Against-Hegemonic Agenda: Indigenous New Media and the Challenge to Hegemonic Power

Abstract

The main objective of this work is to identify the different strategies used by the Mapuche indigenous social movement, especially from the mid-1990s to the present day, to publicize their demands and claims. The study considered three methodological strategies, namely, the analysis of a corpus of news, the making of individual and group interviews, and the documentation of a review and analysis. Among the main findings is the identification of two strategies. The first aimed to intervene in the agenda of the hegemonic media in Chile and the second aimed to create their own media as an alternative media agenda. The central concern of the research is to understand how the Mapuche movement, through the use of certain media strategies, manages to break through the hegemonic agenda in Chile towards an against-agenda that allows them to make their demands and claims visible. Thus, the problem also consists of knowing what the strategies most used by the Mapuche movement are. Is it possible to establish an against-agenda? And what are the characteristics of the latter? Finally, the paper argues for the dependence of the against-agenda on the underlying socio-political conditions. This work will allow us to analyze other experiences of indigenous or non-indigenous social movements that often use the media in different ways, especially through the intervention of hegemonic agendas and the use of alternative media.

1. Introduction

1.1. Research Problem, Objectives and Hypotheses

The central problem of the research is to understand how the Mapuche movement achieves spaces of visibility for its demands and claims in the midst of a hegemonic agenda. Thus, the hypothesis put forward is that this is achieved through the use of certain media strategies of intervention of the hegemonic agendas to then move towards an alternative agenda or against-agenda. The objectives of this research are as follows: (a) to identify the different strategies used by the Mapuche social movement, (b) to analyze the possibilities of a against-agenda, and (c) to characterize the against-agenda.

1.2. From Resistance to Offensive Strategy: Genealogy of a Movement

According to the Institute of Statistics (INE) of Chile, the population considered to belong to indigenous people is 2,185,729 people (INE, 2017), which is 12.8% of the total population. Of this indigenous population, 79.8% (1,745,147 people) are considered to belong to the Mapuche people. During the second half of the 19th century, as a result of the incorporation of the lands in the south of the country by the Chilean national state, a conflict opened that continues to this day. Since the second half of the last decade of the 20th century, a series of demands and claims by the Mapuche people towards the Chilean state has been activated, especially the demands for the return of lands and social and political rights such as constitutional recognition.

The Mapuche indigenous social movement has its origins in 1910, with the creation of the Caupolicán Society for the Defense of Araucanía. Since 1910 was the year of the Centenary of Chilean Independence, the society set out to commemorate the movement.

When looking at research from the 1920s, we found information on the Araucanian Federation and the holding of the First Araucanian Congress. In this case, a critical and at the same time dialoguing stance is evident. In the same vein, we found the initiative to create the Araucanian Corporation, whose purpose was to unite efforts. All of this was recorded in the press of the time (La Época, 1910a, 1910b, 1910c; El Diario Austral, 1938), as well as in the minutes of the movement’s documents (Asamblea de Caciques del Sur & Dirigentes de Indios, 1961; Comisión Organizadora del Primer Congreso del Movimiento Netuaiñ Mapu, 1972).

However, from the mid-1980s, the indigenous movement assumed a more critical and demanding character, which coincided with the end of the dictatorship and the beginning of the government returning to democracy (Proclama de la Coordinadora de Resistencia Mapuche Pelentaro, 1986; Centro de Estudios & Documentación Mapuche Liwen, 1990).

From the 1990s onwards, the critical position became increasingly intense through different organizations (Consejo de Todas las Tierras, 1991; Identidad Territorial Lafkenche, mid-1990s; Coordinadora Arauco Malleco, 1996; Partido Político Mapuche Wallmapuwen, mid-2000s; Órganos de Resistencia Territorial, since 2012).

The above allows us to understand why media strategies occupy an important place in the Mapuche movement, in the sense that the growing criticism requires more and more conditions to express the demands and claims. The early appearance of their own media (1926) as well as the capacity to maintain them over time are evidence of this relevance. It is a deeper strategy and not just a conjunctural and recent one.

1.3. Against-Hegemonic Agenda

Much has been written about the tensions between the political agenda of social movements and the agenda of the hegemonic media and the role of the latter in preserving the status quo; in particular, there is a written evidence of the antagonism of both agendas and how, over time, the contents of social activism tended to occupy spaces in the media (Saavedra, 2023; Alarcón & Cárdenas, 2021; Peña et al., 2016; Scherman et al., 2014; Candón, 2012; Rodríguez, 2012), even if only temporarily. However, little has been written about the capacity of these movements to establish an agenda. In this way, the Mapuche movement presents a paradigmatic case, which manages to establish an agenda of themes and subthemes.

