Venezuela: The people's fight for a fair hearing

[Judi Lynn]

Venezuela: The people's fight for a fair hearing
Saturday, March 27, 2010 - 11:00
By Pablo Navarrete

February 4 marked 11 years since Hugo Chavez first assumed the presidency in Venezuela, following a landslide election victory that swept the country's discredited traditional parties out of power. Since then, Chavez has presided over a radical process of reforms that has been the subject of ever increasing levels of demonisation by the corporate-controlled mainstream media.

The English-language media has been no exception — in fact it has been at the forefront of the attempts to systematically smear Venezuelan democracy under Chavez. Right-wing outlets, such as Rupert Murdoch's Fox News channel, regularly refer to Chavez as a dictator, even though there have been 12 national elections during his time as president — most of which received unprecedented levels of scrutiny by international observers and were systematically deemed as free and fair.

More surprising is the position taken towards the Chavez government by media outlets generally viewed as "liberal". For example, the coverage of Venezuela by the British Guardian's Latin America correspondent, Rory Carroll, has been shamefully superficial and misleading. One analysis of Carroll's reporting on Venezuela, published by the left-wing British magazine Red Pepper in September 2008, carefully dissected his anti-Chavez bias.

The BBC has also had its coverage of Venezuela questioned recently. In December 2009, researchers at the University of the West of England published the preliminary findings of a 10-year study.

Of 304 BBC reports published between 1998 and 2008, the researchers found that only three mentioned any of the Chavez government's positive reforms — such as poverty reduction programs that have halved the poverty rate from 46.5% in 1998 to 23% in 2009.

Instead the BBC's reporting has been characterised by insinuations that Chavez lacks electoral support, and even compared Chavez to Hitler in one instance. The research also suggested the BBC has fallen short of its legal commitment to impartiality, truth and accuracy.

It is within this context of media disinformation that I decided to make my new feature-length documentary, Inside the Revolution: A Journey into the Heart of Venezuela.

Filmed in the capital, Caracas, in November 2008, on the eve of the 10th anniversary of Chavez's presidency, I wanted the documentary to provide audiences outside Venezuela an alternative narrative to the one offered by the mainstream media.

I thought that in order to better understand the process underway in Venezuela, two things were essential. The first was to move away from simplistic interpretations that focus virtually all developments in Venezuela around the figure of Chavez, and instead provide a platform for the voices of the government's grass-roots supporters.

The mainstream media routinely ignores these people, but they are instrumental in driving the process forward and should be at the centre of the story.

More:
http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/43505

[Judi Lynn]

1. Media In Venezuela: Facts and Fiction

Media In Venezuela: Facts and Fiction
Written by Caitlin McNulty and Liz Migliorelli
Monday, 17 August 2009 09:36

When Hugo Chávez won the Venezuelan Presidential election in 1998, he immediately implemented one of his primary campaign platforms, the rewriting of the Venezuelan Constitution of 1961. This new constitution included a broader scope of social, economic, cultural, political and civil rights. A popular referendum was held to elect qualified citizens to make up a Constituent Assembly whose job was to draft the new constitution. This constitution was truly written for the people and by the people. One of the articles in the constitution required the restructuring of the Venezuelan oil industry in order to provide a more equal distribution of resources and wealth to the Venezuelan people. For the economic and political groups who traditionally held power and who had benefited greatly from this oil profit, this shift in structure and fortune was not at all welcome. Since then, this large block of private media (whose ownership belongs to the most powerful businessmen and corporations) has worked toward removing Chávez from power and slowing the revolutionary process.1 Since Chávez won the presidential election and the traditional political parties Acción Democratica and COPEI lost power, the news media has become the greatest weapon of the opposition in a war against the Chávez administration.

~snip~
The Coup d'Etat

Never was corporate media's agenda of destabilizing the Chavez government more transparent than during the 2002 coup attempt against Chávez, which was seen by many as the "first media war in world history".8 Overwhelming public outrage broke out as the majority of Venezuelans who voted Chávez into office saw the democratic process derailed before their very eyes. Their voices, actions, and protests were silenced by the news media in favor of the "inauguration ceremony" of Pedro Carmona, the illegitimate coup-appointed interim President of Venezuela. In response to the government's change of the executive board of Petroleros de Venezuela (PDVSA, Venezuela's oil company) a massive opposition march to the headquarters of PDVSA was promoted by print media, radio and television incessantly. In the days before the coup, instead of regular television programming, Venevisión, RCTV, Globovisión and Televen broadcasted constant anti-Chávez speeches and propaganda calling for viewers to take to the streets. Some ads urged, "Venezuelans, take to the streets on Thursday, April 11 at 10 a.m. Bring your flags. For freedom and democracy. Venezuela will not surrender. No one will defeat us."9 Many propaganda ads were extremely threatening and clearly intended to instigate violence and an overthrow of the Chávez government.

