I'm starting a new thread on this because the more I think about it

[EFerrari]

the more freaky it seems to me.

I don't know how many of us watch LinkTv. I love that channel because it airs things you just don't see anywhere else. Amy Goodman, Greg Palast, wonderful documentaries on cultures we know little or nothing about. Danny Glover, Harry Belafonte and other heavy hitters support it and it is a treasure, imho.

But today, I watched a segment on a new show, "Pulso Latino" and it was the first PO rightwing S I've EVER seen aired there. I could have been watching Faux News!

The topic was freedom of speech (the press) in Latin America, and predicated on the notion that Chavez was stifling dissent and that this might just be a growing trend in Latin America.

I couldn't believe what I was watching. They even used footage of rich, white kids "protesting" in Caracas when those "protests" have been debunked as scripted fakery. They didn't mention the pro-Chavez demonstrations. They didn't mention that the new format of the old RCTV actually frees the flow of info from the oligarchy's grip or that it actually diversifies what is being broadcast. I was just :wow:

My belly flipped the first time I caught this new program (for which I had high hopes, given the very intelligent and responsbile programming of Link) and it's flipping more rapidly now. What the hell is going on at LinkTv? Repeating BushCo talking points is clearly against their announced mission statement.

I think this is important to notice, hermanitos.

[EFerrari]

1. Here is a link to the video of the segment:

http://www.linktv.org/video/1466

[Judi Lynn]

2. I just took a look, too. I think when I get some time later on, I want to look up

the two men the moderator asked to participate in the panel, who represent the side to condemn the RCTV license expiration and non-renewal: Raick Rockwell, and Geoff Thale. I want to listen to them again, and check out their bios.

The discussion gave a great chance for the two intelligent speakers, Ted Lewis of Global Exchange, and Lydiaz Chavez, journalism professor, Berkley to discuss points we have already been discussing here! They were great.

You probably noticed the two men, Rockwell and Thale were very shifty, and lack true confidence in what they were saying. The difference in tone was unmistakable from the first: they KNOW they are on the wrong side of this.

The discussion went very much the way you'd expect with two normal, intelligent human beings, and two sneaky right-wingers. It's not hard to tell their politics when you listen to these two clowns.

Oh, another thing, sfexpat2000: Do you remember ALL the people who were chosen to give opinions in the tv reporting segments were very conspicuously Caracas elitists? They would surely ONLY be interested in advancing the side of the ethically challenged people who supported the coup. No idealists among them, to be sure!

So glad the journalism professor brought it up (and it had to be confirmed by the two rightwingers if they wanted to maintain any semblance of credibility) that what has been happening in Mexico and Colombia, where journalists are murdered regularly is of far greater importance. Ted Lewis mentioned it's too bad the "human rights" groups touted by Rockwell haven't lowered themselves to worry their beautiful minds with the murder of reporters. He also mentioned it's clear after the Mexican election that the "free market" is the greatest inhibitor of freedom of expression, and that actual freedom of speech journalistically in that country is tightly controlled and limited.

I'll check on those two right-wingers because I'm interested, later when I've got some time.

Don't know a thing about Link TV. Thank you for the first look at them. Hope to find out more.

[EFerrari]

3. Omg! That's the wrong link. But I'm so glad I made that mistake

because I'd forgotten that today's show is the second one they've done on this topic. Why can't a brand new program find a different topic to cover in what must be still under ten episodes?

What you saw was a debate. Today, there was no debate. The segment was clearly framed this way: Hugo Chavez is suppressing dissent in Venezuela -- can it happen elsewhere in the region?

Today there where no journalism profs from Berkeley but instead, they found a rightwing wackjob prof from Berkeley who spent the Venezuela part of the segment beating up on the Venezuelan Ambassador.

And they used footage of the Gucci protestors - complete with close up of a very well dressed fair skinned young woman in tears.

There may be no link to this new segment yet. When there is one, I will put it up.

[EFerrari]

7. Your memory is better than mine. Do you remember which

RW group helped organize those "student protestors" with scripts and all?

[Cleita]

9. I don't have time to watch it until tonight. n/t

[msedano]

4. tan interesante, pero...

i don't watch tv, though my wife is threatening to buy a satellite. this program, pulso latino, looks like a great idea, like the old news magazine "atlas" that compiled news from around the world. sadly, television doesn't do a good job of putting things into perspective. i see nothing inimical about airing the right wing, or left wing, slants. what i'd like to see is running commentary offering competing viewpoints simultaneously, or like it's laid out on the web with a video hole then two text holes.

as for the issue of shutting down that tv station, i didn't like it. i don't support government taking over the airwaves, any more than i support rich corporations controlling the airwaves. ultimately, however, what chavez does in his country is his country's business. we can watch from afar and nod our heads in agreement or shake our heads with disapproval, but that's about all we unitedstatesians are entitled to do. we in the EUA have our hands full finding ways to handle our administration.

mvs

read! raza
http://labloga.blogspot.com

[EFerrari]

6. I don't mind if they want to do half an hour of rightwing wackos

on patines. But, this was propaganda framed as fact.