In this framework, the agenda will be understood, in global terms, as the configuration of the themes and subthemes that appear at certain times in the media. Then, a hegemonic agenda will be defined by a more or less established consensus on said themes and subthemes, especially media that are called hegemonic. The latter, also in a still-open discussion, is understood as those characterized by certain economic groups that control the media industry sector (Saintout, 2018) as well as by taking advantage of its greater massification to promote political and economic interests.

Although agenda theories (Lippman, 1922; McCombs & Shaw, 1972; Roberts, 1972; Weaver et al., 1981; Dearing & Rogers, 1992; Aruguete, 2016; Zunino, 2018; Ardèvol-Abreu et al., 2020) imply, on the one hand, the different levels of accessibility that they have for the various social actors, they tend to explain more about hegemonic than against-hegemonic rationalities. However, this should not be understood as a problem of the explanatory model but rather of how it is applied, especially if we consider the reversal experiences we observe today, which account for how social movements relate to power and challenge it.

There is no doubt that the nature and character of information is at the heart of the debate on the agenda. However, if we consider information as a social good, it is a right of citizens; if, instead, it is considered a consumer good, it becomes a right of the media. Here lies the main difference between the conception of freedom of expression and that of the right to communication. In the first case, it is about information as a private good and in the second as a social good (Muleiro, 2006).

As commercial purposes prevail and operations are carried out with high levels of concentration, certain discourses, certain sources, and certain economic, political, and ideological interests predominate. The latter tends to contribute to a private media model, which is disputed in the advertising market.

Considering the above, for the political economy of communication, social movements will experience, among other things, transformations in communication dynamics, such as at the level of internal, external, and media communication, so that “social movements have developed communication strategies and policies” as well as “have questioned the dominant forms, technologies, images and communication messages”, using “literacy campaigns, street theatre, alternative newspapers, video and film production, alternative computer networks” (Mosco, 2009, pp. 347–348).

The shift from agenda to against-agenda can be observed in the Mapuche movement’s strategy based on the generalized use of traditional hegemonic media belonging to the large power groups to the use of alternative media.

In this sense, the against-agenda will be understood as another agenda, which is constructed within the framework of a dispute for the control of the semiotic-communicational code that gives meaning to society, to its relations and, above all, to its possible changes.

1.4. New Agendas and Social Movements

In this sense, it is interesting to analyze how social movements can access the agendas of the traditional hegemonic media, especially when the latter adjusts to the new social realities because in this case there is a coincidence between the interests and values of social movements and the political and media interests and values of the elites (Gitlin, 1986).

In this work, it is important to understand the characteristics of communicative interventions (Obregón & Tufte, 2017), as well as to know how it is possible to build new agendas with new media. This is best explained by one of the most recent stages of agenda-setting research, agenda-building, which is characterized by the relationships between different actors and their mutual influence on the agenda-setting process (Zunino, 2018). Considering that there is an open debate on the matter, we aim to understand new media as journalistic organizations that are part of “an alternative media ecosystem to the traditional one” characterized, in turn, “by maintaining a fluid and agile interaction with the audience” as well as by their “capacity for adaptation and experimentation” (Cabrera et al., 2019, p. 1515).

Although, as Zunino (2018) argues, the protagonism of the public, for example, through the widespread use of social networks, could affect the power of the agenda-setting hypotheses, it is important to consider that such activism occurs within the same journalistic system, although in a first phase, it will be through intervention in traditional media and in a second moment the media system will be expanded by incorporating new media. These operations of setting an alternative agenda take place within the framework of a highly concentrated media system and, on the other hand, imply a strategic analysis of the journalistic and media system, specifically the weaknesses of journalistic routines and the sensitivities of the information input (the criteria of newsworthiness). There is no doubt that, at least, the canonical concept of agenda must be problematized (Zunino, 2018); in which case, the analysis of new practices, new media, and complexities in relationships constitute a challenge for the field of communication.

Agenda construction considers the news construction process and the different elements that influence it, with emphasis even on collective construction and the role of spokespersons (Charron, 1998; Lang & Lang, 1981; Sheafer & Weimann, 2005; Sádaba, 2008). In the case of the construction of the agenda by social movements, it is important to consider the possibilities generated by the relations between the media and the sources, articulations that even the construction of the agenda does not sufficiently explain. Therefore, in order to explain some situations, it is necessary to understand how certain voices of actors and sources can become agenda setters at a given moment, that is, occupy spaces of enunciation that allow them privileged access to the media. The questions, however, are more complex, since they imply distinguishing, on the one hand, between the influence that the different media have and, alternatively, the influence that the different social actors may have. If we grant a relevant role to these agenda-setting actors, we must ask ourselves whether we are talking about a predominance of the agenda of the public, who in certain circumstances also become decision-makers. If this is the case, we must explain how it is possible that they interrelate in certain socio-political situations and even merge the agenda of the public (who become political actors in these circumstances and, therefore, some of them become agenda-setters), the political agenda (highly sensitive to the public, as voters), and the agenda of the media (whose structure, despite being highly concentrated, opens spaces for certain counter-hegemonic discourses that feed the conflictual nature of the news). Finally, we can ask ourselves whether, in this case, the explanatory model of agenda setting is operational or whether, on the contrary, we should look for other explanatory models.

