CANALCATORCE — broadcast
20260806 020000 UTC
530 transcript segments
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text API (Chirp) + Gemini 2.5 Flash Non-Thinking
Data courtesy of The GDELT Project (https://www.gdeltproject.org/), from the Internet Archive TV News Archive.
Machine transcription. Treat it as a searchable index of what was broadcast, not a verbatim quotation record.

[00:00:00] the audiences, why does it generate
[00:00:03] the rights of so resentment among concessionaires, among
[00:00:07] commentators, of the electronic media,
[00:00:11] generating a process of
[00:00:16] and that we have always defended, the part of defending the rights of the audiences and
[00:00:20] why have they articulated in these
[00:00:23] recent days a very clear campaign
[00:00:26] to say the same thing that
[00:00:28] and monopolistic interests of has always been said when it comes to regulating
[00:00:31] rights in terms of communication that they
[00:00:34] try to exercise censorship,
[00:00:38] control, violations of freedom of expression,
[00:00:42] etc., this is a debate that I think matters to all
[00:00:46] citizens, because it is another equation of
[00:00:50] communication, it is not the part between the media and the
[00:00:53] government, but actually between the media and their audiences
[00:00:56] and precisely to be able
[00:01:00] to understand the whole historical
[00:01:03] process and the content of the guidelines that
[00:01:07] regulatory law is from 2014, in are under consultation, today we have a great
[00:01:10] guest, a friend of many years,
[00:01:13] politician,
[00:01:15] eh, what we journalist, and
[00:01:16] from currently senator, Senator Javier Coral, thank you very much Javier,
[00:01:20] editorialize and editorialize on thank you Genaro for the invitation with great pleasure,
[00:01:24] where can we start, Javier, this
[00:01:28] concept of audience rights is
[00:01:30] relatively new, right? And it is incorporated for
[00:01:34] the first time in the constitution in this reform
[00:01:37] of
[00:01:40] the framework of the Pact for Mexico of 2013 which was
[00:01:43] the reform to the sixth constitutional,
[00:01:46] eh, why at that moment was it important to mention
[00:01:50] this issue? It is relatively new for our
[00:01:54] telecommunications services country, for our country, not for some other Latin American countries,
[00:01:58] much less for Europe. Eh, particularly Germany and
[00:02:02] France, who incorporated it into their legislations
[00:02:05] 38 and 42 years ago, I say that the
[00:02:09] audiovisual services law of
[00:02:12] France is a pioneer in guaranteeing audience rights,
[00:02:16] eh, the United States incorporated it,
[00:02:19] then Chile, Argentina, Mexico arrived a little
[00:02:23] late to the issue, but it arrived,
[00:02:26] exact, because as you well said, it was taken advantage of.
[00:02:30] the agreement called Pact for Mexico to
[00:02:34] incorporate in the reform
[00:02:37] eh of the sixth and seventh constitutional
[00:02:40] the different elements or components of the
[00:02:44] media ecosystem eh to regulate the rights not only of the
[00:02:46] concessionaires of the
[00:02:50] media workers, that's right, but of the
[00:02:53] essential subject of communication, the final recipient of
[00:02:57] communication who is the citizen, that's right. audiences who are their
[00:03:01] public there was incorporated a series
[00:03:05] of principles eh of a long
[00:03:08] for him, so that he would be promoted in struggle, it must be said as it is, exact, a long
[00:03:11] social and political struggle of academic institutions,
[00:03:15] social activists, human rights activists, especially
[00:03:19] re-established, communication
[00:03:20] re-filled, as they researchers eh to
[00:03:23] guarantee the right to information, not only that
[00:03:26] is the great umbrella, let's say, which I would say is the great great
[00:03:30] concept in which freedom of information and freedom of
[00:03:34] expression are immersed,
[00:03:37] as constitutional rights that belong to all citizens, that's right,
[00:03:41] because what we have to start from is that freedom of
[00:03:45] expression is a right that belongs to
[00:03:49] of general interest, so citizens, media and
