By: Eva Golinger - Venezuelanalysis.com
Over the past few days, major newspapers in the United States, such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times and The Wall Street Journal, have published editorials aggressively and harshly criticizing recent declarations and decisions made by re-elected President Hugo Chávez and his cabinet. A large percentage of the content of these editorials, which reflect the viewpoints of the newspapers, are based on a distortion and misconception of new policies being implemented in Venezuela and the overall way
government is functioning. In the Washington Post's "Venezuela's Leap Backward", published
on January 10, the editorial board intentionally and mistakenly portrays the recent presidential elections this past December in Venezuela as illegitimate and unfair. By falsely claiming that Chávez conducted a "one-sided campaign that left a majority of Venezuelans believing they might be punished if they did not cast their ballots for him", the Post wants its readers to think
Venezuelans who voted for Chávez did so under duress and fear. Nothing could be
further from the truth. A majority of Venezuelans publicly express their sincere admiration and approval of President Chávez in an open and fearless way on a daily basis in this country. Most Venezuelans believe Chávez is the best president the nation has ever had, and statistics prove that his government has built more bridges, railroads, hospitals, clinics, universities,
schools, highways and houses than any administration in the past. The Post editorial
also attempts to downplay the "only 7 million votes" Chávez received, not mentioning that those seven million votes represent more than 63% of total votes - a landslide victory to the opposition candidate's 37% - and that no president in Venezuelan history has ever, ever received such a large number of votes in an election.
The New York Times editorial, also published on January 10, attacks a recent statement made by President Chávez regarding the nationalization of one telephone company, CANTV, and an electric company. However the Times doesn't explain
that the CANTV is the only non-cellular telephone company in the country,
giving
it a complete monopoly on national land-line telecommunications and control
over a majority of Internet service as well. Furthermore, the CANTV was
privatized
only in 1991, during the second non-consecutive term of Carlos Andrés Pérez
a president later impeached for corruption who implemented a series of
privatization
measures, despite having run for office on a non-privatization platform just
three years before. In fact, as soon as Carlos Andrés Pérez won office in
1988 after convincing the Venezuelan people he would not permit
"neo-liberalism" on Venezuelan shores, he immediately began to announce the
privatization
of several national industries, including telecommunications, education and
the medical and petroleum sectors. This deception led to massive
anti-privatization
protests during February 1989 during which the government ordered the armed
forces to "open-fire" on the demonstrators and arrest and torture those not
killed. The result was the "Caracazo", a tragic scar on contemporary
Venezuelan history that left more than 3,000 dead in mass gravesites and
thousands
more injured and detained. The re-nationalizing of Venezuela's one landline
phone company is a strategic necessity and an anti-monopoly measure
necessary
to ensure that Venezuelans have access to telecommunications service. (Take
it from someone who lives here. You can't even get a landline if it isn't
already
installed in your residence. The waiting list is over 2 years and you have
to bribe someone to actually do the job). And furthermore, the new Minister
of Telecommunications, Jesse Chacón, announced that any company
"nationalized" will be fully compensated for its shares and property at
market value.
The third issue put forth in the editorials is the recent announcement by
President Chávez that the license of private television station RCTV to
operate
on the public airwaves is up for review in May 2007 and most likely will not
be renewed. The government has based its denial of the license renewal on
RCTV's lack of cooperation with tax laws, its failure to pay fines issued by
the telecommunications commission, CONATEL, over the past twenty years, and
its refusal to abide by constitutional laws prohibiting incitation to
political violence, indecency, obscenity and the distortion of facts and
information.
The public airwaves, as in the case of the United States, are regulated by
government. Television and radio stations apply for licenses from the
telecommunications
commission and are granted those licenses based on conditional compliance
with articulated regulations. When a station does not abide by the
requirements,
it generally is fined and warned, repeatedly, until compliance is assured.
In the specific case of RCTV, the station and its owner, multi-millionaire
Marcel
Granier, have refused to comply with the law and have continued to abuse and
violate the clear and concise regulations that are supposed to guarantee
Venezuelan
citizens their constitutional right to "true and accurate information"
(Article 58 of the Constitution).
RCTV's owner, Marcel Granier, played a key role in the April 2002 coup d'etat
against President Chávez and has used his station to engage in an ongoing
campaign of anti-Chávez propaganda and efforts to destabilize the nation
through distorting and manipulating information to create panic, apathy,
fear
and violence in Venezuelan society. The station's clear violations of the
telecommunications regulations and the Constitutional guarantees that
protect
freedom of speech and access to true and accurate information provide
sufficient reason to deny the renewal of its license to use the public
airwaves.
Unlike the editorial board of the Los Angeles Times (Fidel Chávez?, January
11, 2007) mistakenly claims, Chávez and his government are not "shutting
down"
the private media station. RCTV can continue to operate on the private
airwaves, i.e. cable and satellite television. As would be the case in any
country
where law and order are respected, RCTV will not receive a renewal on its
license to remain on the public airwaves because it repeatedly violated the
law
during more than a decade.
Unfortunately, international groups that allegedly protect freedom of the
press and of speech around the world, have fallen under the influence and
manipulation
of RCTV president Marcel Granier, who through his close relationship with
Washington, is conducting a campaign to defend his station by user the
banner
of freedom and liberty. But consistent lawbreakers and coup leaders should
not receive the support of international press watchdog groups and human
rights
defenders. Rather, those groups should praise the decision of the Venezuelan
government to maintain the public airwaves in the hands of the public. The
license so abused by RCTV will most likely be granted to various community
and alternative media groups and stations in Venezuela that have emerged
over
the past few years as a result of the direct encouragement and support of
the Chávez administration.
Finally, the editorials in the Post, the New York Times, the Los Angeles
Times and the Wall Street Journal, all criticize President Chávez's
announcement
to create a new political party in Venezuela: the United Socialist Party of
Venezuela. The editorials inaccurately claim that Chávez will dissolve all
political parties in the country and allow only one party to operate. This
is a dangerous and false inference. What Chávez really declared was the
formation
of a new revolutionary party that would be open to all parties that support
the revolution. There will be no closing down or abolishing of other
political
parties in the nation; they can all remain as they wish and those that
choose to merger or support the new party can also freely do so.
Furthermore, Chávez
indicated that the reason for the designing of a new political party is to
break free from the old corrupt hierarchical party structures of the past
that
concentrate power in the hands of few and exclude and ignore the vast
majority of supporters. Chávez remarked that the new party he seeks to
promote will
be formed by grassroots community movements, and that there will be no power
structures that isolate and marginalize constituents.
If you only read the US press, you must be very confused about Venezuela.
The extreme levels of distortion, lack of fact checking and source
verification
and outright manipulation of information in the US media on Venezuela is
quite troubling and dangerous in a nation that has waged wars based on false
data
and misleading policies.
No comments:
Post a Comment