The idea of an interest group agenda promoted to identify and address social problems through different new media that play a key role is certainly relevant (Zhu, 1992). Evidently, the media agenda is in permanent dispute, so that when some issues/problems emerge, others fall by the wayside (Dearing & Rogers, 1992; Zhu, 1992).

The idea of a Network Agenda-Setting Model (NAS) also contributes to the explanation of the phenomena discussed here, specifically in the sense that new media can build connections between agendas to reach audiences (Guo et al., 2012). Without a doubt, a dynamic understanding of the media and their agendas allows us to better explain the role of existing connections in the construction of new agendas. For example, the role that the network plays in the hands of social movements in accessing the media agenda is fundamental. This network manages, in certain sociopolitical situations, to force the hegemonic media to cover information about the movements and their protests (Candón, 2012). Although the relationship between the use of the network and access to the media agenda is not completely quantified, it is evident that social movements incorporate various agendas, such as the public, the media and the political–electoral agenda.

Of particular interest here is how an analysis of frames is currently related to an understanding of organized social movements, specifically because the latter mobilizes their members towards collective actions with political ends. These are collective actions that are sustained over time, organized in a relatively structured way, and whose members not only have common interests but also have concrete strategies (Sádaba, 2008). In a similar sense, the idea of “civic osmosis” is used to highlight “the collective role of the media” (McCombs, 2012).

1.5. The Dispute for the Agenda

Here, we are interested not only in analyzing how social movements can access agendas and intervening in them, but especially in how it is possible to build new agendas. These cases that we will see can be better explained from one of the most recent stages of agenda-setting research, agenda building, which is characterized by “the complex relationships that occur between the different actors and norms of communication; and that mutually influence the formation of the media agenda” (Zunino, 2018, p. 200). Although, as Zunino (2018) maintains, the prominence of the public, for example, through the widespread use of social networks, could affect the power of the agenda-setting hypotheses; it is important to consider that said activism—as we will see—occurs within the same journalistic system, although in a first phase it will be through intervention in traditional media and a second phase the media system will be expanded by incorporating new media. What is interesting, furthermore, is that these operations to configure an alternative agenda occur within the framework of a highly concentrated media system that can inhibit activists (Youmans & York, 2012) and, alternatively, imply a strategic analysis of the journalistic and media system, specifically of the weaknesses of journalistic routines and the sensitivities of the informative input (the newsworthiness criteria). In this way, effectively “the usefulness of the concept of agenda should be problematized” (Zunino, 2018, p. 205), in which case the analysis of new practices, new media, and the complexities in relationships, without a doubt, constitute a challenge for the field of communication.

Although agenda building “focuses on the news construction process and the elements that influence it” (Aruguete, 2017, pp. 38–39) and even emphasizes collective construction and the role of spokespersons (Charron, 1998; Lang & Lang, 1981; Sádaba, 2008), in the case of the construction of an agenda by social movements, it is particularly about analyzing the possibilities generated by the relationships between the media and sources, articulations that even agenda building fails to explain sufficiently, so to explain some situations it is necessary to understand how certain voices of actors and sources (which are not the same, of course) can be transformed at a given moment into “newsmakers” (agenda setters), that is, occupy spaces of enunciation that allow them privileged access to the media. The questions, however, are more complex, since they involve distinguishing, on the one hand, between the influence that different media have and, on the other hand, the impact that various social actors can have. If we grant a relevant role to these actors or “newsmakers”, we should ask ourselves if we are talking about a predominance of the public’s agenda, which in certain circumstances also become decision-makers? That being so, should we explain, in certain socio-political conjunctures, how the agenda of the public—who become political actors in such circumstances and, therefore, some of them constitute “newsmakers”—are interrelated, and even merged? The political agenda is highly sensitive to the public as voters, and the media agenda’s structure, even though it is highly concentrated, opens spaces for certain counter-hegemonic discourses that nourish the conflictive nature of the news. Finally, we can ask ourselves if, in this case, the explanatory model of agenda setting is operational or if, on the contrary, we have to look for other explanatory models.

