Disinformation still clouds the US debate on Chávez's legacy in Venezuela

[Judi Lynn]

Disinformation still clouds the US debate on Chávez's legacy in Venezuela

Despite 14 years of catastrophist predictions for Venezuela, oil wealth has been successfully turned to social purposes

Mark Weisbrot
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 9 January 2013 10.30 EST

Imagine that you went to see the Steven Spielberg movie Lincoln, and all you got was the viewpoint of Southern white slaveholders during the civil war. That is analogous to what you are getting from almost all of the major media coverage on Venezuela.

Last week, the New York Times did something it has never done before: in its "Room for Debate" section, it offered differing views on Venezuela. In the 14 years since Hugo Chávez was elected president of Venezuela, the Times has offered many op-eds and editorials against Venezuela – including its own editorial board piece supporting the 2002 military coup (from which it later backpedaled without acknowledgment or apology). But the Times has never seen fit to publish even a single op-ed that contrasted with their editorial line (or reporting, for that matter) on this oil-rich country.

This contrasts with almost every medium-sized to large newspaper in the United States – from the LA Times, Boston Globe, or Miami Herald, to even the neoconservative Washington Post, and scores of other mainstream city newspapers, which have all published at least one op-ed offering another side of the story. It's worth revisiting this debate that lately appeared in the Times' online edition because it sheds light on some of the problems with what we read and hear about Venezuela.

Moisés Naím argues that Venezuela, whose economy grew about 5.5% in 2012, is headed for "an economic crisis of historic proportions". (Well, at least he said "headed for a crisis". Anita Issacs, a political scientist included in this debate, bizarrely refers to "Venezuela's tanking economy" – possibly like the "United States' tanking economy" in 2004).

More:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/09/us-debate-chavez-venezuela-legacy

[sabrina 1]

1. The wikileaks revelations gave a perfect picture of why this propaganda against Venezuela

continues, led by the US. They are so afraid of anyone who puts their country first and is unwilling to give away its resources to Big Corps. Even more, as was stated in those interesting leaks, Chavez' huge popularity, or rather the popularity of his policies that have worked to restore sovereignty to many Latin American countries after years of brutal, Western supported Dictatorships, 'is a threat to OUR interests'.

He was smart enough to not just focus on Venezuela to keep those criminal elements out of the region, he worked with other countries in Latin America and a generation has now been raised that understands its history and the constant threat from Western Corporations.

It is that influence that, according to the Wikileaks cables, is a huge threat to the US's former influence in Latin America.

What is interesting though is that despite all their efforts, they have failed. If people learned one thing over the past decade, it is that no one can trust the Western Media, and they don't.

With the emergence of real media, real facts have managed to get out to the people making the work of the propagandists, like the NYT, much more difficult than it used to be.

[Judi Lynn]

2. Real media is our only lifeline at this point.

Because of that, it's definitely easy to fear the right-wing will eventually find a way to block our newer access to the real information, too.

It does appear that the number of U.S. Americans who realize we've been bamboozled by our corporate "news" media grows constantly. That's important.

[MinM]

3. Venezuelans Continue to Defy the Washington Post

Venezuelans Continue to Defy the Washington Post

By Peter Hart | FAIR | January 8, 2013

The Washington Post has never been fond of left-wing Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. As serious questions mount about the state of Chavez’s health, the paper’s editorial page (1/5/13) found it a good time to take another swipe:

Venezuelans are bracing themselves for the death of the caudillo who has ruled them–and wrecked their once-prosperous country–over the past 13 years.

Economist Mark Weisbrot has a different take. In a “Room for Debate” discussion at the New York Times (1/4/13), he writes:

Since Hugo Chávez first took office, he and his party have won 13 of 14 national elections, mainly because they greatly improved the living standards of the majority of voters in Venezuela. Since 2004, after the economy recovered from the devastating opposition oil strike, poverty has been cut by half and extreme poverty by more than 70 percent.

Weisbrot goes on to show some of the other ways Venezuelans’ lives have improved in the Chavez years...

http://www.fair.org/blog/2013/01/08/venezuelans-continue-to-defy-washington-post/