The approach of media development

The goal of this work is to approach, in an exploratory manner, to a schema to assess the conditions of media development in Mexican federated states. The starting supposition is that conditions for media development may be observed through the characteristics of public communication, among which one finds the diversity and force of public debates in society, freedom of press, the plurality of social and political projects expressed in communication media, among others, as well as the links between people and citizen participation.

In this article, the results of a research carried out in Mexico on the association between indexes of welfare, development and the characteristics of public communication in the 32 federated states in Mexico are presented. Measures produced from various statistical instruments were resorted to, under the hypothesis that puts forward the presence of associative features between media communication and social development. As a result, we identified five clusters of entities after two analyses, one of principal components and the other, clusters.

For their part, the differentiated characteristics of the five clusters suggest considering a subnational logic to understand these five large tendencies, regarding differences at state (provincial) level in the advancement —or delay— in the instauration of full democracy due to their own historicity and sociopolitical context (^{Augusto, Dargent, & Rousseau, 2017}; ^{Pino, 2017}; ^{Ríos & Soto, 2017}; ^{Rodríguez-Albor et al., 2016}; ^{Suárez-Cao et al., 2017}).

For the formulation of the study, we resorted to media development as a conceptual tool that helps establish the theoretical link between regional development, in terms of welfare, and the consolidation of democracy (^{DeLeón-Vázquez & De la O, 2021}; ^{UNESCO, 2010}) with the characteristics of the public communication system (^{Demers & Lavigne, 2007}), as detailed later in the text.

The Sustainable Development Agenda (^{Organización de las Naciones Unidas, 2015}), conceived to solve the most pressing problems of inequality in the world, has served as a guide to design national public policies. In the academic sphere of communication, this becomes discussions about the way communicational practices might contribute to sustainable social development (^{Padilla, DeLeón-Vázquez, & Medina, 2019}). In the face of the existing sides, in this work we will position on that of media development.

Media development is a notion proposed to designate the relation between the inhabitants’ welfare level, democratic advance, and the strengthening of the communication media system in a country. The supposition is that the characteristics of media activity enable assessing the respect to the right to and liberty of information and communication, which is associated with the consolidation of democratic processes and a better quality of life (^{Garro-Rojas, Solís, & Cordero, 2021}).

Despite media development, as a concept, is related to the general characteristics of a Nation-State (^{UNESCO, 2010}), the elements it comprises are not uniform in the country. In Mexico, there are states where the media systems operate coopted by political elites and local authoritarianism dynamics, in comparison with other states where a freer exercise of journalism, accountability, public denounce and other practices associated to the sphere of media are possible (^{González & Echeverría, 2017}). Due to the above, we consider it relevant to differentiate the characteristics present in the federated states and account for the way this phenomenon takes place at a subnational scale.

Furthermore, it is necessary to point out that the notion of media development is debated. Its most disseminated meaning is as defined by ^{UNESCO (2010)}, as a result of the measurement of 150 indices in five categories: regulatory juridical system, property, democratic discourse, professionalization of communicators, and technologic infrastructure. The above suggests that media development is revealed by assessing the material, legal, and human conditions associated to dispositions for plurality, diversity, equality, and independence of communications.

UNESCO’s proposal is not the only idea about media development; the discussion is still open. ^{DeLeón-Vázquez and De la O (2021)} carried out a systematic review of conceptual formulations of media development and identified four large approaches. The first comes from UN’s Agenda for Sustainable Development, from which UNESCO’s proposal comes. The second is framed into a critical stance toward development, considering it a vision imposed by the global north; this approach is supported by Latin American and African authors who reassert the term from a decolonial standpoint. The third is the comparative international analysis of media systems, a research trend that enables identifying similarities and differences in the ways media activity is managed in various countries. The fourth is the sectorial approach, in which media development designates the growth of media industry as economic sector, technologic advance and the impact of the property schemas of media firms.

^{DeLeón-Vázquez and De la O (2021)}, concurring with ^{Berger (2010)}, state that media development is an inaccurate notion because sometimes it is seen as the process whereby media systems improve, while others, it is considered the ideal state of development that can be attained. ^{Berger (2010)} identified this dual condition —process and state— upon which we base to put forward the general goal of this research as the search for an assessment model of media development in Mexico, keeping a balance between a qualitative approach that allows establishing an evaluative metric (media development as a process), and at once, understanding the contexts of the regions’ development (media development as a goal or state).

In this sense, we take the aspects that articulate a number of stances on media development. In such manner that, for the purpose of this research, it will be understood as the strengthening of the set of local schemas or broadcasting, access to information and communications technology, digital network coverage, freedoms and rights associated with information and communication, regulations on the media and telecommunications sector, the quality of contents that circulate in the communication media, accountability, and related aspects.