In particular, the idea of an interest group agenda is of interest, promoted by diverse groups that “identify, define and raise social problems [whose] agenda is the source of the public agenda” and for whom new technologies, video cameras, newsletters, and other grassroots activities, play a key role (Zhu, 1992, p. 826). In this sense, it is interesting to analyze the media agenda as topics that compete for attention and space in such a way that it is also possible to identify how some topics/problems arise at the expense of others that fall by the wayside (Dearing & Rogers, 1992; Zhu, 1992).

The idea of a Network Agenda-Setting Model (NAS) also contributes to the explanation of the phenomena raised here, specifically in the sense that “the media can group different objects and attributes and highlight these packages of elements in the public’s mind simultaneously [that is,] the media can construct the connections between agendas, thus constructing the centrality of the elements of a certain agenda in the public’s mind” (Guo et al., 2012, pp. 55–56). Without a doubt, a dynamic understanding of the media and their agendas allows us to better explain the role of existing interconnections in the construction of new agendas. For example, the role that the network plays in the hands of social movements to access the media agenda is fundamental. In fact, “The Network then plays a crucial role in forcing the media to pay attention to the movement, both as a way of organizing new protests and in disseminating criticism of the media system and achieving an international diffusion that forced the state media to include the protests in their agenda” (Candón, 2012, p. 225); although the relationship between the use of the Internet and access to the media agenda is not completely quantified, it is evident that social movements incorporate various agendas, such as the public, the media, and the political–electoral agenda.

1.6. The Importance of Networking

Regarding the broad and complex presence of different media, amplified by the multiple virtual networks in use, some hypotheses are proposed. Probably one of the most pertinent cases that concerns us here is the one that indicates that there is a thematic influence between the various media (Aruguete, 2016). In terms of the hegemonic persistence that this could imply if we consider that the emerging media would tend to replicate the contents of the dominant media—as another form of domination—it is worth mentioning recent experiences in which a scenario of political crisis (discredit of traditional actors) and media (disbelief in the function of traditional media) generates a different correlation, particularly when it is the alternative media that practically assume a spokesperson role for the mobilized social groups. Several media emerge amid the situation and from it, they even manage to project themselves. Aruguete (2016) proposes a refreshing analysis in this regard, indicating some very necessary doubts and concerns. She asks, for example, “If social media begins to occupy that leadership role, will it be necessary to adapt the postulates of the agenda setting to a new model?” (Aruguete, 2016, p. 165).

1.7. The Role of New Media in Socio-Political Contexts

Nevertheless, as the counter-agenda arises in contexts of crisis, the need for guidance becomes an important axis, more so than other factors such as personal experience or the extent of exposure to the media. This “need for guidance is manifested in all areas that the individual perceives as important for his life or for the society of which he is a part (relevance) and about which he has no information (uncertainty)” (Ardèvol-Abreu et al., 2020, p. 7). In fact, the need for orientation may be rather associated with the search for new experiences with new media (for example, the appearance of new media, usually digital, that address topics and problems in a counter-informational way, as well as relatively new exhibition dynamics, with a tendency towards multimedia and transmedia practices).

We can raise and problematize all of the above regarding the process of the Mapuche indigenous movement in Chile, whose media actions, along with transforming the ecosystem, have managed to install content with unusual efficiency, as “actors who strive to access the media agenda and install their demands and proposals there” (Aruguete, 2017, p. 47).

1.8. Production of the Emergent

Very probably, the most emblematic case is how a concept like wallmapu manages to position itself on the media and political agenda, practically moving from the absence or presence linked mainly to certain demand and protest groups to a broad level of visibility in the political discourse in a few years. This concept is an example of the result of persistence in agendas, through the intervention of traditional media, but especially through the installation of new media. Wallmapu is the name given by the Mapuche movement to the historic territory they inhabited which includes extensive territories that today form part of the national states of Chile and Argentina.

From a critical perspective, we will understand that this concept is inevitably part of an ideological discursive framework, to which it is integrated in a situated way in a contingency that gives it meaning, even if it is counterhegemonic.

The above, namely, the linguistic and ideological character of wallmapu, make this expression, above all, a triumph of linguistic human work and the result of a lack of a need for relationships with others. Thus, wallmapu is a profound expression of the lack of genuine dialog and horizontal relationships. It is a cry, both of confusion and hope because it entails the Utopia of the construction of the Mapuche Country (Ancán & Calfío, 1998). Language, we must not forget, is a collective and community social activity. In effect, wallmapu is the product of a collective linguistic work that produces the collective language, within the framework of the speech exercise of individuals who, by the way, come together in the same common space; it is then capable of scaling the discursive planes from the most intimate of the communities to the general public opinion.

