Read more

Here are some views they would never dare publish about RCTV:
The truth about RCTV

Here's just a sample of this very worthwhile read:

quote:

---

Across the world, decisions not to renew licences to those who have violated these requirements are not unusual. A report by J. David Carracedo published in the magazine Diagonal on 21 countries, including the US and in Europe, found that there have been at least 236 closures, revocations, and non-renewals of radio and TV licences. [ix] In addition research conducted by the Venezuelan Ministry of Telecommunications shows that over 600 TV broadcasting licences have not been renewed all around the world.

---

Canada is no different and the Bennett government of the late 20's and early 30's took very similar action against all US broadcasters operating here.

Funny how our own practises are never compared to Venezuela's.

To see a sample of this station's "quality reporting" here's a sample from You Tube:
RCTV plays with photo shop

For the non-Spanish speakers, here's a quick explanation of what's going on;

RCTV shows a video of dozens of brand new Hummers parked in the main military garrison of Caracas - Fort Tiuna. Just to make certain that the viewers know where the film was shot, a big sign in the background says "Fuerte Tiuna". All the time the outraged presenter is talking about corruption and the evils of socialism.

Of course, being RCTV things turn out to not exactly be what they appear to be. Watch til the end of the video and you will see the picture is actually a parking lot in California that appeared on Alan Greenspan's blog! They simply manipulated it to add the "Fuerte Tiuna" sign and there you go - evidence of Chavez government corruption ready to be broadcast over the public airwaves to millions of Venezuleans.

Today the Venezuelan government took legal action against two other networks for some of their broadcasts:

Second Venezuela TV is under fire

quote:

---

Venezuela's government has accused a TV station of inciting people to kill President Hugo Chavez, hours after taking another network off the air.

It said footage shown on Globovision implicitly called for Mr Chavez to be killed. The station denies the claim.

Communications Minister William Lara said Globovision had called for the death of Mr Chavez by airing footage of the 1981 assassination attempt against Pope John Paul II with the song "This Does Not Stop Here" sung by Ruben Blades, now Panama's tourism minister.

"The conclusion of the specialists ... is that (in this segment) they are inciting the assassination of the president of Venezuela," Mr Lara said, as he filed a lawsuit against the news network at the state prosecutor's office.

The government was also suing the US station CNN for allegedly linking Mr Chavez to al-Qaeda, Mr Lara said.

---

I wonder how our government would react if any of our broadcasters behaved in this fashion?

Mayo 19 2007

Watching the last hours of Radio Caracas Television as it salutes itself with sentimental clips of its pop programming. In the streets of Caracas a protest of RCTV supporters is dispersed after gun shots and minor police injuries.

At the same time a across the county pro-government events celebrate with fireworks, music and dancing in the street at the virtual end of a TV channel owned by Marcel Granier one of the most powerful men in modern Venezuelan history. He is one of the richest men in Venezuela and also held high positions of power within the previous government.

At midnight the channel 2 RCTV broadcast will cease after 53 years of private broadcasting. In its place will start a new channel called Television Venezuela Social TVes, the third national channel created by the Chavez socialist government to promote the values of the Bolivarian Republic.

As I understand it, the decision to not renew the RCTV broadcast license was decided by the president within his limited time frame of enabling laws. It is a legal act within the constitution and approved by the federal court. Canada and most other national governments have similar powers to approve and cancel broadcast licenses, but they never use this power for political purposes. RCTV was a loud and constant critic of the new government. Anything negative the happened was the fault of Chavez. The closure of RCTV is seen as thus a shut down of a powerful opposition megaphone from the legacy of elite private power, and as well as a form of government censorship against loud critics.

Internationally there have been formal criticisms from respected NGOs and governments of Chavez's decision to end RCTV as a strike against “freedom of expression”. From outside I can understand how at a quick glance this could be see as a serious blow against the ability of journalists to communicate with the public. But one must also understand first that RCTV was no bastion of free speech. It was a corporation that pushed messages that served the interests of its owners. More importantly Venezuela continues to have five other major private general programming TV channels that are critical of the government along with many speciality channels, mostly from the USA. Here you can find more than 10 different national independent newspapers along with around five regional papers at any large news stand. Back in Toronto we have three national TV channels (one paid for by the government) and three national newspapers. Who has more freedom of speech?

Watching the final minutes of RCTV with my residence mate Jose Luis we laugh how RCTV says goodbye. All the programs feature people that look very “rico”. Tall, fair skinned, blond, expensive clothing and jewellery, breast implants where necessary and generally not at all representative of real Venezuelans. Crying spokespersons who make more in 2 weeks than the average Venezuelan in a year, we find it hard to sympathize with their pre-recorded songs of despair and national pride. They chant for freedom yet any employee of RCTV had no freedom to speak outside of the corporate guidelines set by one Marcel Granier.

I think the real question is what alternative the government will provide. It’s easy to criticize corporate media that has no interests outside the bank accounts of its stock holders, but is government controlled media any better? I don't think Chinese or USSR media are ideals that we should be working towards. So far the two government sponsored channels VTV and VIVO include a wide variety of educational content, lots of boring discussion shows featuring community leaders, writers and academics, some basic kids programming, unique documentaries on national heritage and socialist critics of USA history, frequent sign language translations and government public service announcements where commercials would usually be. While I'd judge their content to include much better representation of everyday Venezuelans and they are definitely much more socially constructive than your average prime time FOX affiliate, it lacks critical perspective on the government. Mind you, that’s what every other channels has a surplus of, along with dumb soap operas and cheesy pop programming.

