A bit on Chavez shutting down RCTV
You might already have heard about the fact that Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez recently refused to renew a television license belonging to Venezuelan TV station Radio Caracas Television (RCTV). I’ve seen a lot of reports everywhere the last few days that basically amount to accusations on restriction of freedom of speech. However, when you consider certain details, things start to look very different.
If you’ve been reading my blog for a while, you know how I think about freedom of speech and about censorship. I absolutely HATE censorship. But what I hate just as much as censorship, is dishonest, incomplete, incorrect or in general, bad, information. I’ve written an entire post not too long ago about how we have to be very careful these days with where we get our information from. In that post, I also mentioned what’s needed in order for information to be useful to us.
I can imagine the decision not to renew RCTV’s license was not an easy one for Chavez. He must have known people would accuse him of trying to silence the opposition in his country and restricting freedom of speech. On the other hand, RCTV has been known to violate laws in Venezuela and has demonstrated questionable journalistic ethics for years now. From here:
Since 1999 RCTV has spread blatant lies and outlandish manipulations of information directly attacking Ch?vez. It has broadcasted sexually explicit and other inappropriate material in such violation of the law (652 cases) that any honest assessment leads to the conclusion that their journalism is an attack on public health and decency. Fox News is a kitten compared to RCTV.
Beyond this, RCTV were leaders in the 2-day coup in April 2002. This coup was not only one that used the military, but also the media. During the coup, RCTV cancelled their usual programs and broadcast a two-day string of black and white fuzziness, Hollywood movies, cartoons, and infomercials. This is widely confirmed by Venezuelans. When RCTV finally covered the coup, they reported that Ch?vez had signed his resignation and peacefully left his post as president after his supporters had opened fire on an innocent opposition march. The images RCTV broadcasted of the violence among the marchers were later proved to have been secretively arranged so to block from view the reality; pro-Ch?vez marchers were firing in self-defense after having been attacked by hidden gunmen. Meanwhile, their president had been violently kidnapped. RCTV`s action were part of a blatant and well-coordinated attempt by the major media to assist the coup leaders by blinding the public to what was actually happening.
And from here:
Along with the other four major corporate-owned dominant television channels (controlling 90% of the nation’s TV market), RCTV played a leading role instigating and supporting the aborted April, 2002 two-day coup against President Chavez mass public opposition on the streets helped overturn restoring Chavez to office and likely saving his life. Later in the year, these stations conspired again as active participants in the economically devastating 2002-03 main trade union confederation (CTV) – chamber of commerce (Fedecameras) lockout and industry-wide oil strike including willful sabotage against state oil company PDVSA costing it an estimated $14 billion in lost revenue and damage.
For one thing, I think Chavez has been extremely lucky in 2002. During the 2-day coup in 2002, which was planned by the CIA, a couple of Irish filmmakers were present and were able to capture a lot of footage. This footage made it into their documentary “The Revolution will not be Televised.” I wrote about this documentary here. You can watch it on Google Video. In this documentary, you can clearly see how RCTV manipulated footage to fool people into believing a completely incorrect version of what was going on during the 2-day coup. Were it not for these independent filmmakers, lots of people, including me, would probably not know, or doubt, what went on during the 2-day coup. So Chavez has been extremely fortunate to have had this documentary available as an independent and objective source of information to back him.
Even after Chavez came back to power after the coup in 2002, he merely asked the private media who openly supported the coup against him, including RCTV, to correct their behaviour and be honest. He didn’t ask them to lie and not to criticize him, but simply to be honest, objective and correct in their reporting. One can imagine that he could have shut them all down back then if he wanted to, and if he wanted to restrict freedom of speech and not tolerate criticism. But he didn’t, even though what they did to him in 2002 during the 2-day coup was very serious. If you watch “The Revolution will not be Televised,” all of this is very clear at the end. And ofcourse most of the private media, including RCTV, went on with their questionable journalistic ethics even after 2002 until the Venezuelan government decided not to renew RCTV’s license this year.
So is Chavez restricting freedom of speech? I think not. Like I said at the beginning of this post, I HATE censorship, but I also hate it when the media purposely manipulate information and are dishonest in order to promote their (political) agenda. I hate dishonest, incomplete, incorrect or in general, bad, information. So with regards to what RCTV had been doing, I think it was correct for the Venezuelan government to take back the license for channel 2 and give it back to the people of Venezuela. From here:
In Venezuela, as in most democracies, the right to broadcast TV and radio are public commons, which belong in the hands of the public in some way. Since representative democracy is such a predominant political model at this point in history, democratically elected governments like the one in Venezuela are supposed to control the public communications commons. The government gives concessions to private parties to use these commons responsibly, and the government has the right to take them away in the public interest at any time.