On April 11, 2002, the march that was directed toward the PDVSA headquarters changed route toward the presidential palace, where a group of pro-government supporters were rallying that same day. When sniper gunfire rang out and pro-government supporters began to fall, the Chávez supporters started to shoot back in the direction of the gunfire. RCTV, along with other major news networks, selectively showed footage of Chávez supporters firing guns off of the Puente Llaguno bridge along with a voiceover of "Look at that Chávez supporter…see how he unloads his gun at the peaceful opposition march below."10 They failed to broaden the angle to include the abandoned street below, or include that a mix of two peaceful marches of both Chávez supporters and opposition members had been fired upon by unidentified gunmen, the majority of victims were Chávez supporters, and the men on the bridge were responding to a direct attack. The private media held the Chávez supporters responsible and blamed the Chávez government for arming the aggressors.

Shortly afterwards, a video of objecting high-ranking military officials pronouncing themselves against Chávez's government and requesting his resignation was shown. By projecting these videos over and over again in the mass media, the coup plotters hoped to justify their final goal of kidnapping Chávez and carrying out the coup. The next morning, after Chávez had been taken away but had not resigned, a Venevisión morning program hosted some of the military and civilian coup leaders. The guests on the show thanked the private media channels for their integral role carrying out the coup. As powerful businessman Pedro Carmona became the de-facto president of Venezuela, all the private media owners were present in the palace cheering loudly as the new president dismantled the democratic institutions that Chávez's government had put into place.

There was a complete blackout of information about the coup. The private media intentionally kept breaking news and critical information concealed from the public. On April 11, RCTV received information that Chávez had been kidnapped and was being held in a military prison, but withheld that information from the public, continuing to publicly celebrate his "resignation." During this news blackout caused by the forced closure of the state TV channel, the private media became the primary source of information. Demanding the return of their democratically elected president, Chávez supporters took to the streets on April 13. Instead of reporting these demonstrations and massive mobilizations, the private channels broadcast old movies, cartoons and soap operas. There was a total news blockade; networks prohibited all employees from showing Chavez supporters on screen, forcing those with moral or ethical objections to leave. Venezuelan analyst Eva Gollinger states that;

The intentional censorship was a clear attempt to deny Venezuelan citizens access to true, objective and timely information, violating their constitutional rights and those rights garnered to them under international human rights instruments.11

It wasn't until the protesters won back the state-run television station that Venezuelans began to receive news of what was happening in their country.

Community media played an integral role in combating this widespread media manipulation and blockade, presenting accurate information about the coup and the popular resistance beginning to mobilize in order to derail it. Gregory Wilpert explains;

During the coup, the community media filled the gap which the private mainstream media left when it played and active role in the coup and refused to broadcast the military and popular resistance against the coup government.12

Although the majority of community media stations were broken into, dismantled, and destroyed, a few managed to convey their message beforehand and helped mobilize the masses that eventually managed to reinstate their justly elected president. On one of the most significant days for Venezuelan democracy, the day the democratic process prevailed and Chávez was re-instated as the President of Venezuela, major news stations broadcasted cartoons.13

More:
http://upsidedownworld.org/main/venezuela-archives-35/2059--media-in-venezuela-facts-and-fiction

[Peace Patriot]

3. "...networks prohibited all employees from showing Chavez supporters on screen"

-----

"Instead of reporting these demonstrations and massive mobilizations, the private channels broadcast old movies, cartoons and soap operas. There was a total news blockade; networks prohibited all employees from showing Chavez supporters on screen, forcing those with moral or ethical objections to leave."

-----

They also prohibited anyone from the Chavez government from speaking on TV.

And that is a key point as to the utter deviousness of the corpo-fascist media moguls in Venezuela. Although the mass protest that arose spontaneously around the city--with something like a million people pouring out their hovels and surrounding Miraflores palace--was the turning point, in restoring Venezuela's democratic institutions, saving the president's life and restoring him to power--protests can obviously be painted in a bad light and completely distorted (as with the edited video). Protest leaders--and, really, there were no leaders in this amazing event--will not necessarily be able to get a clear message to the public, even if the protest is broadcast. The media can "edit" them, and who would know? But this would be much harder to do to the vice president of the country, or other officials. They were all banned from TV. And Chavez himself was kidnapped and spirited away, so that he couldn't speak to the people either. And of course the coup forces shut down the government TV channel.

This was the focus of Chavez's cabinet's discussions--in the remarkable inside view we get of it, in the documentary "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised." In fact, that is why the documentary has that title. After Chavez was kidnapped, the first problem of those who remained was how to communicate with the public. And that continued to be the problem through the end of the coup--when they finally got the government channel back up (--I don't know who those heroes were, the protestors and technicians who accomplished that). As it happened, the community stations and word-of-mouth succeeded in rallying the people. My point has to do with the treachery and the treacherous methods of the coupmongers and media moguls. Neither Chavez, nor his vice president, nor any member of his cabinet was given "the right of free speech" that these jerks (and our own jerks) blather about now, in their on-going efforts to slander and topple this DEMOCRATIC government.

