To coopt or to repress? Authoritarian interventions on mexican local press

Abstract

Local hybrid regimes rely on a wide range of strategies intended to demotivate media’s criticism. Why do some critical newspapers get coopted while others get violently represssed? Using evidence from Mexican states, I argue that these two strategies are substitutive. Choosing one over the other depends on the resources available to the governors (political, financial and violent); and also, on the costs associated to each strategy (reputational, monitoring, recruitment and visibility costs).