Linking all these elements together is possible by means of statistical approximation, using several public-access instruments, tabulated by federated state, concurring in time, and which offer measurements of elements we consider theoretically linked because of the notion of media development.

For our purposes, we have organized this document as follows: in the first section, we present the background of media development; in second, the theoretical proposals regarding media development and public communication are proposed. In the third section, the methodologic strategy is presented. And, in the final section, the results and conclusions are offered.

Formulations about media development and public communication

In this section, we display in a summarized manner the conceptual considerations about media development and public communication. The documental revision carried out by ^{DeLeón-Vázquez and De la O (2021)} considers seven theoretical standpoints from which seven discussions on media development articulate. The first standpoint is communication for development and social change from Latin America, which is related to the community, in which communication tools are used for favoring a positive change by means of dialogic participation, at once research-action strategies are unfolded to produce knowledge that nourishes the very process of the communities’ progress (^{Barranquero-Carretero & Sáez-Baeza, 2015}; ^{Beltrán, 2008}; ^{Fuentes Navarro, 2005}; ^{Tufte, 2015}).

The second, according to ^{DeLeón-Vázquez and De la O (2021)}, corresponds to the comparative analysis of media systems, which carry the mark of social, political, economic, and cultural contexts where they appear (^{Hallin & Mancini, 2004}, ²⁰¹²; ^{Rodny-Gumede, 2015}). The third perspective is journalism studies, where there is marked interest in freedom of expression as regards democratic practices; an aspect linked to the development of the media and civil rights (^{Lugo-Ocando, 2018}; ^{Nygren, 2015}; ^{Relly & Zanger, 2017}).

The next theoretical orientation, according to the review carried out by ^{DeLeón-Vázquez and De la O (2021)}, is that of information and communications technology for development, in which the processes of technology appropriation as well as the citizens’ digital literacy are identified as factors for the advancement in the solution of problems and attention of social needs (^{Drulă, 2015}; ^{Lee, 2011}; ^{Marín-Gutiérrez, Díaz-Pareja, & Aguaded, 2013}; ^{Padilla & Medina, 2018}; ^{Sein et al., 2019}). The fifth perspective found by the authors is the economic-industrial, which analyzes the economic and industrial sector of media and their growth; in this approach, the conditions of entrepreneurial competence and the growth of the sector before the trends to concentrate media property in their various modalities are problematized (^{Arroyo, 2015}; ^{Checa-Godoy, 1998}; ^{Huerta & Becerra, 2016}; ^{Suing et al., 2016}).

In the sixth place, the authors recognize the context of indices of media development by ^{UNESCO (2010)}, which we previously commented in the introduction. Finally, the seventh approach identified by ^{DeLeón-Vázquez and De la O (2021)} is that of the World Association for Christian Communication, WACC, which consists of a welfare practice, through which it seeks to reduce inequalities and marginalization (^{Lee, 2018}).

Public communication, for its part, is a concept with an integral approach to the interactions of actors in public spaces in a democratic context, where media institutions and digital networks are fundamental to bring society projects to light. Public communication refers to topics and debates that circulate in the public space. It involves journalists who produce information with professional parameters and filter debates, but also the reactions to all that information from the citizens and social, economic, and political actors (^{Demers, 2008}).

If the problem of the notion of media development expressed by ^{Berger (2010)} on the ambivalence of the term as a process and state is considered, it is noticed that something similar occurs with public communication due to its polysemy. As a first meaning, public communication may be considered the communication between governments and citizens, which is a requirement for accountability. In this sense, the government is responsible for creating communication strategies to inform the citizens about public affairs, in addition to being a formal sort of communication ruled by law and order (^{Zémor, 2008}). As a second meaning, it may be understood as the system of public information production through the media and all the institutions involved at structural level; that is to say, the public communication system (^{Martín-Serrano, 1994}). Finally, a third meaning would come from a sociologic approach to information production, the treatment and dissemination practices of all the actors in the public space in an advanced democratic context (^{Demers, 2008}).

This last approach is the one we take in this study, which has been built on the proposal by ^{Norbert Elias (2010)} on social configuration. In this way, the concepts of media development and public communication concur in a social configuration where media institutions, public affairs, the requirement of freedom of press, the need for a solid public-service media system, fair and adequate regulation, civil participation, accountability, plurality of voices, Internet access, expressions of justice demands and other similar aspects coexist. These are elements generated, exercised, and used by people in their daily practices, not only abstractions.

Therefore, we consider it important to relate and measure some of these variables with a view to ascertaining the links between media development, public communication, and social welfare in a situated manner.