[00:03:52] particularly concessionaires of this country who, in addition to
[00:03:56] believing themselves owners of the radio spectrum eh
[00:04:00] of the nation and therefore believe themselves owners of a part of the
[00:04:04] national territory,
[00:04:07] remember that one of also believe that they are exclusive holders of the exercise of freedom of expression,
[00:04:10] exact, as if it were their property, as if it were a
[00:04:12] privilege only of those who have media,
[00:04:15] that's why the
[00:04:19] chamber, of reform of telecommunications and broadcasting of
[00:04:21] well as promoting the values of 2013 was so important, this debate
[00:04:24] begins there, it must be said clearly because now there is a
[00:04:28] debate not only false,
[00:04:30] but in some cases I have seen a great
[00:04:34] regulatory for lack of memory, a lot of pettiness, obviously because of the great political
[00:04:39] for the great guidelines it had bias with which advanced in the world, that's right, because it's our current political
[00:04:42] moment is permeated from a
[00:04:45] polarization and a confrontation that no longer
[00:04:48] distinguishes merits in the projects or in the proposals
[00:04:51] or in the purposes that's right,
[00:04:54] 2025, it is simply disqualified by who proposes it
[00:04:58] nothing that the 4T government proposes
[00:05:01] seems to some political actors, even
[00:05:04] political actors who are renouncing with this
[00:05:07] stance their own causes and convictions that they supported
[00:05:11] many years ago. rights and and and not only well to the causes that
[00:05:15] they promoted not only as eh subjects of
[00:05:19] rights but as the rights of citizens, exact,
[00:05:22] because that was the most important part that we defended in this debate
[00:05:28] the audiences of the citizens,
[00:05:31] so the reform of
[00:05:35] 2013 had several
[00:05:37] successes, one the constitutional, the
[00:05:40] constitutional. radically the conception of what
[00:05:44] radio and television are, until
[00:05:47] then qualified in different laws and
[00:05:50] legal provisions as an industrial
[00:05:54] activity, almost almost the state regulated a
[00:05:58] commercial activity, an economic activity, the
[00:06:01] constitution considers since
[00:06:05] 2013 broadcasting,
[00:06:08] radio and television and telecommunications as a public service.
[00:06:13] which must guarantee the entire population, it is not the
[00:06:16] same to regulate an activity
[00:06:20] of public interest an industry
[00:06:23] to regulate and guarantee a
[00:06:26] public service of general interest in addition to general interest, therefore
[00:06:30] the constitution incorporated
[00:06:33] eh very important concepts,
[00:06:36] developed in a new section which is
[00:06:39] section b of article six of the Constitution.
[00:06:43] the characteristics and rights that in
[00:06:46] terms of broadcasting and telecommunications
[00:06:49] citizens have as human rights, there
[00:06:53] it is placed as
[00:06:56] a duty of the state, to
[00:06:59] guarantee the rights of the users
[00:07:03] that's right, of the of
[00:07:07] the audiences
[00:07:10] eh in terms of radio. broadcasting
[00:07:13] that's where the bases were laid to
[00:07:17] prohibit misleading advertising, exactly, or
[00:07:20] to present misleading information which is
[00:07:23] advertising and propaganda, but which they present as
[00:07:26] news, that's where it was also
[00:07:30] established the basis to differentiate information from
[00:07:33] opinion, that's where the right of
[00:07:36] reply is guaranteed, because in reality the guidelines are not
[00:07:40] creating any new right,
[00:07:42] in terms of audiences, they take up the constitutional
[00:07:45] bases and they take up the definitions that are in the
[00:07:49] regulatory law, which is the law on telecommunications and
[00:07:53] broadcasting, and what the guidelines do is
[00:07:56] only generate the processes, the
[00:07:59] instruments, the mechanisms to
[00:08:02] be able to exercise those rights that the constitution
[00:08:06] guarantees, even that the constitution obliges the law to
[00:08:09] develop, it is very important if you allow me.
