Politics: Freedom of expression is at risk under a new initiative
Mexico's government is advancing Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (CRT) guidelines meant to regulate audience rights under Articles 6 and 7 of the Constitution and the 2025 Telecommunications Law, but the initiative has triggered sharp controversy. Critics argue the rules concentrate excessive power in the CRT, which would draft, interpret, register, review, supervise, and sanction media content and codes of ethics—effectively acting as judge and party. Central concerns include vague terms such as "false" or "decontextualized" information left to CRT interpretation, the erosion of audience ombudspersons' independence through mandatory registration and appealable decisions, disproportionate fines of up to 1% of revenue, and a complaint-appeal structure that could let the government override editorial judgments.
The CIRT (The National Chamber of the Radio and Television Industry) raised these objections in relatively moderate terms, while jurists and analysts went further, warning of potential censorship and self-censorship ahead of the 2026-2027 electoral cycle, and framing the guidelines as part of a broader pattern of pressuring media owners into silencing critics rather than censoring directly. This pattern is linked to earlier episodes, including a 2025 proposal (later withdrawn) to grant authorities power to block social media, and the use of presidential press conferences to discredit critical journalists, a practice continued under Sheinbaum.
It is worth noting in this context the toll of violence against journalists: 68 murdered since 2018, nearly half concentrated in four states, alongside a rise in protection-mechanism requests and a troubling increase in cases in which the perpetrator is unidentified, reflecting weak investigation. Notably, public officials are the most common likely aggressors.
Facing sustained pushback, Sheinbaum has softened her rhetoric, moving from flatly denying any censorship intent to acknowledging that the guidelines could be clarified and revised, although without conceding that censorship exists or committing to remove the most contested provisions. The outcome remains uncertain, hinging on whether the administration presses forward with tighter media control or scales back to avoid further polarization before the 2027 elections.
Now read on...
Register to sample a report