Identification of five tendencies of media development in Mexico

In this section, the results of PCA for the 23 selected variables are presented, and then the correlations obtained by means of Pearson’s test. These analyses precede that of clusters, in which the associative features of media development for the 32 states of the Mexican republic are identified. Table 1 shows the set of the most relevant variables in the five first components identified in the analysis.

PCA allowed recognizing variables with a different nature that may be related to one another to generate empirical evidence with theoretically established links between social development, the quality of media system and public communication. Following, in Tables 2a, 2b, and 2c, the significant correlations found by means of the calculation of Pearson’s coefficient for the 23 variables in the 32 Mexican republic states are shown.

In Tables 2a, 2b, and 2c, there are four sets that stand out due to their significance level in the correlations between variables. It may be noticed that the four sets are distinguishable because of the significance level of correlations between variables. It is observed there are 26 highly significant correlations at the level of 0.01. Distinguishable are those linked to lack of accountability, coordination between government levels (.608), poor justice administration (.736), poor health care (.497), social democracy index (.458), and democratic development index (.419); correlation between freedom of press and democratic development index (.488); and households with Internet access and cell phone users (.971), with internet users (.982), as well the one that links both users, cell phones and Internet (.997). In theoretical terms, we suppose that perceptions measured between the variables correlated with lack of accountability, and freedom of press have an important socialization component from the information disseminated by the communication media. However, self-referentiality is noticed in the media infrastructure between commercial television and commercial radio stations (.748), and between social radio licenses and the commercial ones (.464), and with public use licenses (.646).

A second set is composed of the 14 significant correlations at the level of 0.05. We noticed some correlations at this level between corruption (Corr and RCP) and technological variables (HIA, IU and Ucel), though since there were no strong theoretical connections between them, they may not be explanatory elements. Furthermore, the correlation between the index of freedom of press and lack of accountability (.385) was expected, and its empirical verification in this calculation is relevant, since these two variables define the importance of media development as a parameter of communicational aspects of democracy. The index of freedom of press is calculated with the number of attacked journalists and the citizens’ perception of the freedom of expression in each state (^{PoliLat, 2020}). Mexico is one of the countries where there are more attacks on journalists, and even murders. It has been documented that most of these attacks comes from state agents (^{Article-19, 2020}; ^{UNESCO, 2018}). This may provide statistical evidence as regards the association of attacks on the press and censorship. In this sense, we deem the correlation between lack of accountability and the economic democracy index relevant (.414) because the citizens’ economic decisions need a system of solid public information.

Therefore, the third and fourth sets comprise a number of correlations with negative sign at the levels of 0.01 and 0.05, which would show the verification of an inverse relationship between variables. These correlations mainly link governmental performance variables. Among the correlations that link to directly communicational variables, distinguishable are insecurity and crimes with lack of accountability (-.446), which is noticeable, as this relation would be expected positive. So is distinguishable the one between the index of freedom of press and Internet users (-.375) and cell phone users (-.408).

With a view to better using the data, the finer patterns were identified by means of k-medias analysis, using standardized values. The result was the identification of five consistent blocks of federated states in the country (Table 3). Then, the means of the 23 variables analyzed were calculated for each of the clusters (Table 4). From the analysis of the average behavior in their respective clusters of federated states, similarity patterns between them and differences with the rest of the clusters were identified. Once these characteristics were known, a name was given to each cluster.

Following, Map 1 shows the geographic location of each cluster and the states comprised

Source: Own elaboration based on the cluster analysis.

Map 1. Geographic location of the clusters in Mexico  

Corruption cluster

The first cluster is composed of seven states: Coahuila, Durango, Guanajuato, Nuevo León, Quintana Roo, Sonora, and Zacatecas. Five of these states are in the north and adjoin one another; with the exception of Guanajuato and Quintana Roo, in the center and south, respectively. The adjoining location of these states, adding to the results of the analysis that grouped them, points at territorially-based characteristics. This is the case of the rest of clusters. This finding points at the verification of a subnational dynamic, in which internal similarities and differences between clusters might be explained by regional-order historic-contextual characteristics.

This cluster has the highest value in corruption (M=55.114, SD= 4.8978), and the second in corruption in proceedings (M=15246.71, SD= 6153.936), gender violence (M=6.2364, SD= 2.882352), poor governmental performance (M=30.157, SD= 5.0020) and radio (M=47.43, SD= 22.508; M=11.86, SD= 11.682; M=10.29; SD= 4.990) and television infrastructure (M=32.14, SD= 10.367; M=33.29, SD= 33.525). It is a region where democratic backwardness expresses as blatant mistrust in government. The strong presence of radio and television media —an indicator of media development— would have to be complemented with the analysis of the quality of their contents, and audience participation. We do not have such information in the present study; however, the fact that the index of freedom of press is not relevant in this cluster allows supposing its low quality.

Cluster of technology and poor governmental performance

This cluster comprises to adjoining states which are clearly the most important metropolitan zone in Mexico: the state of Mexico and Mexico City. Despite they are just two states, they account for 20.79 percent of the national population (^{Inegi, 2021}). In this way, it is understandable that the cluster contains the highest values for households with Internet access (M=2329145.50, SD= 531046.385), Internet users (M=8849333.00, SD= 3567192.491), and users of cellphones (M=9340181.50, SD= 3735283.793), as well as economic democracy index (M=1.11300, SD= 0.111723), because of which we called it technologic.

However, this region also holds the first place in insecurity and crime (M=81.750, SD= 9.1204) and the highest corruption rate in proceedings (M=20686.50, SD= 4.950). It ranks second in poor law application (M=18.050, SD= 3.0406), and poor quality in education (M=12.600, SD= 2.1213). As well, it is also last in the index of freedom of press (M=5.0075, SD= 0.563564), which makes it the most dangerous region for journalism.

This cluster has the most advanced urban conditions, since it does not have any paragon in other region in the country. However, the state of Mexico has highly marginalized rural areas; hence, in this cluster, two dissimilar realities in terms of social development intermingle. Besides, the technologic and economic progress of large cities —aspects theoretically recognized as part of media development— faces problems inherent to metropolises such as a high crime rate and corruption.

Democratic cluster

It comprises 11 states in the center and north of the country: Aguascalientes, Baja California, Baja California Sur, Chihuahua, Colima, Hidalgo, Nayarit, Querétaro, San Luis Potosí, Sinaloa, and Tlaxcala. This cluster has the highest value in freedom of press (M=20686.50, SD= 0.963920), one of the foundations of modern democracy, which is consistent with the highest results in the measurements of social democracy, while second in democratic development (M=7.07682, SD= 1.993554).

Despite their scant neighboring condition, they are a group of states that are distinguished by their economic and social development. Several of these states are repeatedly at the first places in measurements of democratic development and index of freedom of press (^{PoliLat, 2020}). This cluster is promising in the context of the present study because it seemingly verifies theoretical statements of the approach of media development. In this way, this group is a research line to deepen into its characteristics and more finely observe the relationships between the media system, public communication, social development, and welfare.

Media cluster

It comprises 10 federated states mainly in the south and the Gulf: Chiapas, Guerrero, Jalisco, Michoacán, Morelos, Oaxaca, Puebla, Tabasco, Tamaulipas, and Veracruz. Its main characteristic is holding the first place in infrastructure for the three sorts of radio (M=60.90, SD= 30.072; M=14.00, SD= 10.446; M=12.80, SD= 12.630) and television licenses (M=36.10, SD= 18.823;

M=11.60, SD= 8.113), as well as Internet access at the households (M=574551.40, SD= 348940.715), and second place in users of cell phones (M=3022711.90, SD= 1481021.207). By contrast, it holds the penultimate place in the index of freedom of press (M=5.4963, SD= 2.736733). In this cluster, Veracruz held the last place in freedom of press for almost the entire decade; while the other states have also had very low figures in this regard over the same period (^{DeLeón-Vázquez & González, 2020}; ^{PoliLat, 2020}).

The result of the measurements of social and democratic aspects is not high in this cluster, a situation that is consistent with the self-referentiality of the media expressed in the correlational analysis. Though, it will be necessary, as in the previous cluster, to carry out a finer research that enables us to grasp what it means that this set of high figures in the media and telecommunication structure has very low records in freedom of press and is not outstanding in aspects related to social welfare, as theory would consider.

Backwardness cluster

This group is composed of two adjoining states: Campeche and Yucatán. The cluster groups around the variables that show greater backwardness in social development: lack of coordination between government levels (M=14.300, SD= 4.5255), lack of accountability (M=5.750, SD= 1.9092), poor health care attention (M=49.000, SD= 6.7882), low quality in education (M=14.450, SD= 9.5459), gender violence (M=7.4470, SD= 1.308148), and presence of natural disasters (M=2.300, SD= 1.5556). Conversely, it holds the second place in freedom of press (M=7.61800, SD= 1.388758), and the first in democratic development (M=7.95900, SD= 2.064752).

The variable Lack of accountability, associated with the others that characterize this cluster, allows considering the influence of media development in a negative manner. That is to say, in a context where the result of measurements of social welfare are low, the practices associated with right to information, transparency and accountability are compromised. Even so, it is possible that journalism and freedom of expression are highly valued by the citizens, as it has the second highest mean in the index of freedom of press. It is necessary to state there is need for elements to interpret the high value of the variable democratic development index in this cluster.