[00:08:13] to read a paragraph, I have here
[00:08:16] this, this constitution so
[00:08:19] solid, very robust, every person
[00:08:22] has the right to free access to plural
[00:08:26] and timely information, as
[00:08:29] well as to seek, receive and disseminate information and ideas
[00:08:32] of all kinds by any means of expression, this
[00:08:35] is, let's say, the cornerstone, that's right, where the
[00:08:39] rights of the audiences are based. But
[00:08:42] then comes, in matters of broadcasting and telecommunications,
[00:08:46] the State shall guarantee the population its
[00:08:49] integration into the information and knowledge society
[00:08:53] through a universal digital inclusion policy with annual and
[00:08:56] six-year goals. Telecommunications are public services
[00:09:01] the State shall guarantee that they are provided under conditions of
[00:09:04] competition, quality,
[00:09:07] plurality, universal coverage, etcetera,
[00:09:10] etcetera. Broadcasting is a public
[00:09:13] service of general interest, section three, so
[00:09:16] the state shall guarantee that it is provided
[00:09:19] under conditions of competition and quality and provides the
[00:09:23] benefits of culture to the entire population, preserving
[00:09:26] plurality and the veracity of
[00:09:30] information, as
[00:09:33] national identity contributing to the purposes
[00:09:37] established in article three of the Constitution.
[00:09:41] Section four, of the B section of article six of the
[00:09:44] Constitution says: The transmission of
[00:09:48] advertising or propaganda presented as
[00:09:51] journalistic or news information is prohibited,
[00:09:55] the conditions that must govern the
[00:09:58] content and the contracting of services for their
[00:10:02] transmission to the public shall be established, including those
[00:10:05] related to the responsibility of the
[00:10:08] concessionaires regarding the information
[00:10:11] transmitted on behalf of third parties. without affecting
[00:10:15] freedom of expression and dissemination. I read
[00:10:19] this and finish by pointing out a
[00:10:22] fact. Section six: the law
[00:10:25] shall establish
[00:10:28] telecommunications users, of audiences as well as the
[00:10:31] mechanisms for their protection, let's see,
[00:10:34] with this we have 13 years in the constitution,
[00:10:37] exactly, but now it turns out to be a
[00:10:40] novel issue, an imposition, now it is
[00:10:44] attributed to President Claudia Sheinbaum and the federal government, that
[00:10:48] they want to impose, they say, how is it possible that now they want to
[00:10:51] impose that information be truthful and timely and
[00:10:56] plural, well that's what the constitution mandates, I want to interrupt you here, yes, what
[00:10:59] parties approved that constitutional reform, well, it was in
[00:11:03] the Pact for Mexico, the telecommunications one practically all
[00:11:06] of us concurred, all of us, PRI, PAN,
[00:11:09] PRD, that I remember,
[00:11:12] Green, yes, eh, the PT, eh, I think that
[00:11:15] all parties supported the constitutional reform on
[00:11:19] telecommunications, then no, then there was no such
[00:11:23] consensus in the secondary. the one of 2014, in the one of
[00:11:27] 2014, the constitutional reform is from 2013, the
[00:11:32] the regulatory law
[00:11:36] eh well some very important things were lost
[00:11:41] the constitutional reform,
[00:11:43] particularly issues of economic competition to
[00:11:47] tackle or
[00:11:49] limit the predominance, the
[00:11:52] preponderance of monopolies in the. issues of both
[00:11:55] telecommunications and broadcasting, but what is
[00:11:59] certain is that great progress was made because there the rights of
[00:12:03] audiences were defined in the law, they were
[00:12:06] disaggregated, let's say, these audience
[00:12:09] rights, they had an
[00:12:11] absolute
[00:12:13] acceptance,
[00:12:15] several of the paragraphs of the
[00:12:19] constitution were transcribed,
[00:12:21] even others were developed in terms of...
