Conflict between Kirchnerism and the media
The Clarín Group, led by CEO Héctor Magnetto, strongly supported the sector,[3] and their newspapers published articles that were considered favorable to the "ruralists" or chacareros.
[4] At least one writer who worked for one of the conglomerate's dailies (Enrique Lacolla of La Voz del Interior) was dismissed for submitting an op ed opposing the landowners' lockout of April 2008.
[8] The television broadcasting rights for all Argentine football[N 1] league matches had been held by the Clarín Group cable channel TyC Sports since 1992.
The Supreme Court ruled against one of those appeals,[14] declaring that it created a precedent where "a single legislator could not challenge an act of Congress,[N 2] nor judges use their authority to stop the application of an entire law.
A majority of journalist respondents in a 2011 Argentine Journalism Forum (FOPEA) survey considered the new law a partial or even substantial progress compared to the previous one.
[24] Cablevisión later disregarded a February 2011 order by the Federal Audioviual Services Authority that the INCAA, CN23, and TeleSUR networks be included in its lineup; children's programming channel Pakapaka was likewise excluded, but was added in May as part of the "premium plan.
[29][30] Shortly afterward Isidoro Graiver denied the charges, stating that the sale of the company took place while his brothers were free, and that their detention was not related to Papel Prensa but with their link to the Montoneros guerrilla group.
[34] Michael Soltys, editor of the Buenos Aires Herald newspaper declared: "Papel Prensa is an anachronistic holdover from the military dictatorship which should not continue any further into the 21st century; but not this way.
Another source of contention between the government and its private partners in Papel Prensa is that production at the firm's San Pedro facility has been well below capacity and declining, leading to increasing imports of a staple considered one of national interest.
[38] More controversy arose in September 2010 when the Government's Secretary of Communications office published a list of 389 Internet providers that could potentially replace Fibertel.
[39] Judge Ernesto Marinelli of the First National Court on Federal Administration Contentions was initially chosen to preside over the case, but declared himself in a "conflict of interest" because he was a Fibertel user.
Pino Solanas of the Proyecto Sur Party, for example, proposed that the country should have a new law to deregulate and promote all the communication services instead of regulating a single company.
[42] Criticism of the Argentine government included an editorial by Mary Anastasia O'Grady from The Wall Street Journal who said that Kirchnerism is "cracking down on the free press.
"[43] Editorial comment from Spain's El País was of the opinion that Kirchnerism is "using methods similar to those of dictatorships to keep its power" by revisiting the Papel Prensa case.
[44] Other voices echoed a different view, including editorial comments in El Tiempo from Colombia, declaring: "The government maintains that the company sells the paper to small newspapers at higher prices than those who buy Clarín and La Nación and considered these actions go against freedom of expression.
"[46] In August 2010, U.S. Department of State Deputy Spokesman Mark Toner declared that the Barack Obama administration is closely following the controversy and that concerns about press freedom are taken seriously.
