the descrip2ve variables were grouped as follows: 1. Overview 12 ; 2.
Si se realiza un análisis de conjunto respecto de estas medidas, surge en primer lugar que las Reuniones trabajan de modo aislado, sin vincularse entre sí, pero que sin embargo se perfila una línea de cambio a par2r de 2005-2006 en relación a la cual es posible visualizar un interés explícito en la comunicación y la cultura, que no llega a formularse en tanto polí2ca regional, pero que aporta elementos para una puesta en agenda del tema.Se inician además relevamientos y sistema2zación de información sobre circulación, consumo y comercio internacional de audiovisuales y cinematogra•a (a cargo de la RECAM) y de bienes y servicios culturales (a cargo de la RMC) que aportarán la base informa2va necesaria para la elaboración de polí2cas en la materia que puedan incidir en el plano regional.
En esta línea, el reconocimiento de que el MERCOSUR es, además de un acuerdo comercial, un proceso polí2co, social y cultural, y la explicitación de la necesidad de atender a la comunicación pública y al acceso universal a la información en la búsqueda de construcción de ciudadanía como parte necesaria de la integración, cons2tuyen indicios respecto de una posibilidad de transformación de las polí2cas de la omisión hacia las polí2cas de la acción en el ámbito regional.
De las consultas realizadas con funcionarios e intelectuales de los cuatro países, se revela un reconocimiento acerca de la necesidad de impulsar el desarrollo de televisoras públicas no estatales ni gubernamentales -a imagen de la BBC o de otras televisoras europeaslo cual nos encamina hacia los debates sobre el servicio público de radiodifusión y sus límites en las sociedades la2noamericanas.En general, existe un acuerdo sobre la urgencia -dado el contexto regional de concentración-de reflexionar sobre los medios de radiodifusión públicos par2endo de una concepción de servicio público con acceso universal.