1.9. Collective Production of Language

Now, it is not possible to understand this case without considering the specific weight that some actors and sources suddenly acquire, as is the case, for example, with the political role that Mapuche actors suddenly assume as conventional constituents, for example, Elisa Loncón, who even presided over the Constituent Convention. The above is also explained because “not all news has the same power to influence the political agenda” (Aruguete, 2017, p. 48) and because the quantification of which sources and actors appear in the media does not allow us to explain the capacity that they have certain sources—at a certain time and space—to negotiate everyday reality and help build, from said negotiation, the media representations of said everyday reality.

2. Methodology

Materials and Methods

The study considered three methodological strategies:

(a)

A total of 1034 news items were analyzed, according to the following inclusion/exclusion criteria:

(i)

News items whose contents refer to issues related to the native peoples of Argentina and Chile, especially the Mapuche people of both countries.

(ii)

News items, news pieces, or opinion pieces in which the Mapuche people appear as protagonists or are directly affected by an event that involves them.

(iii)

That represent the main hegemonic media with national coverage in Argentina and Chile.

(iv)

That represent the most important hegemonic media with regional coverage in Argentina and Chile, in the three cities included in the project (Temuco and Valdivia, in the south of Chile, and La Plata in Argentina).

(v)

That represent against-hegemonic media in Argentina and Chile, considering the presence of Mapuche issues.

(vi)

News that corresponded to the period between 1 November 2018 and 31 October 2019 (

Table 1. Detail of analyzed media.

Media	Country	Media Type
El Mercurio	Chile	Hegemonic
La Tercera	Chile	Hegemonic
El Austral de Temuco	Chile	Hegemonic
El Austral de Valdivia	Chile	Hegemonic
Mapuexpress	Chile	Against-hegemonic
El Mostrador	Chile	Against-hegemonic
Clarín	Argentina	Hegemonic
El Día	Argentina	Hegemonic
Página/12	Argentina	Against-hegemonic
Portal 221	Argentina	Against-hegemonic

).

In this case, a corpus of news was analyzed with the content analysis technique and using SPSS software, version 25, based on a set of variables arranged in an Excel file for data entry (codebook), namely identification, visual frames, thematic frames, value tones, actors, attribution of responsibility, state action, and generic frames, among others.

(b)

Twenty in-depth interviews with Mapuche Indigenous leaders from Chile (20 subjects) and Argentina (1 subject), using 3 thematic cores and 12 sub-themes. Here, we understand Mapuche leaders to be those who are recognized in different areas, such as academia, politics, or in their performance in the public or private sector. This was ensured by using the “snowball” technique in the conformation of the group of interviewees; that is, the first interviewees gave references to the names of the following, based on the characteristics recorded (

Table 2. Details of interviewed subjects.

Interviewee ID or Code	Sex	Age Group	Profession	City, Country
E 1	Man	Adult	Academic	Temuco, Chile
E 2	Woman	Adult	Academic
E 3	Man	Adult	Political leader
E 4	Woman	Adult	Political leader
E 5	Man	Young	Public sector
E 6	Woman	Young	Public sector
E 7	Woman	Young	Private sector
E 8	Man	Young	Private sector
E 9	Man	Young	Activist
E 10	Woman	Young	Activist
E 11	Woman	Young	Academic	Valdivia, Chile
E 12	Man	Adult	Activist
E 13	Woman	Young	Academic
E 14	Man	Young	Private sector
E 15	Woman	Adult	Public sector
E 16	Man	Adult	Private sector
E 17	Woman	Adult	Private sector
E 18	Man	Young	Academic
E 19	Woman	Adult	Political leader
E 20	Man	Adult	Political leader	La Plata, Argentina

). Interviews were conducted between 2 April 2020 and 29 August 2022, taking into consideration the difficulties that arose as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic as well as the time required to coordinate each interview with Mapuche people with different characteristics (Figure 1). This part of the study was carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Scientific Ethics Committee of the University of La Frontera (on 11 December 2020, as recorded in Act Number 061_19, Folio No043_19). Thus, the interviews have been signed by each interviewee, who has kept a copy. The consents have been archived in a duly safeguarded place at the University, while the recordings of the interviews as well as the transcriptions are duly safeguarded. To ensure anonymity, both in the presentation of the data and in any publication thereof, only a description characterized by generic coded aspects has been used, namely gender (male/female), age (young/adult), activity (academic/political/professional), and country and city of origin, such that it is not possible to associate the responses with specific people.

These are mainly Mapuche leaders who work in different areas of activity (Table 2).

