This is a clear example of a person who watches 6-7-8 and likes to believe everything the government says.
I do, I like variety too, I watch TVR, hear Victor Hugo and plenty of others a bit more objective than the 6-7-8 hellbent fans.
The problem with people like this is that they have polarized opinions. Either you agree 100% with the government or you agree 100% with Clarin. There's no middle point. This government puts itself in a "trendy" position. It's "cool" to think like the government does. So if you don't think like the government tells you, you aren't cool. You are a loser. These people just can't seem to find a middle ground, and like to adorn their speech with adjectives, like "dictatiorial".
On the 70's we were under a dictatorship, it's the proper word to use, with all the human rights violations that are associated with it, and you call that adorning. And what's a polarized opinion? And where's the "middle point" in the opposition to this government? Looks like you're projecting yourself there.
Now tell me where in all of the Clarin controlled media has the government ever said how the people should think. Let's be factual and honest, this government (unlike others) has had fewer decrees (laws passed directly by the president without senate vote) than any previous ones, every single thing this government has done was done abiding by the democratic process of presenting projects to the senate and getting them voted. Even with a majority of opposition on the senate all these projects got reviewed, worked on, voted, and made law (except for the first time in history that the state's budget was not approved). So, when Clarin shows interviews with people like Elisa Carrio that shout out loud that this government is a dictatorship, and when the interviewer agrees with it, trying to make the audience buy that crap, you do buy it too? I wonder how many do this.
It's a fine example of how the government-controlled media apparatus works. They even see the media's "fourth power" status as something bad! Who watches the watchmen?
I'll be called Marxist but the power should not be on enterprises that care nothing but just about money. It should be on the people's hand, for that the media (look up journalism on a dictionary) has to be objective and impartial and be of varied, different opinions, not 100% opposing all the time, neither 100% pro-government. The world right now is showing how that fine neo-liberal model has worked so far.
They applaud the new "media law" which wants to split up nation-wide channels, under the premise of "democratization". The government's main selling point about the old media law was that it was, first, old, but second and most important: "WAS WRITTEN BY THE MILITARY DICTATORSHIP!!!!!oMGOMGOMGMGO THE MILITARY ARE CONTROLLING OUR MEDIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA".
Did you read the law in it's entirety? Here's what Fox News said about it. And here's another view. The law does nothing to nation-wide channels. It does so to the "content providers" so to speak. If you distribute content you should not own that content too (but the law grants a few channels for each provider anyway). Anyone with 1/8th of a brain would know that a provider that cannot own all the channels it distributes would be hellbent on having as many channels as possible, which would include a huge lot of local content, plus the already established nation-wide channels and others outside, just to be competitive of other media providers. Competition between providers also ends up being a plus, you get the freedom of choice for your provider based on their benefits, you are no longer locked into "the only provider in my area" anymore (which is the rule in the countryside). Clarin is hellbent on defending this lock of the media production and distribution, which is shown on their every opinion TV program and every newspapers page.
They don't realize (or do, but like to deny it) it's just a divide-and-conquer strategy. When every newspaper, radio, and TV station is local, then economy of scale makes it impossible to stay in business, without resorting to government sponsorship. Once they start playing advertisements paid by the government, they lose their "free speech"... they can still say what they want, under the risk of losing government support. Anyone with 1/8th of a brain can listen to that clown Mariotto for 30 seconds and realize why this law is a TERRIBLE idea. That, and the fact that supporters of this law (http://www.leydemedios.com.ar/), are just stupid government sockpuppets. If you are minimally serious about this, you can't make a list (see right there at the bottom) of "EVIL" people who are "against" the law, and "COOL" people who are WITH it.
Ha, that is a blog. I hope everyone knows how to "take" the content of a blog and, by the way, the "reputation" of the "cool/evil people" list is what that list is trying to show, nothing more. Regarding "economy of scale", do you have any idea what it takes to sustain a local TV station? Do you know how much a local TV station has to "pay" to be included in cable distribution, which is controlled by Clarin, to gain audience and make a profit?, Do you know how much a content provider, that cannot create content, and by law has to air a certain amount of local content would contribute to local TV stations so that they can sustain their content? These details don't seem to be discussed anywhere other than Clarin controlled opinionists, and you wont hear anything from the major TV experts because they are tied in with the current media distribution lock, once it's lifted, and Clarin's hold gets released, it's gonna take time, but we'll be able to watch whatever we want wherever we want whenever we want, including air TV distributors using ISDB-T (an excellent format supported by Japan and Brazil, also made standard by this government.)
The fact that the congress had to make a separate calculation for inflation rates because the government institute that calculates it is oh-god-so-infected by government supporters (the government even fines private companies that make their own inflation measurements).
The government cannot fire a private company that they did not hire. These private companies that you mention use names like University of Buenos Aires (UBA) to give weight to their "calculations", only to later have said University call them out for their lie, and then they suddenly disappear. But yeah, we agree, the INDEC is a shitty leftover joke that should die and made anew with proper analysts.
The government claims that there is NO inflation and you can buy more with the same amount of money now, than in 2007. I have a business, I can go back to 2007 invoices and prove to you that things costed almost half back then.
First, there was no such claim. Like the business owner next door, you keep consuming what Clarin sells. When the government speaks of specific inflation on specific areas, it's taken out of context and applied to a "global inflation". Even 6-7-8 admits and complains about the inflation, but they point fingers to the specific culprits, they don't blame the whole economy system for it. Now when you start to rationalize the inflation, where does it comes from? The dollar has been fluctuating never past 4.15, the only thing that has been going up steadily is fuel, and whose fault is that?