[00:12:25] programming, audio quality, image, rights of children's
[00:12:28] audiences, this for the whole issue of the
[00:12:31] protection of children from children's
[00:12:35] programming, eh, in short, the rights of audiences were generated
[00:12:39] in the law, and the truth is
[00:12:42] that eh there was a full consensus
[00:12:46] regarding these rights which are the instruments that
[00:12:49] citizens have to
[00:12:52] also express our freedom. that is, to be able to
[00:12:55] exercise our freedom of expression, our right to information, how do you
[00:12:59] defend yourself eh against, for example, an undue
[00:13:03] or slanderous imputation or a slanderous insinuation, if you
[00:13:07] have no means, well you do it through the right of reply or
[00:13:11] you do it through audience rights enshrined in the
[00:13:14] law, this reform of
[00:13:16] 2014 eh, I must say
[00:13:20] that it was
[00:13:23] generated eh, by a long struggle that
[00:13:27] Mexican society gave in terms of the right to
[00:13:30] information and immediately the
[00:13:33] IFT issued some guidelines
[00:13:36] in 2016 that I must
[00:13:40] recognize some very
[00:13:43] good guidelines, even much broader
[00:13:47] than the secondary law itself, much broader
[00:13:50] than the current ones, for example, even than the secondary law of
[00:13:54] that time.
[00:13:57] that's right, they broke down much more, expanded much more, they had definitions of several
[00:14:01] issues, yes, they took care of children's
[00:14:04] programming issues, I could say eh, in honor of
[00:14:07] the truth that those guidelines eh, were very
[00:14:11] good, very good and can be rescued, well, the
[00:14:14] truth is that now what has been done with
[00:14:17] these guidelines is a system already eh
[00:14:21] hybrid, I will say between between the law and
[00:14:25] self-regulation, exactly, and and it is
[00:14:28] not wrong that it was done this way, because it is necessary to
[00:14:32] the great resolutions that the
[00:14:35] last Supreme Court of Justice of the
[00:14:39] Nation had, the previous one, especially the first
[00:14:44] the first chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation in a presentation by Juan Luis
[00:14:48] González Alcántara Carranca, great
[00:14:50] minister,
[00:14:52] they resolved an amparo. direct that
[00:14:56] reached the
[00:14:58] court
[00:15:00] eh promoted by a civil association against the
[00:15:03] counter-reform of 2016 that eliminated audience rights
[00:15:07] of 2017 of 2017 of 2017, that is, a year after the
[00:15:11] ifetel, if I'm not mistaken, issues these
[00:15:13] guidelines the PAN and
[00:15:17] the PRI begin to promote in
[00:15:19] agreement with the television stations a counter-reform, yes, well, some from
[00:15:23] the PAN, because it turns out that the PAN split again on this
[00:15:27] issue, as when we, as happened with the Televisa law, as happened with the Televisa law, well, in
[00:15:30] fact they called the one of
[00:15:34] 2017 the Televisa-Doring law.
[00:15:38] because Doring presented the initiative, Federico Doring, a great PAN
[00:15:41] militant, eh, who has always been like a transmission belt for the
[00:15:45] interests of the chamber of the radio and television industry, of some of the concessionaires
[00:15:49] in congress, because they are not
[00:15:52] popular representatives, they are business representatives, no,
[00:15:56] and how it also defines the current circumstance of Mexico, no, they have
[00:16:00] always pushed to defend the oligopolistic
[00:16:05] the broadcasting industry. not to defend citizens in their
[00:16:09] audience rights, they removed from the
[00:16:13] law through a reform these
[00:16:15] rights and they curtailed surveillance
[00:16:18] powers of the federal institute of
[00:16:20] telecommunications
[00:16:23] in 2017, so as a result of that counter-reform of
[00:16:26] 2017 that precisely reacted against the
[00:16:30] guidelines of 2016 because this
[00:16:33] counter-reform, in reality the counter-reform reacts to the guidelines.