[msedano]

26. propaganda framed as fact, MOS

more of the same. seems to me the ken burns world war 2 epic is puro propaganda framed as fact, but with the agenda focused on emending chicanos from history. and that's the noble PBS (cross yourself)! from the critiques i read at du, one broadcaster is such an ideologue gente call it faux news. this type of crap evinces why i'm deliberately a tv pop culture illiterate.

glad to see you're keeping the broadcaster on its toes, even if its mealy-mouthed buck passing let the producers know reeks of rot. even the good tv sucks, is what this says to me. but that's democracy. these broadcasters have a right to show this stuff and you have a right to push the button.

mvs

http://labloga.blogspot.com

http://readraza.com/hawk/index.htm

[EFerrari]

29. I think whoever is behind this show thought they could pull it off

because it is done bilingually.

The producers' response to me at their website was, we're presenting the Latin American media. And that is mendacity when, as in Venezuela, an economic few own most of it.

I told them they did a good job of forwarding the views of the corporate media, and that flies in the face of LinkTv's stated mission.

[Peace Patriot]

27. Just a note of clarity, msedano! The public owns the airwaves, and every democracy

on earth regulates the use of the airwaves IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, usually through licensing. TV/radio airwaves have a limited bandwidth, and are allotted to businesses or non-profit government-funded/community broadcasting on the basis of rules and laws laid down by the people through their government. In the U.S., for instance, pre-Reagan, we used to have the "Fairness Doctrine," which required that equal time be given to opposing political views, and all TV/radio stations were required to do it.

You create a false opposition between government "taking over the airwaves" and "rich corporations controlling the airwaves." The government/the people OWN ALL THE AIRWAVES. The "rich corporations" have no rights in this situation--none! They have NO "free speech rights" when it comes to our PUBLIC airwaves. We have the right--and, indeed, the duty, if we really do believe in free speech--to force them, through licensing requirements--to provide a wide spectrum of opinion over our PUBLIC airwaves, and further to provide entertainment that is ALSO in the public interest. Use of the public airwaves is quite a different matter than the publication of newspapers and magazines, and production of books and movies, that customers have a choice of reading/viewing. The First Amendment protects those forms of speech. The public airwaves are a completely different matter.

One analogy is the loss of public "town squares" (communal meeting places) in the U.S., and the impingement of the corporate shopping mall on public space. These shopping malls try to restrict free speech. Ever tried to leaflet for a political cause in a corporate shopping mall? There has been all sorts of litigation about it. They try to restrict where you stand, what you wear, what signs you hold, who you speak to, and they would ban you altogether, if they could. No (or very restricted) free speech in corporate shopping malls. Neither is there free speech on corporate TV/radio.

Or think of it this way: What if big corporations took over our public highways--these limited avenues of trade and travel that have been funded by the public--and, say, only allowed vehicles that they sold to use our highways, or only allowed new vehicles, or only allowed vehicles that carried their logo? Would you say that the government is "taking over the highways" to hold the highways open to ALL traffic, with government licensing of vehicles and drivers as the only requirement?

Government's proper role is to license the use of our public airwaves in such a way as to provide the widest possible public access to information and viewpoints. That is not the same thing as the government "controlling" the airwaves--say, producing all programs and only permitting the government line. The former is democratic; the latter is tyrannical. But what has happened, through "rich corporations"'s influence in Washington DC, is a complete takeover of our public TV/radio airwaves by giant corporate monopolies, and the DANGER of that takeover has been well-illustrated by the Iraq War: relentless, 24/7 warmongering and war propaganda, all channels, all the time.

I am very proud of our fellow Americans' stubborn resistance to this 24/7 war propaganda, starting way back at the beginning, when 56% of the American opposed the invasion (Feb. '03)--i.e., kept their thinking caps on--a figure that has now grown to over 70%. But the 5 far rightwing billionaire CEOs who control ALL news/opinion on our PUBLIC airwaves have nevertheless been able to create a false national narrative of support for this heinous war, that intimidates people, and convinces members of the peace-minded, justice-minded great American majority that they are in the minority. It demoralizes and disempowers people.

I call them "the war profiteering corporate news monopolies", and their traitorous and despicable behavior around this war SHOULD lose them their public broadcast licenses, in my opinion. We should do to them just what the Chavez government did to RCTV. You want to fuck our country over, good-by to you! No license for you! Begone! And I would furthermore dismantle these corporate monopolies--pull their corporate charters, break them up, and even seize their assets for the common good.

