6 137); and V. Conclusion (paras. 138-142). I. THE IMPORTANCE OF AUDIOVISUAL MEDIA IN DEMOCRATIC SOCIETIES 19. As emphasized at the beginning of this opinion, starting with Advisory Opinion OC-5 on Compulsory Membership in an Association Prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism and up until this case against Venezuela, the Inter-American Court had been consistent in granting a broad content to the right to freedom of thought and expression recognized in Article 13 of the Convention.24 The Inter-American Court has indicated that this article protects the right to seek, receive and impart ideas and information of all kinds, as well as to receive and know the information and ideas imparted by others. In addition, it has indicated that freedom of expression has an individual dimension and a social dimension, which should be guaranteed fully and simultaneously to provide total effectiveness to the right to freedom of expression.25 20. The individual dimension of freedom of expression includes the right to use any appropriate means to impart opinions, ideas and information and to ensure that it reaches the largest possible audience. In this regard, expression and dissemination are indivisible, so that a restriction of the possibilities of dissemination represents directly, and to the same extent, a limit to the right to express oneself freely. 26 21. In addition, regarding the second dimension of the right to freedom of expression – the social dimension – it is necessary to point out that freedom of expression is a means of sharing ideas and information between individuals; it includes the right to try and communicate one’s point of view to others, but it also signifies the right of everyone to know the opinions, information and news imparted by others. 27 For the ordinary individual it is as important to know the opinion of others or the information that they have, as the right to impart his or her own. Thus, in light of both dimensions, freedom of expression requires, on the one hand, that no one should be arbitrarily impaired or prevented from expressing his or her own thoughts and represents, therefore, a right of each individual; but, on the other hand, Compulsory Membership in an Association Prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism (Arts. 13 and 29 American Convention on Human Rights); Case of “The Last Temptation of Christ” (Olmedo Bustos et al.) v. Chile; Case of Ivcher Bronstein v. Peru; Case of Herrera Ulloa v. Costa Rica. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of July 2, 2004. Series C No. 107; Case of Ricardo Canese v. Paraguay. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 31, 2004. Series C No. 111; Case of Palamara Iribarne v. Chile. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 22, 2005. Series C No. 135; Case of Claude Reyes et al. v. Chile. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 19, 2006. Series C No. 151; Case of Kimel v. Argentina. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of May 2, 2008. Series C No. 177; Case of Tristán Donoso v. Panama. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of January 27, 2009. Series C No. 193; Case of Ríos et al. v. Venezuela. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of January 28, 2009. Series C No. 194; Case of Perozo et al. v. Venezuela. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of January 28, 2009. Series C No. 195; Case of Usón Ramírez v. Venezuela. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 20, 2009. Series C No. 207; Case of Gomes Lund et al. (Guerrilha do Araguaia) v. Brazil. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 24, 2010. Series C No. 219; Case of Fontevecchia and D’Amico v. Argentina. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 29, 2011. Series C No. 238; Case of Mémoli v. Argentina. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 22, 2013. Series C No. 265; Case of Norín Catrimán et al. (Leaders, members and activist of the Mapuche Indigenous People) v. Chile. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of May 29, 2014. Series C No. 279; and Case of Granier et al. (Radio Caracas Televisión) v. Venezuela. 24 Compulsory Membership in an Association Prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism (Arts. 13 and 29 American Convention on Human Rights), para. 53, and Case of Norín Catrimán et al. (Leaders, members and activist of the Mapuche Indigenous People) v. Chile, para. 371 25 Cf. Case of “The Last Temptation of Christ” (Olmedo Bustos et al.) v. Chile., para. 65, and Case of Norín Catrimán et al. (Leaders, members and activist of the Mapuche Indigenous People) v. Chile, para. 372. 26 Case of “The Last Temptation of Christ” (Olmedo Bustos et al.) v. Chile., para. 66, and Case of Norín Catrimán et al. (Leaders, members and activist of the Mapuche Indigenous People) v. Chile, para. 375. 27