With a variety of actors operating on various fronts and a contradictory political scene (particularly in the area of communications, which is in a state of near schizophrenia), the struggle for the democratization of communication in Brazil faces difficult challenges. Although it is possible to have the impression - at a quick glance or from comparisons with countries in a similar situation - that we have favourable conditions for the struggle for the right to communicate, the fact is that our country is still a long way from having a substantial, well-organized communication movement.

Undoubtedly, communication has never been debated more than it currently is in Brazil. However, it is not a favorable scenario for those struggling for the right to communicate. This is summed up by the following factors:

1) The absence of policies and regulations for communication: the legal and institutional landscape with regard to the defence of the right to communicate in Brazil is a complete wreck. There is no up-to-date broadcast legislation (the present one dates back to 1962), no restrictions on media cross-ownership, no public communication system, community radios are repressed on a daily basis (they shut down more radios than they authorize) and the private sector dictates its own rules. In addition, no policy exists to provide incentives for plurality and diversity in the media. Within this context and without even 20^th century regulations, Brazil needs to establish 21^st century regulations that consider the new environment of technological and corporate convergence.

2) Governmental schizophrenia: from the moment that Lula became President of the Republic, but particularly since Hélio Costa became the Minister of Communications, communication policies have been schizophrenic. While Costa’s Ministry follows a conservative line in cooperation with the interests of broadcasters, other governmental bodies, such as Gilberto Gil’s Ministry of Culture and “Radiobrás,” presided over until early 2007 by Eugênio Bucci, are trying to implement democratic policies. Even so, until the end of his term, the ball-play has remained in the camp of the Ministry of Communications and the broadcasters.

3) The attacks by the conservative mass media: from the perspective of content, the mass media that opposed Lula’s government during the elections continue operating with the aim of implementing their own political agenda, affirming their role as a great political party that organizes the right-wing agenda. Their recent priorities include, among other things: support for relaxed labor rights; defending cutbacks in public expenditures and reforms to social security benefits; in addition to constant opposition to rural movements (aggravated by the recent attack against the “quilombolas”[i]). Lately, reactionary responses in the area of communications have been emphasized as part of a campaign against community radio stations and against Venezuela’s refusal to renew RCTV’s broadcast license.

4) Isolation of the issues: communication movements have not managed to make their democratic agenda a struggle involving all social movements. As we will see further along, this is an outcome of several elements, within which are the diffuse nature of the communication movements themselves and the absence of consolidated rights that would allow them to promote a single agenda.

The current situation

The schizophrenic nature of Lula’s government in the area of communications has resulted in a reorganisation of the movement and shared initiatives. However, it has also faced an equally fortified conservative resistance. In this context, it is important to identify the various initiatives and to relate them with the stated challenges and critical junctures in order to be able to comprehend the current agenda of social movements in the area of communication.

The historical role played by the National Forum for the Democratization of Communication (FNDC) is a fundamental reference point, although in recent years the forum has not demonstrated the same capacity to mobilize people as in earlier periods. Made up in large part by unions and other representative organizations, the Forum relies on the strength of these sectors to advance its struggles and is encountering the same issue of demobilization that is affecting other movements with a similar base. In addition, even by broadening its reach, the FNDC did not encompass the full diversity of those who are active in the area of the democratization of communication. In recent years, the central focus of the forum has been the move to digital technology, and by the end of 2006 it set its sights on the organization of a National Communications Conference[ii] as its main objective for 2007.

From the beginning of the decade, other movements have gained strength which are mobilizing activists in the struggle for the right to communicate. In this area, Intervozes stands out – the Brazilian Collective for Social Communication – which brings together activists from 14 of 27 Brazilian states and from local groups such as the “Comunicativistas” in Rio de Janeiro and “Fopecom” in Pernambuco. These groups identify themselves as having reclaimed the right to communicate as a slogan, with the idea that communication is not only for experts. Accordingly, they struggle to make social appropriation of communication viable. Even without "grassroots representation," they are important actors in this area, bringing together the ability to formulate proposals and to mobilize.