In this case, for the analysis, a Qualitative Content Analysis was used, using open, axial, and selective coding. First, an attempt is made to express the data through concepts. In this, the researcher dissects, fragments, segments, and unravels the data contained in the text, trying to enumerate a series of emerging categories (Carrero et al., 2006). To do this, the work of coding and analyzing the data were carried out with the support of the Computer-Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software (CAQDAS) Nvivo 12, to categorize the codes and categories of the open and axial coding and group them in a dendrogram.

(c)

Review and document the analysis of historical texts of the Indigenous movement.

In this case, an interpretative analysis was made according to the information obtained from the documents. The main criteria for inclusion/exclusion of historical texts are as follows:

(a)

Texts of different nature, such as books, chronicles, or news;

(b)

That provide information about the Mapuche movement;

(c)

That provide information on the Mapuche media.

From this process, 9 key works were found.

The three methodological strategies were integrated by cross-referencing the data to answer the objectives and address the hypothesis. The press corpus allowed us to access the strategies employed in the Mapuche media, in comparison with the hegemonic media, in order to establish the particularities of these strategies. The interviews and the analysis of key documents allowed us to understand how the actors define the strategies employed, especially the construction of an alternative agenda.

3. Results

Considering the analysis of the news, interviews, and documentaries, it was possible to find mainly two types of findings.

One referred to strategies employed by the Mapuche movement during the first stage, consisting of intervening in the agendas of the hegemonic media through the generation of news events that allowed them to achieve visibility to express their demands and claims (as land and constitutional recognition), as well as to create new means to articulate the circulation of the contents, both directly and through replicas in other media.

The second type of findings refers to the characterization of a counter-agenda, understood as an alternative agenda raised in a network by different non-hegemonic media that seek to make their demands and claims visible.

3.1. Strategies Identified

3.1.1. Intervention of Hegemonic Agendas

One of the main problems for understanding counterhegemonic phenomena and processes has been the hegemonic conception and interpretation of some communicative and media theories and models, such as the effects model and the current of uses and gratifications. In the case of the latter, the question of gratifications (tastes, expectations, and experiences) prevails, but in its Latin American aspect, we observe an interesting focus on social uses (Orozco & González, 2012). In this sense, there are two challenges for a sufficiently critical view, which has been ignored and which we can represent with two types of questions: (a) about the nature of the study, that is, going from questions of what the media do with the public to what audiences do with the media and (b) about the purpose of the study, that is, how is greater empowerment of audiences achieved? These seemingly simple twists will allow us to overcome the determinism of the media to enable the emancipation of audiences. Likewise, they invite us to see beyond the limits of the theory itself, for example, that “mediations and practices converge in uses” (Orozco, 1998). In a similar sense, we can reverse the logic of the agendas, moving from questions of how the media affect/influence the issues that audiences will consider to how the interests of the public affect/influence the topics that the agendas will consider. Furthermore, in what ways could audiences generate these transformations?

As we will see below, one of the first ways is the intervention of agendas. In the section that follows this one, we will see the second: the production of new media.

If we consider that the media agenda establishes a correlation between the themes raised in the media content and the problems reported by the public, we will understand that what has not been included in the media does not exist for public opinion.

This phenomenon, “which has been demonstrated in numerous investigations in different areas of study, political-electoral, social, cultural, religious, marketing, business” (Abela, 2012, p. 522) explains, on the one hand, the need to reverse the situation of invisibility of certain groups or movements and, in contrast, the efforts deployed to achieve said visibility. In this sense, effectively, it is about installing certain themes and problems in public opinion.

Although studies of the conflict between the nation-state and the Mapuche people usually incorporate press information as a source (Rojas & Miranda, 2015), they fail to visualize the media–conflict framework, in which the media constitute another actor (Del Valle, 2022b, 2022c, 2023, 2024). This is mainly due to a double focus: on the one hand, historiographical and on the other hand, sociopolitical, which prevents an in-depth understanding of the singularities of the media, beyond the coverage and treatment of the content.

The analysis of the first of the arson attacks against the machinery of one of the forestry companies in the region allows us to understand one of the milestones of the conflict, beyond the purely conflictual. This arson attack will play an important role, both because it gives rise to a new phase and because it implies a more strategic view, whether intended with the facts or derived later from them. However, certainly, we must begin by pointing out that this arson attack supposes (a) the failure of indigenous protest as a mechanism of political inclusion and (b) that social protest had not generated any benefit for the Mapuche movement. Considering the latter, the move towards violence seemed an obvious strategy. However, is it sufficiently explained by the failure of previous forms of protest? Are there other elements to consider?

It is not possible to understand the emergence of violence in the Mapuche movement, expressed in the arson attacks against the machinery of forestry companies and the subsequent ones, without also considering the installation of a new media culture starting from the post-dictatorship (1990), which was expressed not only on morning television as the main format but also in a more casual coverage and treatment of the press and radio, particularly of some dissident sectors. This opening, however, as it later became evident, only consisted of a one-time exercise and had no relationship with the strong economic, ideological, and cognitive concentration of the media structure in Chile, which will continue to be maintained. What is evident is the correlation between the events that occurred in the region and their presence in the media.