The reason that the corporate news monopolies are so down on Chavez's de-licensing of RCTV is that they don't want US, up here in the north, to get any ideas from it, of restoring the PUBLIC INTEREST purpose of OUR public airwaves.

The public airwaves should be NEUTRAL public space, where all views can be heard--and it is government's responsibility in a democracy to insure that the licensing of the public airwaves achieves that goal.

That is what Chavez did. He did HIS JOB! He not only de-licensed the most rabid rightwing station in Venezuela--a station that actively participated in a violent military coup attempt against the lawful government--he opened that airwave to independent producers and excluded groups--minorities, the indigenous, unions, community groups, the poor. THAT is the proper role of government in regulation of the public airwaves.

[msedano]

33. licensing electronic spectrum hertz

in your and my dreams do the people own the airwaves. that's a poor metaphor for control by the FCC, laws and rules, and money. check this out, a pdf of the electronic spectrum that you and i own.
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf

unfortunately, government chose to sell off licenses and set up systems of call letters and stuff like that. not right away, but early on, folks noted the possibility of turning a buck on broadcasting. and turn a buck they have! so see if you can buy up any available AM, FM, UHF, VHF space in your metro area, radio and television. they're all taken. try to revoke someone's license. not a simple matter of filling out a form and posting it to the FCC. truth hertz, que no?

no one can force programming upon a license holder except what is forced on all the others. so you get your eleven minutes of PSA spots at 3 a.m. and vapid children's programming several hours on the weekends. ken burns doing whatever the hell he wants with chicano history but he's not doing anything against the rules. can't force him to change without coercing his sponsors. how much will he get away with?

cable tv regulations had the inspiration to require public access channels and studios. that's one actual hands-on way to express your ownership of broadcasting, and it's not really using the stuff on the .pdf, it's a cable direct from pole to your tv set. i wish more people had the speaking and writing and production ability to create watchable public access cable. maybe u tube will take its place.

government control is quite distinct from corporate control. neither is inherently evil but there sure seem to be a lot assholes in powerful authority in both camps.

but that's only in the US, where i live, and the only country whose domestic policies i have a right to butt into.

[EFerrari]

5. Reply from the Director of Research at Link Media:

Dear Ms, Ferrari,



Thank you very much for taking the time to share with us your concern over the Pulso Latino episode entitled, "Free Press in Latin America ." We have forwarded you message on to the producers.



I did want to take the opportunity to address your concern about fact-checking. Link TV is careful to review for facts the scripts of our hosts, who might be thought of as speaking for Link TV. However, we do not do so for guests.



We would be happy to investigate further if there are specific errors of fact and false premises you would like to bring to our attention. The episode can be viewed online, here: http://www.linktv.org/video/1542



Thank you again for taking the time to let us know what you think.



Sincerely yours, Roger



Roger G. Macdonald

Director of Research and Information Systems

Link TV and Link Media, Inc.

[Cleita]

10. Looks like I got a lot of watching to catch up with.

I just got broadband so this is a new ability for me.

[EFerrari]

8. My response to the LinkTv Research Director

Dear Roger,

Thank you for responding to my concerns. Were it not for LinkTv, Amy Goodman and Greg Palast, I wouldn't be well enough informed to foster them. So, first, thanks for LinkTv. It, along with BookTv on C-SPAN, is the only reason I maintain a cable account.

The segment in question was so skewed, it's hard too know where to begin. Perhaps the most direct way, though, would be to examine the premise of this segment: Hugo Chavez is stifling dissent. Could this be a trend in Latin America?

Instead of making an argument, I will submit a few links for your consideration. Even someone with my limited skill could find more than several credible sources that debunk this premise.

FAIR's statement: http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3107

Leading British Voices Support Venezuela's RCTV Decision:
http://www.greenleft.org.au/2007/712/36967

Venezuela's RCTV: Sine Die and Good Riddance
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5792

In addition to the more than problematic premise of the segment, film footage of faux protestors was aired -- protesters who were well dressed and as white looking as the staged protesters in "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" that were caught on tape while the counter protests, in support of the government's decision and far greater in number, went unmentioned in this segment.

http://www.angolapress-angop.ao/noticia-e.asp?ID=535941

There is so much more, but I believe the information I've pointed to is illustrative of the problems with this segment.. If I can find this information, anyone can. It seems not to be a matter of fact checking so much as fact ignoring and much more worthy of Fox News than the excellence LinkTv's audience has come to rely upon.


Sincerely,
Elizabeth Ferrari

San Francisco CA 94122

[Cleita]

11. Nothing like being able to back your assertions with

factual sources. :-) I look forward to their reply. It looks like the deposed Venezuela elite are trying to infiltrate our airwaves and LinkTV looked like a good option because most of the MSM isn't really that interested in their food fight with Chavez.