The decision not to renew the concession to RCTV was made after a thorough investigation of their journalistic ethics including accuracy, objectivity, and their compliance with the Law on Responsibility in Television and Radio (which was denounced by Human Rights Watch for being a restriction of free speech).
It is also important to note, that although RCTV lost its license to broadcast on channel 2, they are still able to operate via cable and satellite. This is an important fact the international press seems to ignore. I guess you have to ignore that if you want to make it seem like Chavez is restricting freedom of speech and completely shut down RCTV. From here:
In spite of their lawlessness, the Chavez government treated all five broadcasters gently opting not to prosecute them, but merely refusing to renew one of RCTV’s operating licenses (its VHF one) when it expired May 27 (its cable and satellite operations are unaffected) – a mere slap on the wrist for a media enterprise’s active role in trying to overthrow the democratically elected Venezuelan president and his government. The article explained if an individual or organization of any kind incited public hostility, violence and anti-government rebellion under Section 2384 of the US code, Title 18, they would be subject to fine and/or imprisonment for up to 20 years for the crime of sedition.
I, for one, agree with the fact that refusing to renew their license is “a mere slap on the wrist” when you consider everything they’ve done so far.
But does this stop them? Far from it. They seem to continue with plans to destabilize the government in Venezuela:
Caracas, May 26, 2007 (venezuelanalysis.com)? Several major Venezuelan journalists have received all-expenses paid trips to the U.S. for courses in an apparent effort of the U.S. State Department to influence the media in Venezuela, according to recently released documents. The Venezuelan-American attorney Eva Golinger, who released the information yesterday in a press conference in Caracas, also revealed evidence of a destabilization plan against the Chavez government to take place this weekend.
Golinger is the author of The Chavez Code, which documents U.S. funding of opposition groups and U.S. involvement in the 2002 coup attempt.
Under a program named International Business Leadership Program, many Venezuelan journalists, mostly from the opposition media, but also some from the Venezuelan government, have received “scholarships” from the U.S. government to attend training courses during the years 2001-2005.
…
With the supposed intention of teaching journalists about the media and journalism in the United States, the program also has the purpose of influencing how Venezuelan journalists cover events related to the U.S. foreign policy. According to the documents released, the programs denominated “Journalism IV” seek to “influence the approach and ultimately the coverage given to issues of importance to U.S. foreign policy and to strengthen the Venezuelan democratic process.”
The State Department gave special attention to the Venezuelan news channel Globovisi?n, which they believe to be “the most influential channel” and to have the most positive coverage of the United States. The State Department sought a special relationship with this particular news network, and especially with one important journalist Maria Fernanda Flores.
Pay special attention to the fact that the US State Department is actively trying to influence the media in Venezuela. Also take note of the fact that Globovision is receiving “special attention.” Could it have something to do with the fact that they recently alluded to assassination of Chavez during a broadcast?
In an official broadcast over all the nation’s airwaves yesterday, President Chavez announced that his government would not allow the private media or political leaders to openly call for violence and incite chaos in the country. Chavez accused the private network Globovision of instigating violence and his assassination, and warned them to control themselves.
“Globovision, you watch how far you go, I just recommend that you measure it well,” warned Chavez. “If you all want, keep advancing, if you want to keep calling for disobedience, inciting assassination like you did last night.,” he said referring to a recent broadcast of Globovision that alluded to assassination.
Chavez also warned the country to be aware of any destabilization plans. He alerted both opposition and pro-government groups that certain opposition sectors are looking to cause deaths in the streets.
It is no surprise that the USA is trying to influence and even actively support the private, largely anti-Chavez, media in Venezuela. They’ve been supporting the opposition in Venezuela for years now. It’s pretty obvious what they’re trying to achieve. If you want to take over from the outside, you have to first destabilize from within which makes it easier. They’ve done the same thing in many, many other countries in the past, and are doing it right now in Iran as well.
It’s sad that many people still fail to notice what’s really going on.
This entry was posted
on Sunday, June 3rd, 2007 at 5:20 pm by Karel Donk
and is filed under 
June 4th, 2007 at 7:40 am
Karel,
Interesting observations on the Closure of the RCTV and your view
that the closure really can’t be equated to an attack on the Freedom
of Speech and Expression in Venezuela. Whilst I found your arguments
convincing, I’m afraid that I also understand that they will appeal
to many who are largely ignorant of the reality of current Venezuelan
Life and depend on similar observations from subjective media sources
both from the left and right.
You make the point that it is understandable that RCTV was refused
it’s license on the basis of its role in the 2002 coup against Chavez.
Whilst the point has merit, even the Venezuelans can’t justify a delay
of 5 years to support this case. The timing and the purpose of the
closure has far more significant than “?a mere slap on the wrist��?
as you suggest.
Chavez is far stronger now than he was in 2002. Recognisable and credible
opposition is limited with key players joining their fellow anti -Castro
Cubans in the U.S. The reason for the delay is not about RCTV’s part
in the coup but more about the Governments power. Even the chaumos
demonstrations were small and of limited impact and showed little
of the funding the CIA is purported to be paying the opposition! You
mention that 90% of the Venezuelan media is still in private hands
and this is a good indication of the continued freedom of speech and
expression in Venezuela. This nearly as misleading as the RCTV scenes
from the coup. The rationale for refusing RCTV it’s license, was not
an end in itself……..it was “encourager les autres”. Any commercial
enterprise in Venezuela which doesn’t get this simple message will
soon go the way of RCTV.
Whilst the wheels of revenge have been slow, I predict a very quick
learning curve for the media in Venezuela which will soon destroy
any objective criticism of Chavez. Of course, I could be wrong and
the private Venezuelan media will fail to grasp what is happening
to them and continue to live in denial. This will play straight into
Chavez’s hands as the meddlesome and irritating Globovision channel
will be the next to find it’s license refused.
It is quite absurd to suggest that the suspension of RCTV is not really
all that bad as they are still permitted to broadcast on Satellite
and Cable Channels. I wonder if you have visited the barrios around
Caracas and seen the ranchos where despite Chavez’s 8 years of power
and increased oil revenues, millions continue to live in squalor.
Satellite and Cable channels do not, and will not reach these bases
of Chavez power. This population will be uncluttered in the future
by any suggestion of failure on the part of Chavez, retaining it’s
“rent a mob” qualities, and will descend on to the streets at a moments
call.
The film “This revolution will not be televised” is also cited as
an underlying testimony for the closure rationale. One has to question
the values of journalists who wanted to objectively film a political
character and who were clearly afforded lots of access to the individual.
I would have been far more impressed with their impartiality if they
had also examined the happenings of the coup attempt by Chavez himself
in the 1990′s. They would have then realised that a central feature
in the success of Venezuelan coups since the 1950′s is nothing to
do with the media and its opposition to the government in power. Essentially
Venezuelans don’t “do” coups well and the two recent examples demonstrate
that incompetence rather than media subjectivity, is the deciding
factor. To blame RCTV for nearly toppling Chavez in 2002 overlooks
the far more important failure by the “golpistas” to immediately get
rid of the Miraflores Security Guards and Chavez himself.
Its sobering to consider the historical comparisons involved. An individual
who served in the Army and led a failed coup was eventually democratically
elected. He changed the nation’s flag and survived a number of coup
attempts on himself. One of his early actions when in power was the closure
of opposition newspapers and enabling laws which changed the constitution.
His name was Adolph Hitler.
June 4th, 2007 at 9:09 am
Hi Chris,
Thanks for your very long response.
RCTV was not refused a renewal of their license only because of their role in the 2002 coup against Chavez, but also for many violations of the law with their broadcasting and their questionable journalistic ethics, of which their part in the 2002 coup was just an example. As you can see from news reports, even now that their license was not renewed, they continue with their practices.
As for the 5 years, I think the Venezuelan government waited for a good chance do be able to do something about them. Instead of forcing them to shut down years ago, they simply waited for their license to expire and presented a good case of why they will not renew it. After the coup Chavez also asked them to change their bad ways of journalism, as he is still doing today, and gave them lots of chances to do so, but as you can clearly see, they don’t listen. Please note that Chavez is NOT asking them to not be critical of him, but simply to be honest and objective.
Is Chavez really stronger? Reports around the Internet seem to suggest that he’s losing some of his support. And opposition in Venezuela seems to be very strong still, if I can believe the newsstories of which I also linked to in this post. It seems to me Chavez has his hands full right now with the opposition.
Again, as far as I could see from the information in my post, the Venezuelan government presented a good case for why they refused to renew RCTV’s license. RCTV clearly violated the law many times. In addition, they spread blatant lies while pretending to report the news, and the 2002 coup is a good example. Now, if the media in Venezuela start to honestly and objectively report on the facts, and based on that are critical of Chavez, I doubt they will act against them and shut them down. If that happens, I will be fast to report on that here as well.
I don’t see this as revenge. If Chavez wanted revenge, he would have shut them all down right after he came back to power after the failed coup in 2002. It doesn’t look to me like Chavez is such a person. Just look at how he treated his opponents of the 2002 coup after they lost to him. He just let them be, no punishment, no consequences, even though he could have gotten killed because of them. You can see this in the movie “The Revolution will not be Televised.” This made a very strong impression on me.
I did not say that it is not that bad, just that when the media says RCTV is completely shut down, that’s not entirely true since they are still able to operate on cable and satellite.
The media played an important role in the 2002 coup. That’s a fact you can simply not deny and is quite clear in the documentary “The Revolution will not be Televised.” These days the media is essential in war, as has been demonstrated in the US – Iraq war. It is used to manipulate the public into supporting a certain agenda. The Pentagon has entire plans and policy currently in place for “Information Warfare.” Please read this article. So it is no surprise that the USA is trying to influence the media in Venezuela and supporting them in various ways.
I don’t think you can compare Chavez to Hitler at this point. You’d have a better case if you compared Bush to Hitler.
June 6th, 2007 at 1:36 am
Dear Karel,
Thank you for taking the time to read my response to your piece defending
Chavez and the “closing” of RCTV. I know there will be some who will
argue that RCTV has not been closed, merely “realigned” towards satellite
and cable programming. I also know you can see excerpts of RCTV news
bulletins on YouTube but that is hardly what I would term a “continuing”
freedom of speech and expression. Such arguments remind me of the
adage that evil occurs when good men do nothing as I sense an intellectual
quality to the discussion rather than a practical grasp of the reality.
You ask “Is Chavez really stronger? Reports around the Internet seem
to suggest that he?s losing some of his support. And opposition in
Venezuela seems to be very strong still.”
He apparently mobilised over 300,000 people onto the streets of Caracas
over the weekend which is no mean feat for a weakening politician.
I think the question of whether this individual is getting stronger
after his success in elections in December for the second time, can
be definitely compared with one other of his ilk. In the early 1930′s
there were many uninformed commentators who were very quick to point
out the weakness of the German State and how it was being controlled
by the requirements of the Treaty of Versailles and that Herr Hitler
would never be a threat. (Interesting that senior Brazilian politicians
are also referring to Chavez as a “cheap Hitler”") If the opposition
is so strong, why has Chavez indicated his intention to be in power
for at least another additional termeven if he has to change the constitution…..If
he didn’t have oil, he would be merely regarded as a South American
Mugabe, as it is, he is becoming the Latin Gadafi and his closure
of RCTV is merely one part of the process.
You point out that “The media played an important role in the 2002
coup” I certainly don’t deny this. I merely point out that a far greater
factor in the success, or lack of it, of Venezuelan Coups is the incompetence
of the coup leaders.The control of the media reflects that incompetence
rather than the media deciding whether the coup will be successful
or not. The 2002 plotters did not destroy Canal 8….so the Chavez
Government were able to mobilise their supporters. The media played
an important role but it was the incompetence of the coup leaders
which allowed it to play that important role.
You mention that you were heavily influenced by the film “The Revolution
will not be Televised” If you want to get real and understand Venezuelan
life, I suggest you see the film “Secuestro Express” (Kidnap Express)
This was not filmed by a couple of Irish lads who had all sorts of
access to Chavez and only spent six months in Venezuela to get their
“insight”!This is a modern fictional film, filmed in the realities
of Caracas and made by Venezuelans who are not taken in by the superficial
impressions that the “Monsieur” (European foreigner) will get in the
corridors of the Miraflores Palace. Armed with the experience of the
film you may begin to appreciate that intellectual niceties of the
freedom of speech issue will not cut much ice with the remaining media
sources in Venezuela.
You suggest that Chavez could have been much worse. “Just look at
how he treated his opponents of the 2002 coup after they lost to him.
He just let them be, no punishment, no consequences,” Death Squads
and Desaparacidos are not the Venezuelan way.(Yet!) Chavez knows that
he doesn’t have to go round intimidating his opponents with violence.
They’re leaving and have left in their thousands for the last half
a dozen years. After his own failed coup, Chavez wasn’t taken outside
and disposed of………..That is not the way Venezuelans do things.
This can be clearly seen in 2002, when they had the chance, but the
plotters didn’t harm him! Even Perez Jimenez, a former dictator left
Caracas in a relatively untroubled way when he was overthrown. Chavez
is just following the Venezuelan way rather than being incredibly
generous to naughty media barons. It is this patent failure to understand
the Venezuelan way which demonstrates the inadequacies of the Irish
film and this lack of understanding spreads to the real reasons for
the closure of RCTV.
It is nice that we can debate the closure of RCTV and not worry about
the consequences. That luxury will soon disappear for the Venezuelan
people in Venezuela. As long as Chavez keeps the oil flowing Northwards
I don’t see any real take up of arms on behalf of the Venezuelan’s
right to freedom of speech and expression. Chavez will consolidate
his power until its too late and then there will be numerous Neville
Chamberlains claiming that they didn’t realise that his closure of
RCTV had any real implications other than a realignment of internal
communications. Not quite “Kristal nacht” but close to Book burning
scenarios. As you will find on the signs at the exits to most German
Concentration Camps “Those that forget the lessons of history are
doomed to repeat them.”
Chris
ps
Its also frightening to note that another shared characteristic between
Chavez and Hitler was the absence of a father from an early age! Bush’s
father still lives, Bush didn’t lead a failed coup. Bush didn’t change
the US flag and the name of his country. Bush hasn’t shut down any
US Media or had Moore dealt with as RCTV has been handled. With all
his failings, the analogy of Bush being comparable to Hitler shows
a lapse of knowledge about Hitler, and more importantly, about the
people of the US.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
Chris,
The story in the media, not only international but also locally where I live, is that Chavez is losing support because of what he did to RCTV. Maybe not support in Venezuela, but international support.
With regards to the coup leaders, yes I have to agree they were incompetent. In “The Revolution will not be Televised”, you can see them discussing all their plans for the coup on TV. That’s just stupid.
But I don’t agree with you on what important role the media played. The important role as I see it, is the fact that the private media in Venezuela were giving a totally untrue and misleading account of what was happening in Venezuela and with Chavez. Even blaming deaths on him by manipulating video footage. That’s just wrong. I hate censorship, but any media company that is purposely and blatantly lying to people should be shut down. I hate lies and bad information just as much as censorship.
I haven’t yet seen Kidnap Express, but I will see it soon. You are downplaying the importance of “The Revolution will not be Televised” too much.
And yet his opponents DO intimidate Chavez with violence and even assassination.
It will be interesting to see if Chavez will become what you say he will. Everyone, including me, is following his moves to see if he will go on the wrong path. But in any case, the closure of RCTV in my opinion was the right thing to do. Let the media learn to report facts to people.
Bush practically owns the US media. Please watch “Outfoxed” and “Orwell Rolls in his Grave”. With a media like that in the US, any dictator would love “democracy.” Bush doesn’t have to shut down the media because he controls it in different ways.
On the contrary, you should probably check your knowledge of Bush and Hitler. I suggest you watch the movies on 9/11 which I listed here.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:45 pm
As an Argentinean and a South American, I feel that in general we Latins have more knowledge than the American people do about your government’s plots, together with international institutions “for the advancement of societies” like the IMF and the World Bank, to overthrow any socialist or nationalist government in our countries.
From the time Columbus set foot on these lands, we’ve been the fuel that has driven Capitalism and the enrichment of the former and actual world powers. As Uruguayan journalist Eduardo Galeano so adequately put it, “developing” countries are actually undeveloped, and the state of being undeveloped is not a bridge to development, but a consequence of the development of other countries. Did you know that the governments of South American countries which are indebted to the U.S. and the IMF are required to allow the aforementioned international organisms to decide what their external policy is going to be, what they are going to do with their money, who they are going to sell their resources to and at what prices, and what they are going to buy from, say, the U.S., even though the country may have no demand for the items being bought? Argentina’s National Bank has a reserve of over 40,000 million dollars, but I just heard the other day that we had to ask for a loan of U$s 300 million to buy a new radar for one of our airports. How can this be? Simple, the money in our National Bank is not ours; the U.S. must be needing to finance another war to keep the American people distracted.
If you want to know the true story of South America and the “Infinite Injustice” that we have been made to suffer (and continue to endure) read Galeano’s book, “Las venas abiertas de Am?rica Latina” (Open Veins of Latin America). If you want to learn much more than you would want to know about how a group of select families (like the Rockefellers) rule the world and the U.S., read Walter Graziano’s “Hitler gan? la guerra” (that would be “Hitler Won the War” [my translation]. I don’t know if this one is available in English). Both books treat their respective topics very seriously and are thoroughly documented.
I’m glad there are people like you who know at least some of the truth and are willing to make others know. Thanks for letting me share.