The milestone represented by the first arson attack on three logging trucks belonging to the Bosques Arauco forestry company, which occurred in December 1997, is characterized by high coverage and informative treatment at the regional and national levels (Pairicán & Álvarez, 2011). The political–strategic nature of the events (1997) has been widely recorded as a milestone (Pairicán & Álvarez, 2011).

The coverage and treatment of this event and subsequent ones are part of a global strategy that will include various platforms, with the purpose of breaking into the media ecosystem head-on (García, 2014, p. 177).

Before the widespread use of social networks, the strategy consisted of using the power of hegemonic media in a counter-informative manner. This was a complex agenda intervention strategy. On the one hand, because it had to break the existing information fence against the different actions that will affect the interests of the nation-state and forestry companies and, on the other hand, because it required a “wake-up call” truly capable of giving visibility by circumventing guidelines, practices, and journalistic routines strongly rooted in power.

3.1.2. Creating New Media to Build a Media Against-Agenda

With the beginning of the new century, the need to create new media will emerge with enthusiasm to move from the intervention of the agendas of the hegemonic media to the formation of its agenda, as well as to constitute a discursive counterhegemony that reinforces the first advances of the counter-information activity from the second half of the 1990s (Marimán, 2011). Meanwhile, from the point of view of the users of the different media, we observe a clear trend towards the incorporation of these networks in political activity.

Now situated in the era of widespread use of social networks, the appropriation of virtual spaces is as noticeable as it is efficient, as shown today, for example, by the intense activism of social movements on Twitter (Sierra, 2021). Notwithstanding the above, research also shows us that Mapuche actors distinguish three roles associated with the media, namely (a) hegemonic roles (especially in the case of media belonging to the country’s economic groups), (b) counterhegemonic roles (especially in the case of the media belonging to the groups themselves), and (c) relative roles, which together with allowing the visibility of the Mapuche movement generate uncontrolled scenarios lacking planning (Del Valle, 2022a).

Now, there is a criticism of the way in which the hegemonic media represent the Mapuche people:

(a)

“The first thing the hegemonic media do is stigmatize the Mapuche, they call us terrorists. They always put the Wichís on the agenda when they die of hunger or they put the indigenous peoples on the agenda when there is some repression, some roadblock, some death” (E 20).

Similarly, the interviewed actors do not hesitate to highlight some of the main strengths of new media and the use of social networks:

(a)

Allows the active incorporation of new actors: “incorporate Mapuche youth into these processes.” (E 3).

(b)

It allows for dissemination, validation, and cohesion: “establishing communication justice, equating Mapuche presence in the Chilean collective imagination” (E 4).

(c)

It allows us to inform and achieve unity: “which allows us to be united and active, despite the multiple adversities, which are triggered from time to time because this living resistance is latent, in a silent network” (E 2).

(d)

Allows you to think differently: “Without independent media, it would be impossible to think differently” (E 8).

(e)

It allows for incorporating new allies and transmitting hope: “The multiple voices from different places can awaken hope in those who are fainting or reinforce the conviction of those who remain fighting, finding allies who fight on other rivers” (E 6).

(f)

It allows access to the diversity of perspectives: “When this type of communication did not exist, you could only find out about alternative initiatives and/or resistance if the traditional media were interested in this type of news or if someone traveled and acted as nexus […] allow access to views of the most diverse facts; which has been fundamental when there is a policy of demonization of the resistance movement” (E 6).

Below, we can see a summary of what has been stated up to this point (Figure 2).

3.2. Characterization of the Against-Agenda

According to the objectives and hypotheses initially proposed, the against-agenda is characterized by the following:

• It is another agenda built within the framework of a dispute for control of the semiotic-communicational code that gives meaning to society, its relationships, and especially, its possible transformations.
• In the same sense, the against-agenda is a model that explains the role of the new media.
• The against-agenda is only built in very particular socio-political situations.
• The against-agenda is an emergency, since counter-agenda setting operates through emergent actors, in emergent contexts and through emergent media.
• Finally, the against-agenda is configured through collective and community work that mobilizes in a utopian dimension.

In this way, the creation and use of our media constitute a strategy that has shown its effectiveness over time, because it manages to permeate both the intra-community space and the rest of the population: “Thus, indigenous media accelerate the process of recreation and reinvention of rituals favoring a (re)elaboration of their Mapuche identity and the recovery of their ethnic consciousness” (García, 2014, p. 184).