[EFerrari]

12. That was my thought, too. Infiltration.

The scene continues. And I'm not backing off -- Link is such a great resource. It would be a shame for it to be polluted in this obvious way.

[Cleita]

13. As soon as I catch up with the videos and that will be

tonight, I will write them. They need to know.

[EFerrari]

14. They really do need to know I'm just not a nutcase

because I'm sure they get a lot of that.

Thank you, Cleita!

[Cleita]

19. I watched it and I was impressed with Lydia Chavez.

I will write them tomorrow and suggest that they use her more and I know that they were trying to get an opposing opinion to be "fair and balanced" but they need to pick someone who isn't biased. I know it's really hard to find a truthful and unbiased conservative but there has to be better ones out there than what they had. I still have to go through the other information, but I promise tommorrow they will get an email from me.

[EFerrari]

24. She was great! And, my problem wasn't with the conservatives

but with the framing. The assumption was Hugo Chavez has victimized RCTV (this term was used repeatedly).

[Judi Lynn]

15. So you've written with SOURCES, too! I'll bet they weren't prepared for people to actually

know what's happening. That really screws it up for propagandists!

I have only had the time today to watch your second link, and note the names, Franciso Barradas, and Daniel Coronell Castañeda.

I believe it's the 2nd one who is here hiding out, allegedly, from Colombia, after it was alleged he received death threats, by phone, a bouquet of flowers (I'm not sure about this, crowded memory momentarily) and an anonymous e-mail they traced to a Colombian senator, they claim, whose name on the internet only comes up in relation to having anonymously sent the e-mail. That senator says he sent an e-mail but it has been misinterpreted.

At any rate, Castañeda is hiding in another country, a host country whose President hates the Venezuelan President, and he's hiding from a bunch of paramilitaries, connected to a Colombian Senator who is said to be close to President Uribe, who is also very close to _Bush.

I can see that he might be very determined to suck up to the powers who will lay off him, and stop threatening him if he's nice! He is the one who did the most heated hammering of the Venezuelan ambassador.

I'm sorry I've not had any time at all the last two days to get in there and look around for some answers. This is a subject I really care about, and I want to know who's doing what!

I'll be back later to check the links you have shared. Thank you for taking the time to get serious with LinkTV people. This is great.

[EFerrari]

16. (Thanks, Judi Lynn)

:toast:

[burrowowl]

17. Great Post!

:toast:

[EFerrari]

18. I can't remember or find the name of the RW group that staged

the "student protests". But, in all honesty, although the show's producers are in a rhetorical war with me, LinkTv has been hugely responsive and I appreciate that.

(And, thanks to you and everyone that posted FACTS that I could use to counter this obivious hitjob.)

:)

[Cleita]

20. I think it's somewhere in the post I made about Chavez when

RCTV lost it's license. I think there are links to them. I was putting stuff up so fast I haven't even looked at all of them myself but one of the videos I believe has the information.

[EFerrari]

22. That thread was a godsend, Cleita.

It's so good to hand some facts laying around. But, I couldn't find that post. It has the name of the group and it mentions training sessions for this "protesters" and scripts.

[Judi Lynn]

21. Going back to the two anti-Chavez speakers on the first show...

Rick Rockwell is connected to a publication, IVoryTowerz, where I saw this note:"*Rick Rockwell served as a consultant to Freedom House on press freedom issues in Mexico and Central America in 2005 and 2006."
http://ivorytowerz.blogspot.com/search/label/Latin%20America

I first heard about Freedom House in connection with a man who was running it, Miami's Cuban right-wing extremist, "exile" Frank Calzon, around 6 years ago, and looked into it a little back then.

Here's a quick description of that organization as it works now:

Freedom House conducts a variety of projects, primarily aimed at measuring or promoting political rights and civil liberties in countries around the world. (38,19) The definition of political rights used for the group's annual worldwide Comparative Survey of Freedom revolves arounds an individual's rights to "participate meaningfully in the political process." It is primarily an electoral definition of political rights and includes such criteria as the holding of regular elections, the presence and number of opposition parties, size of the opposition vote, regular and/or recent transfers of power, fairness and openness of the campaign environment, and so on. Other political issues which are considered include the amount of military influence on government and the degree of foreign involvement, each of which--according to Raymond Gastil--are measured conservatively. (38)

The group's definition of civil liberties includes freedom of expression and association, the right to hold demonstrations, religious freedom, and personal rights such as freedom of education, ownership, and travel. Other factors included in this category include the independence of the judiciary, rule of law, degree of freedom from government terror, and freedom from imprisonment for reasons of belief or conscience. (38)

