correspond to the social communication topics recognized in the democratic States. This situation brings the possibility to design a research program focused on studying the laws carefully and evaluate their creation. Also, to discuss if these topics are enough for the Mexican context or if it is necessary to propose new arguments that require legal frames. The possibility to recognize new communicational rights and to make them enforceable, even if they are or not in global agendas. An example is cyberbullying, personal data protection, and the democratization of the public image right, for the speech right for all, not just for journalists and officers. Observing these possibilities serves to have options for the articulation of the legislation analysis with the studies of civil society and its lights in the communication area; it would add to the recognition of a broader catalogue of demands that require legal recognition to convert into formal rights.

In third place, it is evident the necessity of going deep in the evaluation of the social communication laws belonging to the subnational entities. The complexity of this work requires the support of comparative analysis to contrast successful experiences of state regulation of communication in the world. This situation would allow identifying its sufficiency levels, also of its incorporation in the theoretical debates and the Public global agendas without abandoning the regional scope; it would make it possible to continue the comprehension of problems to legislate on social communication. It would encourage the legal region body in its efficiency, not necessarily in its quantity; it would make it possible to identify the recognition challenges and demand rights and freedom of information and communication.

In fourth place, it is relevant to insist that the specific laws are not enough when talking about the communication of the subnational entities. There are several elements spread in a big part of the regional laws, of which we have already given examples in this article. For this reason, it is a pending matter to identify the total chart of regulation that implies the public communication system (Martín-Serrano, 1994). Also, identifying how the social specific communication laws interact with the entire legal body of the subnational entities; with this, a complete map of the legal area of the social public system communication rights and obligations recognition could be formed from the regional scope.

A fifth consideration consists of making the following question: how much these laws represent the social claim related to rights and freedoms of communication and information? Are these the result of the strategies of the power groups to keep control of the communicative dynamic? Salazar (2018) and Espino & Mendoza (2015) present their work to show the strategies of the regional power groups to control the media and press system by laws and other actions. Strangely, there were not identify studies that document, at a region level, the efforts of the civil society to recognize formally communicational rights; this does not mean that these efforts do not exist. The child audience protection laws, the journalist protection, and even some other regulations of other subjects suggest that regional social agendas are incrementing on them.

According to UNESCO, the evaluation of media development implies to qualify the legal frame of the national States as an evaluation category. It is limited if the diversity of legislation in the subnational space is not recognized. The general observance of federal laws is an indicator of the central regulation that affects the entire country. But the social communication laws of the subnational entities are incorporating qualifies and sometimes salving deficiencies that are related to political and social life in the regional field. They look for solutions for problems that represent the