Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Indigenous radio stations in México have proved to be contested territory. México hosts the largest Indigenous population in Latin America. Close to 11 million people do not have Spanish as their native language, share little—culturally, economically, and socially—with other Mexicans, and for almost 5 centuries have been persecuted and marginalized. In the 19th and 20th centuries, official history books glorified their archaeological past and their fierce resistance to 16th-century Spanish conquerors, but simultaneously the close to 60 Indigenous peoples constituted a nuisance to the Mexican state's modernization project.

From the state's perspective, Indigenous peoples had to undergo castellanización (Castilianization—i.e., they had to abandon their languages and adopt Spanish). Since the 1960s, to achieve castel-lanización, the federal government had tried to create radio stations in remote Indigenous regions. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, this project became a contradictory reality: The stations were to teach Spanish and modernize Indigenous peoples, but also to fight poverty, encourage grassroots participation, promote Indigenous traditions, and, paradoxically, defend Indigenous cultures.

However, the mostly Indigenous staff concentrated on the latter goals, and castellanización soon disappeared from everyday practices and explicit station objectives. The stations soon became multipurpose: The state used them to increase its presence in Indigenous areas, but Indigenous audiences and radio workers seized the airwaves with different agendas that sometimes coexisted, but often clashed, with official goals. Even though these stations belonged to the government, and sometimes acted accordingly, their programming and daily operations also constituted an example of the public appropriating media.

The Negotiation of Rule

México constitutes an unusual case in the history of alternative communication and grassroots organizations. Throughout most of the 20th century, an authoritarian party managed to control the three branches of government and the media, and attempted to co-opt social movements too. The hegemonic hand of the one-party system, led by the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI; Institutional Revolutionary Party), was everywhere, in unions, farmers' organizations, and Indigenous movements.

Occasionally, the state relied on the use of force to repress dissident movements. In the late 1950s, for instance, the police jailed thousands of railroad unionists who had challenged the official union. Ten years later, in 1968, a student rally in Tlatelolco was crushed in a massacre that left several hundred demonstrators dead. Meanwhile, the mainstream media reported a kinder, happier, pro-PRI reality. Broadcasting in México was almost exclusively private but not independent. On one occasion, Emilio Azcárraga, then owner of the TV monopoly Televisa and one of the wealthiest businessmen in México, defined himself as a “PRI soldier.” The press, also private, was controlled through bribery, direct censorship, and state control over newsprint supply.

In spite of all this, however, a more complex reality hid beneath daily Mexican society. Everyday life showed that power and rule were not always in the hands of the state, the government, or the PRI. Rather, governance was attained through a complex negotiation. Thus, when the state created Indigenous-language radio stations, what was meant as a preemptive strike against independent Indigenous community media became a space of resistance, a school for social and media activists, and a role model for future, alternative media.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading