A New Word for Mexico’s Drug Lexicon: Narco-censorship

Mexico’s drug war has escalated to alarming heights during the course of 2010. In only two months, the violence in northeastern cities close to the US border went from bad to worse. The Washington Post, LA Times, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, the Economist, among many other US media sources, have been faithfully reporting on Mexico’s drug war. During July and August, an obvious trend emerged. It’s what the LA Times has dubbed the new word in Mexico’s extensive drug-war lexicon: narco-censorship. The news media has become one of the cartel’s most vital targets. Kidnapping, torturing, murdering and co-opting reporters from newspapers, radio stations, and television news sources is quite common, especially in cities most affected by drug-related crime such as Nuevo Laredo, Reynosa, Ciudad Juarez, and Monterrey, to name a few.

Why is censorship so important to organized crime in Mexico? The logic is simple. Drug cartels cannot afford to have local news source reporting on their criminal activities because this might draw attention from the federal government, which in turn could bolster military presence in vulnerable areas, curtailing their activities. So now cartels are sending a message, loud and clear. For instance, Televisa, one of the most powerful and influential television networks, has been recently attacked with grenades and gunfire in Monterrey, Nuevo Laredo and Matamoros.

Journalism is seriously undermined in Nuevo Laredo. Almost on an everyday basis, drug-related shootings and murders take place very close to the US border and rarely get reported. In fact, it’s more likely that US newspapers such as the LA Times and Washington Post publish the story, not because they get the scoop, but because Mexican news source are not allowed to speak. 

On July this year, Mexican soldiers engaged in battle during more than five hours against a drug cartel. With pointed guns, criminals hijacked vehicles, including a bus. Innocent civilians were caught in the crossfire. Although the city has three television news channels, four daily newspapers and at least five radio stations, one of the biggest stories of the year went unreported. Afterwards, the Interior Ministry in Mexico City declared that 12 people were killed in the gunfight. However, Washington Post reporters informed that local journalists say there were at least 20 or 30 casualties. The death rate rarely matches reality. In Nuevo Laredo digging too deep on a story can get you killed. The same goes to many cities and small towns who are constantly showered with narco violence.

But perhaps one of the incidents that might reflect best the journalistic crisis in Mexico is the kidnapping of four reporters who were covering a news report on a penitentiary in Durango. Their investigation included the massacre of 17 people at a party carried out by the inmates who abandoned the prison at night with permission from the warden. Milenio magazine admitted that one of its abducted reporters contacted the editor asking to broadcast videos posted on an anonymous Mexican website called Blog del Narco. The kidnappers, who belonged to the Sinaloa Cartel, were unhappy about Milenio’s news coverage about them. In an attempt to appear less like “the bad guys,” they wanted the magazine to broadcast three videos of another cartel committing serious crimes. The cartel demanded news coverage instead of ransom money.

Reporters from cities suffering from widespread drug-related crime receive word from colleagues and intermediaries, likely employed by cartels, about what is and isn’t safe to publish. Silence is preferable since attention from national news media, and that includes the US, “heats the plaza” and increases violence. Without news media reporting about the obvious spread of violence in northeastern cities, Mexicans now recur to social networks, such as Twitter and Facebook to find out the latest news about what is happening, and whether or not streets are safe.  Blog del Narco, powered by an anonymous twentysomething and heavily protected by cybersecurity is getting 3 millions hits a week. The gory information, videos and imaged posted in Blog del Narco seem to come from all sides of the drug war, cartels and authorities alike. It is a sad but useful substitute since popular newspapers no longer provide the information Mexicans need.

The absence of media has grave consequences for Mexico’s drug war. To begin with, lack of accurate information makes it impossible to grasp the drug war’s magnitude. How much help does Juarez need? How many soldiers should be sent to Monterrey? The truth is, the federal government might not have the least idea either. How can Mexican officials asses the situation if they don’t have proper information in the first place? Second, the absence of open criticism and accusation of drug cartels provides them with a bigger sense of impunity and freedom to act, since “nothing happens here”. Third, the international community remains unaware and therefore cannot recommend, help, or pressure the Mexican government into acting effectively.

And here’s some food for thought. What if drug cartels are not the only ones benefited by silence? What if the government finds it actually convenient if Mexico stays out of headlines, both on a national and international level? Bad news could discourage foreign direct investment, right? The question now is who will protect Mexico’s journalism if both government and organized crime would rather have it keep quiet? Since December 2006 an estimated 30 reporters have been killed or gone missing, making Mexico the deadliest country in the world for journalists. The silence from newspapers, radio stations and television is frustrating yet predictable. If we lose the fight against information, we are losing one of democracy’s core values: freedom of speech.

Ana Johnson

 Lic. en Estudios Internacionales 
Universidad de Monterrey