As well, program monitoring and public control of mass media have been strengthened, particularly with regard to denouncing systematic violations of human rights in the media. The main initiative in this area is the Campaign for Ethical Television, which involves the Human Rights and Minorities Commission from the House of Representatives, as well as civil society organizations such as the Federal Psychology Council. The campaign, known as "Financing lax standards is an affront to citizens," tabulates a monthly ranking based upon complaints received, and strives to work directly with program advertisers, trying to convince them not to fund programs with lax standards or that violate human rights.  Although the campaign has lost some of its strength without the re-election of Orlando Fantazzini (the representative who founded the campaign and a member of the Human Rights Commission), the campaign continues to play an important role.

The community radio movement, on the other hand, is very scattered, with several organisations representing a range of viewpoints and with difficulties in cooperating. The principal organisation is the Brazilian Association of Community Radio Broadcasting (Abraço).  Its main struggle continues to be the fight against repression, which during Lula’s government has not diminished as would have been expected. Rather the number of community radio stations being shut down has only increased. They are also looking for ways to sustain themselves and to survive given Brazil’s extremely restrictive law which prohibits commercial advertisements and foments a fratricidal conflict between stations, by setting a limit of only one community radio station in each locality.  The biggest challenge for this sector is to establish a strategic agenda for their struggle within a context of ongoing attacks by the Federal Police and the National Telecommunications Agency (Anatel), as well as of the differing interests that coexist among the stations.

In addition to these initiatives, others have emerged in the struggle for the democratization of communication as a result of technological convergence, which is generating new realities and also new demands. In this regard, there are organisations working for digital inclusion, such as the Network of Information for the Third Sector (RITS), cultural organisations such as the Brazilian Cinema Congress and the Brazilian Association of Independent Directors, and organisations working on intellectual property such as the Social Technology Centre of the Getúlio Vargas Foundation which represents the Creative Commons in Brazil.  In addition, collectives with autonomous initiatives have also mushroomed, such as the Independent Media Centre which is dedicated to collaborative and shared production, as well as other small groups sharing the same philosophy but concerned about other issues.

The challenges of social convergence

In recent years, the process of implementing digital television in Brazil has made the emergence of convergent initiatives possible.  From the moment in which this topic became a central theme in the government’s agenda, the Front for a Democratic Digital Radio and Television System was formed, which brought together more than a hundred groups, including practically all of those involved in the area of communication. The Front was able to bring about a public debate concerning the issue, ensuring that it was not limited to questions of technology.  In spite of this however, one of the Front’s particular strengths was the participation of technology-oriented organizations, such as the Inter-State Federation of Telecommunications Workers (FITTEL). This enabled the front to take on a technical battle on a par with the radiobroadcasters.  Following publication of the Decree adopting the Japanese model, the Front lost strength due to the absence of a longer-term and broader-based strategy.

Still, independent of the gradual weakening of the issue of digitalization, in recent months several efforts have been made to keep organisations together and to continue cooperating. Beginning in 2007, the issues of a public radio broadcasting system and National Communications Conference have been gaining strength, which have been demands of the movement for a long time.  In both cases, diverse groups have managed to work together, defining common agendas and action strategies.  However, it is clear that these initiatives have gained a new lease of life because the Executive Government (with regard to the public system) or the Legislature (in the case of the Conference) have taken up the fight and backed State initiatives in this regard. Without allies in government with similar views, it remains very difficult for the communication movement to fully establish a constructive agenda.

On the other hand, the involvement of peoples\' movements in the area of communication is still tenuous.  Although the stronger movements (particularly the MST – the Landless Workers\' Movement) have dedicated several efforts toward establishing their own media, they still do not give sufficient weight to the struggle for democratic policies.

In the upcoming period, the Brazilian Communication Movement needs to define an agenda that includes issues such as the need for new communication regulations – that takes into consideration the lost agenda from the 20^th Century and the new agenda of convergence in the 21^st Century; protection and incentives for community media; implementation of a public television and radio broadcasting system; digitalization (especially with regard to radio on the open airwaves); democratization of the broadcast licensing and license renewals process; ensuring space for people\'s participation in the definition of public policies (such as a National Communications Conference); program classification; in addition to issues such as digital inclusion and extension of intellectual property rights.

- João Brant is a member of “Intervozes,” the Brazilian Collective for Social Communication Group, with studies in Radio and Television at the University of São Paulo, and with a Masters in Communication Regulations and Policies from the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE).

- Translation by ALAI of an abbreviated version of the article written for ALAI\'s publication América Latina en Movimiento, No. 421, June 2007.  http://alainet.org/publica/421.html