The world moves forward, and Argentina seems determined to discuss the same things, like a repeated black and white loop.
Among these discussions is what to do with the public media, that is, the Télam news agency (a news agency has been a concept in crisis in itself for years, with various platforms that better distribute the latest news), Public Television and National Radio.
With minimal impact on the economy,
the possible privatization acquires a symbolic value
, which is seen in the interest in the topic.
The news about what will happen to these media outlets are, these days, some of the most read according to digital audience metrics.
It is not risky to conclude that one of the reasons for this interest is linked to the role of the public media and its figures during Kirchnerism.
With Public TV at the helm, they became platforms to glorify the ruling party, while, with panelists earning million-dollar salaries,
they insulted and humiliated journalists and opponents.
Public TV concentrated, then,
the worst of Kirchnerism: its totalitarian pretensions and corruption.
Perhaps for that reason, the news about the disengaged figures and the terminated contracts provoke massive reading, driven by a feeling of revenge on the part of those who helplessly witnessed so many years of media abuses.
Thus, Milei proposed privatization, today more of an intention than an immediate path.
Its progress is tied to the fate of the law discussed in Congress, and even after that stage it is difficult to imagine who could be interested in purchasing said media.
Now,
is this a discussion of this time that concerns us?
A recent example, although it may seem distant, offers proof to the contrary.
Because?
Let's see: on Saturday the 13th, in the United States, the NFL (American football) game between the Kansas City Chiefs and Miami Dolphins teams set, with an average of 23 million viewers,
the audience record for a streaming broadcast
(that is, neither on open TV nor on cable).
Never before had this technology reached such a number, with peaks of more than 25 million (the game was only seen on open TV in the cities of Kansas and Miami).
The novelty, a milestone in the history of the media, included another relevant fact: the transmission was also decisive in reaching
the record for Internet use in a single day in the US
, gathering 30% of the traffic. on the web during the three hours of the game, with more than 16 million simultaneous devices.
But what was unexpected, if you consider that watching the game required a paid subscription, was that
the audience increased by 6%
compared to the game of the same Playoffs broadcast on open TV and cable last season.
The paradigm changed.
Today
, discussing open television in the future tense is anachronistic
.
The technology reached a maturity that blurs the limits (the transmission had no technical failures despite the millions of users connected simultaneously).
In Argentina, streaming technology had notable acceptance by users willing to innovate.
However, there are discussions stuck in the past.
Perhaps in a world that no longer exists.