[00:16:38] Clear, because when they saw the guidelines and and
[00:16:42] they knew that they wouldn't be able to do it otherwise,
[00:16:45] they obviously got the will of Peña to challenge the
[00:16:49] guidelines, it was Peña who challenged them and then
[00:16:53] they said, let's see, eh we're
[00:16:56] going to go to tribunals for a long time, so it's better if we change the law, because
[00:17:00] we have transmission belts in the PAN and in the PRI, they have always
[00:17:03] had them, historically the chamber of the radio
[00:17:06] and television industry has had eh tele-benches,
[00:17:09] tele-bench, deputies or senators, transversal
[00:17:13] to many parties, that's right, even from Morena,
[00:17:16] so there is there in
[00:17:19] 2017 the counter-reform and and
[00:17:22] several associations, well, the AMDA, the AMDA
[00:17:26] today promoted an amparo, a strategic litigation association
[00:17:29] in human rights won that
[00:17:33] extraordinary amparo in the first chamber, yes, it's a great
[00:17:36] amparo. a great presentation by Juan Luis eh, because
[00:17:40] it considers that reform to be a setback
[00:17:43] in terms of freedom of
[00:17:47] expression, of the right to information and
[00:17:50] audience rights as human rights in terms of
[00:17:54] communication, so eh, it is a thesis that
[00:17:58] feeds, so to speak the action
[00:18:02] of unconstitutionality that then decreed the
[00:18:06] general nullity. of that counter-reform, but that
[00:18:10] decree of nullity came from an action of
[00:18:14] unconstitutionality that did not order the
[00:18:17] recovery of the infetel guidelines of 2016, so
[00:18:21] it remained in limbo, in fact that action of unconstitutionality the court
[00:18:25] resolved it in a very
[00:18:28] Salomonian decision eh they
[00:18:32] went for the form, oh okay
[00:18:34] and found flaws in the legislative procedure. and they
[00:18:38] did not want to discuss the merits of the action of
[00:18:41] unconstitutionality, exactly, but as a result of the flaws
[00:18:45] in the legislative process there was a
[00:18:48] general declaration of nullity of the entire reform,
[00:18:51] so the reform was nullified but it was no longer
[00:18:58] say, the articles
[00:19:01] that had been eh extirpated or
[00:19:04] reformed, right? Eh well this is
[00:19:07] the history of this matter, exact, eh, in
[00:19:11] 2025, the
[00:19:13] drainbound presents a
[00:19:16] reform eh to generate a new law on
[00:19:19] telecommunications and
[00:19:21] broadcasting and recovers the rights
[00:19:25] of audiences that were there stored in a drawer, well, nobody
[00:19:29] had mentioned them again, mentioned
[00:19:31] them, eh, it
[00:19:35] must be remembered that in 2025, on the verge of
[00:19:38] extinction, the IFT
[00:19:41] publishes guidelines on audience rights, the last
[00:19:44] IFT, eh, I think they published them on February 5,
[00:19:47] 2025, but well, between
[00:19:51] us,
[00:19:54] eh, those guidelines ended up being made by the chamber of the radio and
[00:19:57] television industry, very different from those that were made back then, very different from the first
[00:20:01] batch, let's say, of 2016, well, the chamber of the radio
[00:20:04] and television industry made them so much that the first
[00:20:08] communiqué that came out on February 5, 2025
[00:20:11] was a congratulation from the SIRT to the IFT
[00:20:16] generated because they didn't touch it with a rose petal,
[00:20:20] no, that is, the schedules, the
[00:20:23] programming, if you changed a program, you would notify in advance, nothing important,
[00:20:27] so they congratulated the reform of
[00:20:32] what it does is recover the rights of
[00:20:35] audiences as they were in the law of
[00:20:39] 2014 with their same
[00:20:42] definitions, with the same assumptions,
[00:20:45] yes, but it strengthens
[00:20:49] two very important
[00:20:52] issues. ethics codes and audience defender, exactly,
[00:20:56] which in the law the audience ombudsman remained as
[00:21:00] a decorative figure, without greater possibilities, but
[00:21:03] also the entire radio and television industry could
[00:21:07] have only one audience defender for all
[00:21:11] the radio and television concessions, more than
[00:21:14] 3 concessions with a single defender, all those affiliated with the chamber of the
[00:21:18] radio and television industry were satisfied with a single audience
[00:21:21] defender, no well, it was a mockery, a
[00:21:24] mockery, so all that is corrected,
[00:21:27] the obligation is made that for each
[00:21:30] eh concessionaire each broadcaster
[00:21:34] is appointed an audience
[00:21:37] defender and an
[00:21:40] agreement, a consensus, is generated, here we explain the contents of the
[00:21:44] opinion, I remember it was an interview that we did here, we did a
[00:21:47] very long interview where we made known everything that had been achieved
[00:21:50] eh, because it was improved a lot and in telecommunications
[00:21:54] there were also advances, well, the rights of users in telecommunications
[00:21:58] are registered, another big issue that is still
[00:22:01] another issue, now then
[00:22:05] have today is a false discussion, it is a
[00:22:08] debate with many lies, with many exaggerations,
[00:22:12] with many distortions, accusing of
[00:22:14] censorship what has been in the constitution since
[00:22:18] 2013, what many of us promoted in
[00:22:21] 2014, several even of those who are now criticizing
[00:22:24] writing against it, well, they are doing it with a
[00:22:27] lack of honesty,
[00:22:31] of of I say they have fallen
[00:22:35] into such a regrettable
[00:22:37] circumstance, because political bias
[00:22:41] is overcoming them and I say sometimes
[00:22:44] the sick hatred of the 4T
[00:22:48] eh they are no longer capable of recognizing themselves even in their own
[00:22:52] battles and and this is a political issue for them, it
[00:22:56] is an issue of disqualification at all costs to
[00:22:59] try to generate the idea that the president of the republic wants to
[00:23:03] censor, that she wants to say what is true, what is not true, because
[00:23:06] let's see, eh the
[00:23:09] guidelines,
[00:23:12] let's say it as it is, these are very strawberry, they are very
[00:23:16] light, they are very light, uh-huh, these are very strawberry, excuse
[00:23:19] me, Ms. Norma, this,
[00:23:23] but if you compare them with those of
[00:23:26] 2016, with those of 2016, forget it, let's
[00:23:30] see, just now before going to the break, because I think it's
[00:23:34] worth highlighting this, the
[00:23:37] big debate was differentiation
[00:23:41] between information and advertising, because we came
[00:23:44] from the Peña Nieto phenomenon, from the phenomenon of the construction
[00:23:48] of a candidate and a... president who had
[00:23:51] allocated tons of public money so that
[00:23:55] paid interviews would be done
[00:23:58] telenovelas, in entertainment programs,
[00:24:00] and the congress had to
[00:24:04] admit that that had to be corrected, no, well,
[00:24:08] it was corrected a long time ago, before
[00:24:11] before
[00:24:15] 2013, there was the great reform that
[00:24:18] prohibited the contracting of private
[00:24:22] advertising, the purchase by parties, candidate electoral
[00:24:25] reform, a very important political
[00:24:28] unification and and above all the sale of
[00:24:32] interviews and all that phenomenon, the marketing of
[00:24:35] marketing, eh, of electoral campaigns and
[00:24:39] advertising and everything, right? Yes, and then how
[00:24:42] they presented eh reports as if
[00:24:45] it were really newsworthy information when in reality, well,
[00:24:49] they were eh paid, later it was discovered in many
[00:24:52] investigations that were done how the complete packages were sold,
[00:24:55] that's why the
[00:24:56] constitution
[00:24:59] established in fraction four of article five,
[00:25:02] section b, the broadcast of
[00:25:06] advertising or propaganda presented as journalistic or
[00:25:10] news information is prohibited, is since 2013,
[00:25:14] oh, but they say that the drainbound invented it two weeks ago
[00:25:17] because it wants to say eh it wants
[00:25:20] to determine who tells the truth and who doesn't tell the truth,
[00:25:24] we all know that this has
[00:25:28] about preventing the public from being
[00:25:31] deceived, from being tricked, but
[00:25:34] furthermore, this is more important than other
[00:25:37] considerations, radio and
[00:25:41] television are public services
[00:25:44] granted by the
[00:25:46] state, these guidelines are only
[00:25:50] going to apply to open radio and
[00:25:53] television, to pay radio and television or
[00:25:57] as it is called restricted by satellite cable
[00:26:00] to programmers
[00:26:03] who use a
[00:26:06] concessioned medium to transmit independent national
[00:26:09] production, exactly, these are the universe
[00:26:13] nothing more, and why only them? Well, because
[00:26:17] they are concessionaires of a good that belongs to
[00:26:20] all of us, which is in the public domain of the nation, which is
[00:26:23] the radioelectric spectrum and before which the state can
[00:26:26] impose the conditions,
[00:26:29] limitations and guarantees.