These definitions--contained within the neoconservative framework which dominates Freedom House--guide the organization's evaluations and analyses. For the Comparative Survey of Freedom, for example, each of these and other points on an "informal checklist" are considered and measured subjectively based on a review of journalistic information about each of the world's countries. The result is a table of ratings which purport to measure states of freedom globally. Both rightwing and leftwing governments have come up with poor ratings on this scale, but leftwing and left-leaning regimes are more consistently graded negatively. On the 1989 survey, for example, South Africa's "freedom rating" was worse than Nicaragua's, but South Korea--where there has been governmentsponsored violence and corruption at levels unheard of in Nicaragua under the Sandinistas--was rated "more free" than Nicaragua by several points. (38) The same held true vis-a-vis Nicaragua for El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, and Pakistan. (38)

Freedom House has received substantial funding from the U.S. government through the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). This financial assistance is passed through Freedom House to private organizations in foreign countries and is generally used for cultural and media projects. Its NED-funded grantees are located in various countries, including South Africa, the Soviet Union, Paraguay, Poland, and Hungary. Projects supported by Freedom House tend to reflect its neoconservative viewpoint and to bolster U.S. foreign policy positions--at least that was the case under President Reagan. One such project, supported by Freedom House with NED funding, is the anti-Sandinista publications house, Libro Libre, in Costa Rica. Another is the multiregional Exchange project, which collects and distributes articles written primarily by neoconservative supporters of U.S. foreign policy worldwide. (3,18)


Funding:

Freedom House gets its funding from memberships, grants, contributions, sales and royalties, and from investments, interest, and dividends. (16,53) Some of the sources of such contributions include trade unions, corporations, and some thirty foundations. (53) It acts as a pass-through organization for grants from the National Endowment for Democracy. Freedom House funnels the bulk of the NED funds to private sector institutions and projects overseas and is allowed to keep a maximum of 10 percent of the NED money for administrative costs. (19)
(snip)

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/groupwatch/freehous.php

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I think it's safe to assume this explains Rick Rockwell is coming from a right-wing position, and is glued to the Republican view of what's right for Latin America and the Caribbean.

Geoff Thale is a Cuba specialist/analyst with the Washington Office on Latin America, whatever the heck that is.

On edit:

Found their website, here's their "About Us:"

About WOLA
Policy Leadership

Since 1975, when WOLA worked behind the scenes to write the first major legislation conditioning U.S. military aid abroad on human rights practices, WOLA has played a key role in all major Washington policy debates over human rights in Latin America. Today, WOLA staff are called upon regularly to provide information and analysis to the executive branch, to multilateral organizations, to members of Congress, and to U.S. and Latin American media.

Coalition Building
WOLA plays a leading role within four somewhat distinct networks of non-governmental organizations: the human rights community, the foreign policy community, academic think-tanks, and the community of peace, justice, solidarity, and religious-based organizations. WOLA's role as a bridge connecting different networks with each other and with policy-makers has increased over the years. The ability to accurately analyze political dynamics in specific countries and regionally has given WOLA a central role in defining policy options and developing strategies for the expanding community of development, environmental, and human rights organizations engaged with U.S. policy on Latin America.

Strengthening NGO's in Latin America
Through its Spanish-language newsletters, training workshops in Washington and Latin America, and an active visitor program, WOLA acts as a bridge to help Latin American non-governmental organizations working for human rights and social justice gain greater understanding of and access to policy-making circles in Washington and in their own countries.

Educating the Public
WOLA monitors the impact of U.S. foreign policy on human rights, democracy and equitable development in Latin America. Through its reports WOLA informs and educates policy-makers, religious and non-governmental organizations, and the general public about that impact. In addition, WOLA's briefings bring policy-makers and the media in direct contact with Latin American leaders and experts on a regular basis.
(snip)

http://www.wola.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=52&Itemid=20&topic=Institutional+Publications

(You'd have to say they've done a goddawful job so far, wouldn't you? Can't admire them for their job on Iran-Contra, nor the death squads and massacres in Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Chile, Bolivia, Brazil, Argentina, Panama, Mexico, and assorted Caribbean Islands.

US policy has been hideous, grotesque south of our border. Gee, thanks, Washington Office on Latin America.

Thale, from the WOLA site:

Geoff Thale, Program Director (formerly Senior Associate for Central America and Cuba). As Program Director, Mr Thale consults with staff about all of WOLA's programs, from the Southern Cone to Mexico. In addition, he directly oversees the Cuba and Central America teams at WOLA, including the Central America Youth Gangs Program. Geoff Thale has followed Central America issues since the mid-1980s, and Cuba issues since the mid-1990s. Before coming to WOLA, he was the founder and Executive Director of the El Salvador Policy Project in Washington, DC. He holds a Masters degree in Industrial Relations from the University of Wisconsin.
(snip)

Sorry I haven't been more helpful. Have been wildly screwn for usable time.

I hope to be able to send LinkTV an e-mail, too, if I can get enough peace and quiet to compose a focused, intelligent message to them, when I'd really rather tell them how damned disappointing they actually were, with their conspicuously twisted "news" prior to the "debates."

At least, they had the good sense to have two intelligent people on the first night, but sank very low the second, using the two idiots, Francisco Barrada and Daniel Coronell Castaña trying to make names for themselves by attacking the ONE Venezuelan ambassador who got savaged by two vicious clowns, who went after him like wild dogs.

I guess the reason right-wingers are always so vicious is because they realize how wrong they are, and they are desperate to keep uninformed people from seeing how insecure they are.

[EFerrari]

23. Good grief! Why not have Ollie North on and stop fooling around.

lol

[LynnTheDem]

25. Funny thang; all that "Chavez shut down RCTV" bullshitting, and yet not one mention

of the dozen TV stations the US of A has shut down over the past few years.

Now me, I'd have thought that info would have been a good comparison point.

Not, of course, when one is yet again attempting to brainwash Americans into seeing The Devil.

There they go again.

[Peace Patriot]

28. Peru shut down (denied licenses to) several TV stations, but they are a Bush-friendly

"free trade" country, so we don't hear about that. (--big leftist movement, though; likely to win future elections and throw Bush bootlicker Alan Garcia out.)

Sorry, don't have the link handy. Just saw it in passing, reading a bunch of Chavez threads.

The corporate-sponsored rightwing blatherers don't want people to know that these are PUBLIC airwaves, NOT the property of big fascist corporations. ALL governments regulate them; ALL governments deny broadcast licenses for violations of the broadcast rules and failure to operate in the public interest.

Furthermore, there is no such thing as "human rights" for corporations. They try to assert this, and their lawyer-lobbyists are constantly re-writing our laws to treat corporations as "persons," but they are just business consortiums, which are required to obtain corporate charters from our states, and, theoretically, from the people in the states. Those charters have rules in them. And it used to be that corporations were not permitted to live forever, sucking up property and wealth over time, with which to "buy" our government and oppress us all. Keep this in mind, when considering the Chavez/RCTV controversy: 1) corporations have NO right to use the public airwaves, it is a license with RULES laid down by the PUBLIC; 2) they have no right to exist, they exist at OUR pleasure--we, the people, have the inherent right to dismantle them; 3) they have no "human rights"--they are not "persons"; and 4) they have TOO MUCH power, and have become extremely anti-democratic--and this has never been better illustrated than by RCTV's active participation in a violent military coup attempt in Venezuela.

Suggested viewing for LinkTV producers (and everybody else): "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised," Irish filmmakers' documentary of the military coup attempt in Venezuela in 2002, and RCTV's role in that coup attempt. (--available in DVD at www.axisoflogic.com)

Also: www.venezuelanalysis.com - excellent web site, packed with information on Venezuelan politics, regional issues and the Bolivarian revolution.

[EFerrari]

31. Cool! I've been trying to find it on DVD so I can share it

with people who don't watch on line at all. Thanks!

[EFerrari]

30. Yep. Link Media has been receptive but the show's producers

are defensive. They're probably upset because they've been busted.

[EFerrari]

32. Fyi, today I emailed the producers at Democracy Now!

with a link to the segment in question and asked them to please review it.

[Swamp Rat]

34. Gracias sfexpat2000!

:hi:

[EFerrari]

35. Mi placer!

:hi:

[EFerrari]

36. The Link Media Research director said he would follow up

on the links I offered him but I haven't heard back from him.

Meanwhile, I wonder who the producers of this segment are because their methods are very similar to those used by RCTV during the attempted coup. I want to know who is funding this program and I hope it isn't me because these people are propagandists.

Does anyone know how to contact Greg Palast? He would be familiar with the players in Caracas and if this is what it looks like, he could check it out.

[EFerrari]

37. Nevermind. I found it and emailed him. n/t

[EFerrari]

38. I found a website that might be of interest:, "Americans for Chavez"

http://www.americans-for-chavez.com/links.html

I haven't read it so can't vet it but just, fyi.

[proud2BlibKansan]

39. Good for you!

I don't have Link TV. Keep me posted please.

[EFerrari]

40. They tried to infiltrate the best news source on the air.

Gotta give 'em points for audacity. :wow:

Here's a link to my post at their website:

http://www.linktv.org/discussions/viewthread/49

[Judi Lynn]

41. I just went back & watched the 1st episode again. Was horrified to see they used a segment

from Globovisión to explain the "protest" by the "students"* (as if these were the only students demonstrating at the time). Why not simply use one of the segments prepared by RCTV, instead? Same thing.

