Political communication in South America: social media vs. press conferences

In the complex and diverse political landscape of South America There is one trend that stands out for its uniqueness: the almost total absence of regular press conferences by presidents. Unlike their counterparts in Mexico, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic and Panama, South American leaders prefer to resort to social networks to make their announcements and statements.

This phenomenon, which has been the subject of analysis and debate among political scientists and communication experts, reveals much about the political and media dynamics in the region.

The practice in Mexico and Central America

In Mexico, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has institutionalized the “morning”, daily press conferences that have become a symbol of his administration.

This model of direct and daily communication has also been adopted by the leaders Rodrigo Chaves in Costa Rica, Luis Abinader in the Dominican Republic and, as of tomorrow, by José Raúl Mulino in Panama.

These conferences allow for a constant flow of information and provide the opportunity for journalists to ask questions and get answers in real time.

For many analysts, this practice reinforces transparency and accountability, essential elements of a robust democracy.

“Regular press conferences are a vital tool for keeping citizens informed and for holding leaders accountable for their decisions”says Juan Carlos Hidalgo, a Costa Rican political analyst.

The South American reality

In contrast, in South America, presidents prefer social media to communicate their decisions and announcements. From the frequent use of social media X (formerly Twitter) by Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, to the live Facebook broadcasts of Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela, the trend is clear: social media is the preferred channel for presidential communication.

According to Maria Paula Saffon, political scientist and professor at the University of the Andes in Colombia, “Social media allows South American presidents to avoid the mediation of traditional media and directly control the message that reaches citizens.”

“This may be advantageous in terms of speed and scope, but it raises serious problems in terms of transparency and accountability.”he says.

The reasons behind the phenomenon

The reasons behind this preference for social media are varied. First, the networks offer absolute control of the message. Presidents can communicate what they want, how they want and when they want, without the intermediation of journalists who might question or interpret their words.

In addition, social media allows for more emotional and personal communication, which can help humanize the figure of the president and generate a more direct connection with citizens.

Secondly, social media has a massive and immediate reach. A post or live broadcast can reach millions of people in a matter of seconds, which is especially useful in crisis situations or to quickly counter an unfavorable narrative in traditional media.

For Andrés Mejía Vergnaud, a Colombian political analyst, “The use of social media as the main presidential communication channel responds to a modern political communication strategy, where the direct and unfiltered message has a greater impact.”

“However, it also reflects a distrust of traditional media and a desire to avoid public scrutiny.”he points out.

A limitation for journalism

While using social media has its advantages, it also presents significant challenges. The lack of regular press briefings limits journalists’ ability to ask critical questions and obtain detailed, contextualized information. This can lead to less transparency and a deficit in accountability.

Moreover, social media, with its brief and often superficial format, does not always allow for in-depth analysis of issues.

“Communication on social media tends to be fragmented and can foster misinformation and polarization,” warns Felipe Botero, professor of Political Science at the University of the Andes.

“Without a space for debate and the confrontation of ideas, democracy is weakened,” he says.

Immediacy and control of the message

The preference of South American presidents for social media as their main communication channel is a reflection of modern times, where immediacy and control of the message are highly valued.

However, this trend also raises important questions about the quality of democracy and transparency in the region.

As Saffon concludes, “The challenge for South American governments is to find a balance between direct communication and respect for the democratic principles of transparency and accountability. Periodic press conferences should not be seen as a burden, but rather as an opportunity to strengthen democracy and build a relationship of trust with citizens.”