In Dominican history, few institutions have sustained such a decisive presence in the formation of national consciousness as the Autonomous University of Santo Domingo (UASD) and Listín Diario. Although born at different times—one in the 16th century and the other in the 19th—both have contributed profoundly to thinking, narrating, and guiding the public life of the country.
The UASD, founded in 1538, is not only the oldest university on the American continent; It is, above all, a space where Dominican society has questioned itself. From its classrooms, generations of professionals, intellectuals and political actors have emerged who have participated in key moments in national history. His identity has been marked by critical thinking, a libertarian vocation and social commitment.
For its part, Listín Diario, founded in 1889, has been a privileged witness of the events that have defined the course of the country. But beyond recording history, he has actively contributed to its interpretation. Through its pages, it has channeled debates, made problems visible and offered a space for public deliberation, becoming one of the main references of Dominican journalism.
Both institutions share an essential function: producing and circulating meaning in society. The university does it through research and training; the newspaper, from information and public mediation. The value of their relationship lies in this complementarity.
However, for a long time these two traditions have run in parallel, meeting punctually, without sustained articulation. Today, the conditions of the country make evident the need to deepen that bond.
The great national issues—security, inequality, institutional transformations—require not only information, but understanding. In this context, the convergence between university and media becomes strategic.
Here the vision of the director of Listín Diario, Miguel Franjul, who has opted to open spaces for academic thought in the public sphere, acquires special relevance. In that sense, promoting rigorous analysis constitutes a highly considered decision since it strengthens the democratic exercise in a people that suffered one of the most atrocious dictatorships in America.
This orientation has allowed two traditions and national emblems to be brought together. The UASD provides rigor and critical capacity; Daily Listin, scope and public incidence. From our perspective, this link must be assumed as a strategic line: the university must project itself more clearly in the national debate.
In this framework, the National Forum on Crime, Security and Violence – FCES 2026 Research Conference represents a concrete expression of this convergence, demonstrating the importance of articulating knowledge and communication. If this effort can continue, not only will the relationship between both institutions be strengthened, but it will also increase the quality of the democratic debate in the country.