(*You may have noticed if you paid careful attention to the first segment that the facial expressions and attitudes of the "students" didn't reveal any deep feelings or beliefs, but that they were actually very relaxed, and what's so very ODD, is that so many shots were of the a-holes cruising around in their cars, waving out the windows, or parking along the highway, waving at the newstruck as it went by. There was NO similarity to a real protest you see in countries where there is a real outrage which has been perpretrated upon the people.

Remember, we didn't EVER hear about "El Caracazo" in which U.S. supported President (later impeached for embezzling and corruption) Carlos Andres Pérez directed his military to fire into crowds of rioting Venezuelans, killing, according to the PEOPLE, probably around 3,000, after he had raised the costs of their transportation far beyond their ability to pay). No, that seems to have been just fine, not a problem, why bother the American public's pretty little heads by doing stories about it back then).

They didn't lower themselves to explain to their listeners at any time that the station was not simply unhooked and thrown out, that it had actually come to the end of its 20 year license and still continues in satellite and internet or whatever and is also carried on other stations outside the country, with plans to somehow beam it right back to Venezuela, anyway.

As Peace Patriot explained, somehow it was never considered a problem when Peru's Alan Garcia removed 3 or 4 stations in Peru. Amazingly, it isn't considered a problem when a President this administration likes does it.

Was horrified, on watching the first segment again, in a report from a "news" channel, that a Venezuelan "journalist" rattled off a statement about the situation carefully prepared by "Freedom House," which currently receives funding from the U.S. Government's _Bush-controlled NED, and another entity, possibly USAID. Isn't that pathetic? She was as self-righteous as Moses as he would have been reading the 10 Commandments he had just received from "God" on the mountaintop.

Yeah, you can't go wrong, quoting "Freedom House," as an authority. Why not go directly to Rev. Pat Robertson, and save everyone all the trouble?

This is such a twisted situation. There's so much deception involved it can't all be dealt with quickly and easily.

I am horrified that this station has used the material on these two programs to sell more anti-Chavez propaganda to an American audience. Hey, we're so witless, we won't know what hit us, anyway.

[EFerrari]

42. I believe that LinkTv will be horrified when they realize

that they've been duped into giving a platform to these propagandists. And I'm nearly certain that these people believed they could fly under the radar because of the show's bilingual format.

Oops.

Here are my posts to their discussion forum, fyi.

http://www.linktv.org/discussions/viewthread/49

[Judi Lynn]

44. Excellent! I loved the links given, except one has been down, so I found the same article

(running the title of the article in a search), has been published elsewhere, thank goodness!

Here's one link back to that article:
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=12933

That's a WONDERFUL article, written by an American who happens to LIVE in Caracas!
From that article:

BBC also exaggerated "skirmishes" on the streets with "Police us(ing) tear gas and water cannons to disperse (crowds) and driving through the streets on motorbikes, officers fired plastic bullets in the air." It also underplayed pro-government supportive responses while blaring opposition ones like "Chavez thinks he owns the country. Well, he doesn't." Another was "No to the closure. Freedom." And still another was "Everyone has the right to watch what they want. He can't take away this channel." BBC played it up commenting "As the afternoon drew on, the protests got louder." The atmosphere became nasty. Shots were fired in the air and people ran for cover. It was not clear who was firing" when it's nearly always clear as it's been in the past - anti-Chavistas sent to the streets to stir up trouble and blame it on Chavez.

BBC's commentary ended saying "The arguments highlight, once again, how deeply divided Venezuela is." Unmentioned was that division is about 70 - 80% pro-Chavez, around 20% opposed (the more privileged "sifrino" class), and a small percentage pro and con between them.
(snip)

Thanks to you, more people can get a look at the truth, which ALWAYS seems to take longer to get attention! :hi:

[EFerrari]

46. Thanks, Judi Lynn!

LOL! The time when people had nothing to fight back with is long past. :hi:

[Judi Lynn]

43. Maybe there's more to this which will be clearer, later, if you read the funding page:

http://www.linktv.org/whoweare/funders

Have you ever had reason to know anything about the Annenbergs? :eyes: My late mother was horrified and disgusted by them many years ago. They were EXTREME idiot nationalists with a lot of power.

Here's the Wikipedia for Walter Annenberg:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Annenberg

Here's a link to a S.F. Chronicle article on Latin Pulse:
http://www.internews.org/articles/2007/20070418_sfchron_linktv.shtm

It indicates they take their news from news programs by Latin American channels, and as it seems, these channels have usually been controlled by the Latin American oligarchy which has been almost completely under the thumb of right-wing American interests.

The article is helpful in mentioning that most U.S. media which had actual coverage in Latin America in earlier times cut it back considerably, especially since 2000. We apparently are almost totally informed by what the oligarchy in those countries and our own conservatively owned news networks want us to read/hear/see.

No reason to give up now, however! We've got the internetS, for the time being!

