and criticism, because the excessively concentrated media directly acquire the power to create reality, given that our reality is constructed almost entirely through communication. This has been sufficiently raised in sociology, in particular that of the phenomenological aspect and long before the current technological leap. 33 118. In this regard, I must stress the need to incorporate into law, mainly into the branch of Human Rights, the data of reality basically coming from sociology and other social sciences, in order to avoid the traps of a closed normativism that obstructs the incorporation of this data and that, as noted above, can lead to paradoxical solutions in terms of real consequences, despite the fact that the decisions were motivated by the most noble intentions. IV.2.b. The abnormal situation does not prevent weighting, but does complicate it 119. In any case, it is necessary to point out that the abnormality of a monopolistic or oligopolistic situation in no way cancels the need to safeguard the spaces for journalistic criticism necessary for the proper functioning of the administration from punitive power. However it complicates the weighting of values that always presupposes this limitation in terms of the scope of justification, since it introduces an element of social abnormality, given that concentrated media can generate total and singular creations of reality, as happened in the old totalitarianisms. It is not possible to forget that Pravda was a sole creator of reality and Göbbels abhorrent principles have not simply ceased to be effective. 120. The weighting of values, necessary to establish the limits of the cause of justification or legality, is complicated in a region where concentrated media ally with prevaricating judges, intelligence agents and secret services and set up processes now known as lawfare, which support coups in Bolivia, exclude opposition leaders from democratic competition in Brazil or stigmatize others in Argentina. 121. I stress that progress must be made in the protection of the critical press against the undue advance of the exercise of punitive power, but the weighting of values, which allows us to define the limits of justification in each case, becomes more complex. It requires extremely careful attention, given that often we do not live in societies with media plurality, befitting of the plural democracies that we all want, but with concentrated media with enormous power to create unique realities, enhanced by the growing adoption of renewed and more penetrating marketing methods, use of trolls and advertising targeted through big data. It is obvious that this complicates the weighting of values because another value also comes into play, the need to preserve democracy and the rule of law, in the face of fully created realities that are structured to encourage coups d'état or other less coarse, but equally effective attempts at dismissal. 122. Nor should we be naive and overlook the fact that strong economic interests operate in these attempts at destabilizing institutions, because otherwise we would believe that we are floating in a bucolic lake of calm waters when in reality we are being lashed and tossed by the impetuous waves of stark forces that compete for markets or advantages. 123. Although in these conditions the necessary weighting of values is enormously difficult, I do not believe that it has too much influence in this case, because contrary 33 Amongst many, are the fundamental works on this subject, Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann, The social construction of reality, Buenos Aires, 1986, Alfred Schutz, The problem of social reality, Buenos Aires, 1974; also fundamental Pierre Bourdieu, On television, Barcelona, 1998. 19