[00:26:32] to ensure fundamental rights, human rights,
[00:26:36] of course, what worries them the most? Look, they are
[00:26:40] not so worried about
[00:26:42] distinguishing opinion from information, because the
[00:26:46] guidelines do not even oblige that in every
[00:26:49] comment a television host, it would be
[00:26:53] impractical and against all forms of programmatic
[00:26:56] continuity on television, to be saying now I'm going with my
[00:26:59] opinion, no, what the guidelines say is that before and at the end of
[00:27:03] that program, the public is warned
[00:27:06] that in that program the host
[00:27:10] transmits indistinctly news and personal comments
[00:27:14] so that they are aware, so that they
[00:27:18] know that television hosts
[00:27:23] private television and on public television with Maru Campos's interviews, well,
[00:27:27] there are things to have a recent example, the only thing, look,
[00:27:30] the P for Paid. You see that the guidelines come from the
[00:27:34] first guidelines, oh, from 2016, from the first
[00:27:37] guidelines, well, but there is a lot of
[00:27:39] hypocrisy, and there is a lot,
[00:27:43] there is a lot of pettiness, many of them who are
[00:27:47] talking about censorship and all that, they know where
[00:27:51] all these things come from, the story that comes behind, they also
[00:27:54] intervened, many of
[00:28:53] We return to public versions, we are talking with Senator Javier
[00:28:56] Corral, this process of debate and
[00:29:00] discussion about audience rights.
[00:29:03] We have already documented the history, the history that
[00:29:06] comes from a long time ago, but the most recent one is from
[00:29:10] 2013 until now, and there is an
[00:29:13] episode that Senator Javier Corral mentioned, which is
[00:29:17] the 2025 reform already
[00:29:20] in the current six-year term, it is a
[00:29:22] reform of radio broadcasting and
[00:29:25] telecommunications that also
[00:29:28] advances on many topics that were pending,
[00:29:32] that is, with all the topics that remained pending, let's say
[00:29:34] from Peña Nieto's six-year term,
[00:29:38] no, and that remained frozen, so to
[00:29:41] speak, during López Obrador's government, they remained frozen
[00:29:45] with López Obrador, exactly, what was the 2025
[00:29:48] reform? This was a reform, first, to
[00:29:52] adapt and adjust the new legal
[00:29:56] reality of the regulatory body, by disappearing the
[00:29:59] autonomy of the Federal Institute of
[00:30:02] Telecommunications in the constitution and
[00:30:05] considering it a decentralized body
[00:30:09] of the federal executive branch assigned to the Ministry of
[00:30:12] Innovation, yes, and Digital Agency Development, digital
[00:30:16] agency, eh that adaptation had to be made,
[00:30:20] but the President of the Republic took advantage to
[00:30:24] make a reinforcement and
[00:30:28] a strengthening of several topics particularly without touching the
[00:30:30] constitution. constitution, the
[00:30:33] reform was already
[00:30:37] the reform that had been made in
[00:30:39] 2024 to create the
[00:30:42] IFT as a decentralized body, I have to
[00:30:46] remember for
[00:30:50] intellectual and
[00:30:52] legislative honesty that I voted against the
[00:30:56] disappearance of the IFTL's autonomy, exactly, I voted against it.