Chavez had NOT resigned. Promulgating the lie that he did was critically important to the coupmongers--another reason why no member of the elected government could be permitted to speak on TV. They did not succeed with that lie. Word got out. But again, I am speaking of the INTENTIONS of the coupmongers, which included the entire corpo-fascist media in Venezuela (and today includes the entire corpo-fascist media in the world--the BBCons, Rotters, the lot of them--which are STILL TRYING to topple the Chavez government with devious lies and suppression of the truth).

Chavez could not speak. His vice president and cabinet members could not speak. A million people could not speak. WHO are the killers of free speech--in Venezuela, here and everywhere?

Not even on the government channel. Nowhere could they speak.

The views of the elected government were not permitted on TV. Not just the views of protestors--not just the views of the people--whom the corpo-fascist press routinely suppress and ban. The views of the ELECTED leadership of the country were entirely banned on every TV/radio channel in Venezuela (with the exception of a few small community radio stations).

After transparent vote counting, the next most important component of democracy is access to information and many viewpoints, including unfiltered access to elected leaders. (That is why Chavez is on TV for an hour every week, taking call-in's, and why the National Assembly required all channels to cover his speeches!) Free speech! It has become very clear, indeed, that free speech REQUIRES the curtailment of FALSE corporate speech. They cannot be permitted to dominate the airwaves. They cannot be permitted to OWN all the airwaves, any more than they should be permitted to OWN the voting machines, as they do here! Because they will, for sure, use that power to destroy democracy, as they tried to do in Venezuela, in 2002, and are still trying to do, there, and as they have nearly succeeded in doing in the USA and throughout the "first world."

The corpo-fascist blatherers about "free speech" are LYING!

[Peace Patriot]

2. Wow! Brilliant analysis of the corpo-fascist media's profound lie about Chavez and Venezuela!

This jumped out at me:

"... to move away from simplistic interpretations that focus virtually all developments in Venezuela around the figure of Chavez, and instead provide a platform for the voices of the government's grass-roots supporters."

Every point of this article is a brilliant jewel of truth from a brilliant mind who has REALLY BEEN PAYING ATTENTION! I cannot praise it enough. But this point, about the corpo-fascist media's creation of a bogeyman--an effigy that they can beat up on--when their real "enemy" is one that they DON'T IDENTIFY--the people of Venezuela--really stands out and is profoundly inciteful. This writer and documentarian truly understands the "Alice in Wonderland" world of the corpo-fascist press.

They CAN'T go after their real "enemy." Democracy. They can't reveal how much they hate activist, engaged citizens and voters; the courageous and far-thinking, self-empowered and community-empowered, members of the poor majority; the people who made the Bolivarian Revolution. The twisted lie at the heart of their propaganda is that they support democracy. Nothing could be further from the truth. But that is the "stinger" with which they stun their prey--their readers, their viewers--into unconsciousness. If they were to disclose what and whom they really hate, they would not be able to keep so many people in a comatose state, while they steal everybody's wealth, inflict the mass murder of war on countries with resources they want, and destroy every institution that people have created to curtail the power of the few.

So--to deal with Venezuela, where democracy is still alive--they invent a demon--invent it out of whole cloth--that they can beat up on, so as not to expose their dirtbag corpo-fascist greed and murderous powermongering.

Pablo Navarette sees into the heart of the problem. The lie about Chavez is very devious. Not even Oliver Stone got at it. He focuses on Chavez, too, and on other leaders who support Chavez, as if Chavez and his many allies among the leaders of Latin America were the story. There IS a story there, of course--a very important one, as to what this new Latin American leadership is using their mandate to do. But the bigger story--the story that causes the powermongers and warmongers in Washington to tremble and to ready their depleted uranium bullets and their warships and their special forces and their "drones"--is how that mandate was achieved and who granted it: The People, in honest, transparent elections, yet another stunning achievement of the people of Latin America.

It's not about Chavez. It's about the will of the people. And it could not be clearer, here in the USA, just how afraid our corporate rulers and war profiteers are, of the will of the people. Their coup d'etat of 'TRADE SECRET' voting machines, all over the US, with the 'TRADE SECRET' code now owned and controlled mostly by ONE, far rightwing corporation (ES&S, which just bought out Diebold)--a completely "dark" and riggable election system with virtually no audit/recount controls--tells us just how fearful they are.

And their creation of "Chavez the dictator" also tells us about their fear, as well as about their methods.

THANK GOD that somebody on the left understands what is going on with this corpo-fascist myth about Chavez!

Kudos and laurel wreaths to Mr. Navarette!

:bounce: :applause: :grouphug: :applause: :bounce: