A agenda da regulação da comunicação social no Brasil: da constituinte aos impasses contemporâneos

The paper analyzes the regulatory framework for the Media in Brazil in the Federal Constitution and the nexus between democratization and constitutional process, interpreting relevant actors (government, political parties, civil society) and figured as the themes of communication and institutional political agenda. The obstacles to the regulation of many of the statements remain constitutional (right of communication; seal monopolies / oligopolies; regionalization of cultural production; nationalist character in control of broadcasting; compatibility between segments state, public and commercial; Social Communication Council), that replaces debate on the very principle of the right to communication regulation by analyzing the corresponding decisionmaking processes. This conflictual agenda-setting involves multiple interests, from strictly commercial aspirations of companies operating in this market, going by the increasing share of religious institutions who also want to expand upon practices of proselytizing until the interests of policy makers who also have control over a slice of that business.

Defining Regulatory Objectives for Contemporary Electronic Communications : Between a Rock and a Hard Place

Goal evaluation is an essential element of the process of designing regulatory frameworks. Lawyers and legal scholars do however tend to ignore it. The present paper stresses the importance of pinpointing the precise regulatory objectives in the fluid environment of electronic communications, since, due to their technological and economic development, they have become the vital basis for communication and distribution of information in modern societies. The paper attempts an analysis of the underlying regulatory objectives in contemporary communications and seeks to put together the complex puzzle of economic and societal issues.

Regulatory Objectives for Contemporary Electronic Communications : Talking Business or Talking Culture?

The common mantra in telecommunications regulatory fora (be it national, regional or international) now goes along the lines of 'deregulation-good; regulation-bad' and competition is said to be the ultimate answer to basically every question. A generalised dictum like this is in itself suspicious and even more so, when it refers to a sector such as telecommunications, which has a history of heavy regulation and has been the very epitome of state intervention. In the contemporary environment of vibrant communications, subcribing to a purely 'black-or-white' aproach may be, to put it mildly, unsafe. Before answering the question of appropriate regulatory model for communications markets, it is essential to figure out what goals are to be pursued in order to consider what kind of measures could bring about their attainment. In the words of Robert Bork, 'only when the issue of goals has been settled is it possible to frame a coherent body of substantive rules'. Against this backdrop, the present paper looks into the goals and objectives of telecommunications regulation, their complexity and inherent tension between commercial and public interests.

Communications amendment-clarifying regulatory authority : report (to accompany S. 1740)

"August 12, 1959."