Defending audience rights does not equal censorship: Monreal; proposal puts the citizen at the center

Ricardo Monreal Ávila, coordinator of Morena in the Chamber of Deputies, has defended the government’s proposed guidelines for protecting audience rights, stating they do not equate to censorship or state control over media. In an interview during a discussion hosted by El Universal, he emphasized that these measures are not new and have been recognized since 2013 under Article 6 of the Mexican Constitution. The current initiative aims to strengthen these rights, placing citizens at the center of their relationship with media organizations. Monreal rejected claims that the guidelines pose a risk to freedom of expression, asserting that such concerns stem from misinterpretations. He pointed out that the right to audience rights has evolved through several legal reforms. These include the incorporation of the right into the constitution in 2013, its detailed regulation in 2014, modifications in 2017, and the Supreme Court’s rejection of that reform in 2022. Finally, in 2025, a new law on telecommunications and dissemination was approved following an initiative by President Claudia Sheinbaum. This law, according to Monreal, strengthens existing audience rights rather than introducing new restrictions. The coordinator of the Political Coordination Board (Jucopo) further clarified that defending audience rights does not mean supporting censorship. He stressed that no administrative guideline can override the Constitution, and that mechanisms such as habeas corpus or actions for unconstitutionality remain available should there be any regulatory excess. He also dismissed opposition proposals aimed at regulating the morning briefings, which he described as a constitutional right of the executive to communicate public policies and a legitimate tool against misinformation. When asked whether voices claiming the guidelines could threaten free speech were justified, Monreal responded firmly that such views are incorrect. He argued that the initiative represents progress that must be defended responsibly while respecting freedom of expression, press, and opinion. According to him, the goal is to recognize the rights of information recipients, not to censor those who produce or disseminate it. Mexico, he said, requires independent, critical, and free media, alongside an informed citizenry with clearly defined rights and mechanisms to exercise them. Monreal also noted that the consultation process has received significant participation. As of August 10, he stated that 2,047 comments had been registered from 1,942 individual participants. This level of engagement, he added, underscores the importance of the issue and calls upon academics, telecommunications experts, concessionaires, journalists, columnists, civil society organizations, and the general public to contribute their insights during the remaining days of the consultation period. The debate surrounding the guidelines reflects broader tensions between ensuring media independence and safeguarding the rights of the public to receive accurate information. While some critics argue that the guidelines could lead to increased governmental oversight, supporters maintain that they merely reinforce constitutional protections already in place. With the consultation ongoing, the final outcome will likely shape how these rights are balanced in practice, influencing both media operations and public discourse in Mexico.