[EFerrari]

48. And that was the producers' reply to me, they were only

presenting the viewpoint of the media in Latin America. But that is bunk.

There is another program, "Mosaic", re the Middle East. It consists entirely of news broadcasts from four or five countries in the ME, with no editorializing. Clearly, "Pulso Latino" is NOT following that format.

[Judi Lynn]

49. Only have heard a short message from the community relations person saying shse forwarded my message

and I really don't think they'll be sending me anything honest and forthright. It sounds as if they twisted themselves in knots trying to cover their asses in their response to your comments! So much self-righteousness. (It could truly be seen as defensiveness, couldn't it?) Haughty, imperious, close to stamping their tiny feet. Maybe they've suddenly inherited a couple of employees from RCTV!

Written at the bottom of a VHeadline aritcle:

1BC owner, Marcel Granier has been undertaking an international campaign lobbying governments and private organizations in Europe and America to condemn President's Chavez refusal to allow the channel return as an infringement of freedom of expression.
(snip/)

http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=74236

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well, I wish the brother-in-law of one of the coup-plotters, Gustavo Cisneros, owner of Venevisión, largest stockholder in the American Univisión no luck at all in his underhanded plans.

[EFerrari]

50. I've noticed that Link and the producers of Pulso Latino

are not joined at the hip.

And I think Link Media has been played, and that is a new experience for them. Let's see how they do. Thank you for following up!

[Judi Lynn]

45. Found they sent Greg Palast to Venezuela to do a short piece.

Here it is, "Finding Bolivar's Heir:"
http://www.linktv.org/programs/chavez

http://www.linktv.org/programs/special_latinpulse

They don't make available the entire program, in which Greg Palast speaks with Link TV producer, Dante Betteo. I'd like to know more about this man, who used to work for Telemundo, and Univision.

Gustavo Cisneros, married to Patricia Phelps de Cisneros, daughter of the man who started RCTV, Cisneros, also one of the coup plotters, Cisneros, a personal friend of George H. W. Bush, and Cisneros, largest media owner in Latin America is the LARGEST SHAREHOLDER OF THE U.S. UNIVISION NETWORK.

It would be helpful to know how this all fits together!

[EFerrari]

47. I've seen this piece and that's why I emailed Palast.

Because his knowledge of the ins and outs is much deeper than mine. In other words, if there is a producer with an interesting past working on "Pulso Latino", he'd most likely know because of the work he's done, wouldn't he? :)

[Judi Lynn]

51. I hope you will hear from him on this. I've seen and read so much by him and about him

and his interest in everything going on there.

You might remember, when you really, really go back in time, he was the one who started publicly stating it was his complete belief that Hugo Chavez was going to be assassinated.

I'm almost certain I started reading this from Greg Palast BEFORE the coup which the people of Venezuela overturned. I'm going to keep my eyes out, hoping to find his earliest warnings, as it would be very interesting to determine if this isn't the case, and I'm almost positive that it is.

Just found this interesting information at Democrats.com:

Why Venezuela Voted Again for their 'Negro e Indio' President
16-Aug-04
Venezuela

Greg Palast writes, "to feed and house the darker folk in those bread and brick lines, Chavez would need funds, and the 16% slice of the oil pie wouldn't do it. So {he} demanded 30%, leaving Big Oil only 70%. Suddenly, Bill Clinton's ally in Caracas became Mr. Cheney's - and therefore, Mr. Bush's - enemy. So began the Bush-Cheney campaign to 'Floridate' the will of the Venezuela electorate. It didn't matter that Chavez had twice won election. Winning most of the votes, said a White House spokesman, did not make Chavez' government 'legitimate.' Hmmm. Secret contracts were awarded by our Homeland Security spooks to steal official Venezuela voter lists. Cash passed discreetly from the US taxpayer, via the so-called 'Endowment for Democracy,' to the Chavez-haters running today's 'recall' election. A brilliant campaign of placing stories about Chavez' supposed unpopularity and 'dictatorial' manner seized US news and op-ed pages, ranging from the SF Chronicle to the NYTimes."
(snip)

http://archive.democrats.com/preview.cfm?term=Venezuela

I have never heard they actually got the VOTER LISTS, have you? My God. As for knowing about the planted propaganda, we all were very aware of that so very long ago!

[EFerrari]

52. Now the Current Events Director is on that thread defending

the producers of this segment and invalidating my concerns by saying the issue is "polarizing".

Opinions can be polarizing. Not facts.

So, do I believe Greg Palast or these guys? Do I believe Amy Good or FAIR or these producers?

I wonder if this crew ever WATCHES LinkTv? :shrug:

[EFerrari]

53. I never heard back from Palast or the Research Director at Link.

Maybe the wagons were circled or maybe I was too strident with them. I don't know. Has anyone watched this program again? I did once and it seemed more accurate but that was only once.