The legacy of 2006 is not only a deepening of the major political divisions, but the incentive to win the 2012 via the creation of a "moral panic"
Wounds and scars in themselves and under normal conditions, two TV commercials can not divide a society. However, in terms of confrontation, media distortion and institutional weakness, its effects can be devastating and Mexico is a perfect example.
policy in memory of individuals and communities, past grievances always leave scars, it is inevitable and is part of the learning process. These scars, for example, that caused the Mexican collective memory of war with the United States are part of their history, their personality and, sometimes, even his pride or shame but do not prevent normal development. However, when the grievance is still open wound, then it is an obstacle to normal and constructive coexistence. That is still the case of the 2006 electoral process in Mexico. For the Mexican left, or simply for those who really are considered committed to the principles and objectives political democracy, it will require years more to make this wound, the way they conducted the election campaign and the way they processed the election, a mere scar. In any event, the event and its consequences will be registered in the historical memory of our political process similar to what happened in 1988 in the case of Cuauhtemoc Cardenas in Miguel Henriquez in 1952, John Andrew Almazan in 1940 or events of 1961 and 1991 potosinos about democracy movement led by Dr. Salvador Nava.
history as a judge
Sometimes the passage of time becomes traumatic times stories that are reinforced in their view. In other cases, trials are contradictory, making the fight was continuing. I posted about the events of 1968 is an example of the former, and produced as a result of the Zapatista uprising of 1994 it is the latter.
smoke and dust that caused the electoral shock of 2006 still does not sit at all but what happened then and is reflected in the written page. For example, the book by Luis Carlos Ugalde, so I lived, is an attempt to justify what happened in 2006. In contrast, 2006: speak the record: the weaknesses of the Mexican electoral authority is the investigation of Jose Antonio Crespo on the results settled in the electoral records of the day of that year, only documents accessible to the public but that indirectly bring us closer to what could be the actual outcome of the election. In this work, Crespo contradicts Ugalde without support or position of the winner, Felipe Calderón, nor the main loser, Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) - only shows that the available data, the record-it is impossible know who won and who lost at the polls. This year
appear just another job, Javier Treviño Rangel, which elaborates on the analysis of 2006 by other means: the consequences of the test and the type of campaign that was conducted time and whose central feature was the creation, through the use of television, an atmosphere of fear at the possibility that, as indicated by the bulk of public opinion polls, left the option triumph led by AMLO. The work is entitled "Moral panic in the election campaigns of 2006: the development of the" danger to Mexico, '"International Forum (No. 197, Vol XLIX, 2009 [3], pp. 638-689).
The starting point is clear: Vicente Fox as a candidate could take the Guanajuato airport, threatening not to concede it was less than 10 percent, require Ernesto Zedillo to intervene in the election campaign, calling his opponent "Squat" or "mandilón" and the whole PRI "tepocatas" or "snakes prietas" and threatening a PAN mobilization if the electoral bodies ascribed to his opponent a victory by a margin less than 3 percent. This position was not a scandal. In contrast, when AMLO called "chachalaca" Fox and demanded not to be active in the electoral struggle, he came and the sky above him as a "danger to Mexico." Why such different standards of the electorate to similar political attitudes?
'moral panic'
The concept of moral panic (PM) is the instrument that Treviño Rangel used to explain the successful construction AMLO as a "danger to Mexico." The concept was proposed by Stanley Cohen and employed to understand why certain types of rock musicians unfounded fear generated in the most conservative sectors of British society in 1960.
The PM, says Treviño, "emerge in societies where one episode, person or group is defined as a threat to certain values \u200b\u200bor interests. Assume an irrational fear out of control [and] its nature is presented through media stereotyped way. Politicians, journalists or other stakeholders (bishops or entrepreneurs) start a moral crusade, a display of social control mechanisms to stop the threat. Experts socially accredited (editors and academics) emit different diagnoses and solutions. Subsequently, the panic disappears, giving way to other issues ... "(pp. 644-645). As you see, today it's PM is associated with the activities of mass media, especially television, source of knowledge political more than 60 percent of the population.
As the indicators show-opinion polls, cited by Treviño, from 2000 until March 2006, AMLO was ahead in the fight to happen to Fox in the presidency. But , between 12 and 18 of that month, and nothing had changed but manipulating goal very well be called "chachalaca" AMLO had used against Fox to demand to cease the illegal use of the presidency for partisan purposes, the calderonistas created a very effective MP who eventually reduce or negate the advantage of AMLO.
The MP 2006 is mounted on preconceived ideas very conservative, especially among the middle class, and reactivated with a couple of TV spots (the bricks falling and that linked AMLO with Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan president previously demonized) regardless of whether the allegations contained in those messages were not backed up with some kind of empirical support. About
manufactured and presented against AMLO spots three things they knew well studies the matter had already shown: a) the negative information is more salient than the positive, b) the withholding of negative events is greater than the positive c) the effect of negative campaigning is kept longer in the public. These same studies have also shown that "he who hits first hits twice, ie, the available evidence shows that in any election, the first negative commercials are the most influential and, indeed, who first attacked by this approach makes the following agenda. The response of the attack may be similar but no longer has the same effect on the collective imagination. This irreversible effect of the initial negative means that if electoral authority, the IFE in our case, decides to force the attacker to withdraw their spots, that decision has no significance, since the initial effect, which has since operated.
The effects of the campaign of fear around AMLO were magnified by a premeditated use of television news, where the framework for electoral information presented had been established by the premises and effects of negative campaigning. It was problem-de AMLO accused to prove he was innocent, that was not the monster that he had become, and that it was impossible. Effects
future
The PAN campaign made good use of the conservative nature Mexican society and the large sediment left by the Cold War. PAN remained in power "haiga been like haiga been." However, this peculiar way to reverse what seemed a victory for the left hit the fragile Mexican democracy, not strengthened the weak.
is certain that the campaign of 2012 will build on the lessons that we all left six years earlier. No attempt afford to expect to win "for the good." Since there are the incentive to create other "moral panics." Everything suggests that within three years, thanks to inheritance PAN can win again not the best to dry but the best "Apan" of Mexicans.
0 comments:
Post a Comment