Now, if we synthetically consider the media strategies used during the second half of the 90s of the 20th century and compare them with the strategies used more than twenty years later, we will observe the following information, as shown in a comparative table (

Table 3. Comparative table of strategies.

Since 1997 (Arson Attacks)	Since 2019 (Social Outbreak)
Installation of a more planned media narrative, with very clear justification speeches; belligerent discourse	More consolidated speech, with a clear conceptual basis; unifying speech
There are no means and there is the discourse of a story that one wants to establish	Greater discursive control, with the positioning of content (wallmapu) and places (constituent convention), allows for greater strengthening of the discourse
Context of intervention of hegemonic agendas	Context of creating own media

).

Although we have mentioned some Mapuche media so far, we must remember that it is not a recent phenomenon and that it is expressed in multiple ways (Gutiérrez, 2014) (Figure 3).

4. Discussion

The discussion on the possibilities of social movements associated with different power groups to install an alternative agenda to the agendas of large companies or commercial media is open.

This paper addresses their possibilities on the basis of a particular experience associated with the Mapuche indigenous movement present in the territories of Argentina and Chile. This case provides relevant data that allow for a cautious analysis of these same possibilities. On the one hand, contexts of social and political conflict usually contribute to the establishment of these alternative agendas or against-agendas (Candón, 2012). However, for the same reason, it is possible to think that their duration is also restricted to the context that sustains them.

Therefore, one of the challenges posed here to continue this type of study is to better understand the conditions for the emergence of alternative agendas or against-agendas of socially excluded groups, especially based on comparative studies and analyzing in detail the impact of the social conditions of the conflict on their permanence. In the case analyzed, it is observed that only the results of the work of collective production and reproduction of language manage to remain. The findings, for example, show that common interests and concrete strategies are key (Sádaba, 2008). Likewise, it is of interest for the development of this research to clearly identify which strategies have given the greatest results to social movements, especially the two presented here, namely the intervention of hegemonic media agendas and the creation of new media to transform hegemonic agendas: under what conditions does one or the other work best, and is it necessary to implement one or the other? Finally, it is interesting to continue with the characterization of the against-agenda, as an alternative agenda, in particular, its duration, its conditions of possibility and replicability in different cases.

In contrast, it is important to consider the detailed analysis of the different variables that make up the contexts of socio-political conflict when studying the possibilities of alternative media agendas (against-agendas). The limitations of the present work, which allow us to explore new hypotheses to guide future research, include the following: if the construction of alternative agendas or counter-agendas by social movements is subject to the contingency that generates the possibilities of their emergence, it is possible to think of limited possibilities as well as to think of the strategies and tactics of maintaining the conflicts as more or less permanent situations. This, for example, would explain the characteristics of the interactions between social movements and socially excluded groups with the State and its institutions.

Finally, it is important to consider the role played by the subsistence of alternative media that maintain discourses over time. In this way, alternative media cannot be understood only as momentary devices, but as permanent bets capable of giving continuity to the discourses of social movements and socially excluded groups.

5. Conclusions

In short, what is at stake in the construction of alternative agendas or counter-agendas is a permanent dispute for the code to achieve social transformations. The above is expressed in the antagonism of both agendas and how, over time, the contents of social activism tend to occupy spaces in the media (Saavedra, 2023; Alarcón & Cárdenas, 2021; Candón, 2012).

This need for alternative agendas or counter-agendas is explained by the high levels of concentration of media ownership and content, which generate important imbalances by not making room for emerging voices, issues, and problematizations, which are systematically marginalized or mistreated. Likewise, as the media select, frame, and ideologically interpret certain facts considered important, according to hegemonic interests, a complex situation of inaccessibility, marginalization, and lack of informative justice is generated, which harms the right to communication as a social good.

Nevertheless, the need to dispute the code and social meaning by making excluded subjectivities public forces newsworthiness to be managed in various ways, such as the media reaction to conflict and violence. The notions of conflict and violence often act simultaneously as categories of social denunciation and as media responses to expectations that the media themselves have about the social and political. In this way, for example, expressions such as “Mapuche conflict” are not mere factual descriptions, but also arise as sociopolitical complaints and, at the same time, as a materialization of the expectations of the media system and not necessarily as an informative condition. We could maintain that just as violence and conflict are sustained by processes of social and historical accumulation, violence and conflict in the media also operate as a process of media accumulation of informational expectations about said violence and conflict. It is precisely in this scenario that expressions emerge that are installed in the contents of the media agenda, as is the case of the expression wallmapu, as a utopia of the construction of the Mapuche country (Ancán & Calfío, 1998). Indeed, strategies that succeed in breaking hegemonic inertia end up being imposed and becoming a learned practice.