I remain optimistic. I think that with time Venezuela will find its way towards a real democratic media system that is neither fighting privately controlled opposition programming, regurgitating government messages nor spewing corporate advertising fluff. Already they are engaging communities to discuss formats for local communal controlled media systems. One of the key planks of the new TVes that replaces RCTV is “participatory”, but what that mean remains to be seen? I watch a black screen at 12:10am waiting for another step in the revolution to animate on the ancient boob tube in my stuffy room.

It still seems to me that most of the protesters condemning the government's actions are still the same elite group that have been opposing Chavez since his election and beyond the failed coup. I have little sympathy for "los ricos".

It doesn't sound like the existing public stations are all about propaganda so I have no quibble with the Venezuelans setting up their own CBC or BBC. I'm also sure that "los ricos" probably don't even watch VHF channels and have their tellys tuned to satellite and cable where they can still access RCTV.

Anyway, here are some snippets from the recent protests:

quote:

---

"You have to accept dissidence, there can't be just one line of thought," said the dean of the Central University Antonio Paris in support of the protests today.

"We can't let Venezuela be converted into Cuba or ally itself to terrorist states," said RCTV president Marcel Granier. "We have to find a way to reconnect ourselves to the television screens so that people can express their opinions."

But those who support the decision see it as an opening to more diversity, and not a restriction of thought.

"We support the government's decision to not renew the broadcast license of the channel that supported the coup, and to open new roads of communication with the new channel Tves," said one of the pro-government protesters.

"I have been a supporter of this revolution for many years and it depends on us being able to change the things that damage the society, like RCTV," said another marcher. "We are going to try to make a better country for our children and adults."

---

Just one small quibble when you wrote:

quote:

---

Canada and most other national governments have similar powers to approve and cancel broadcast licenses, but they never use this power for political purposes.

---

Actually Canada and most other countries did use this mandate. Under the Bennett government in the early 30's, all US media owners were forced to leave the radio market and turn over the control of their stations to Canadians. For instance in Toronto CFRB was an NBC affiliate and several stations that didn't comply were taken over to form the CBC. I believe both the US and Britain did the same. All these governments were called "communist" and dictators too by the corporate media at the time. FDR even had an attempted coup against him partly led by Randolph "rosebud" Hearst called the "Business Plot".

It was called Death on a Rock

Here's what happened to Thames TV:

quote:

---

The then Foreign Secretary, Geoffrey Howe, attempted to prevent the broadcast of the programme, claiming it would prejudice the official inquest into the event. The Independent Broadcasting Authority refused, stating: 'the issues as we see them relate to free speech and free inquiry which underpin individual liberty in a democracy'. Following transmission, the programme was heavily criticised by sections of the the press, notably the Rupert Murdoch-owned papers The Sunday Times and The Sun. The then Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, was said to be outraged by the documentary, and was increasingly concerned about ITV's 'monopoly' in independent broadcasting. Mrs. Thatcher said, in an interview: 'If you ever get trial by television...that day, freedom dies.'

A 1989 inquiry into the programme largely cleared it of any impropriety.

Subsequently, the British Government ordered that ITV broadcasting franchises, which were up for renewal in 1991, be determined by silent auction. The amount Thames Television offered for its franchise was significantly less than the money offered by other companies. However the winners of auctions were not determined by bid sizes alone, but by an unknown combination of programming requirements and value for money. In many cases losers found that they had bid more than the winners, and it was virtually impossible for a bidder to know exactly what they had to do to win a franchise. The process was considered by many at the time to have become opaque and open to political manipulation.

---

I don't seem to remember the US Senate or the world press claiming that Margaret Thatcher was a dictator and an enemy of freedom. I somehow get the feeling Pat Robertson didn't pray for her assassination either.

[ 29 May 2007: Message edited by: a lonely worker ]

quote:

---

... we respect CONATEL's (The National Telecommunication Commission of Venezuela) decision not to renew the broadcast license of the private television channel Radio Caracas (RCTV) which was taken in complete accordance with Venezuelan domestic legislation and international standards. ...

we are concerned to note that the attacks to which this sovereign decision by the Venezuelan government is being subject are related to the attempts --started by the FAES foundation and repeated by other right-wing organisations in Europe and America-- to “democratically defeat the socialism for the 21 century project”. The Venezuelan government’s fair decision not to renew RCTV’s broadcast licence can be explained by what RCTV did during the April 2002 coup d’état in Venezuela –to wit, giving airtime to the coup backers, distorting the facts and ignoring acts which were an attack on freedom of expression. The events RCTV ignored included the violent take-over of the state TV station, thus silencing and disrespecting its journalists (RCTV also ignored the people’s reaction to the massacre in the streets). What the station did during the coup also permits us to understand why, today as yesterday, right-wing forces all over the world are closing ranks with the Venezuelan right.

---

In favour of democracy in the media

[ 07 June 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by a lonely worker:

I wonder how our government would react if any of our broadcasters behaved in this fashion?

---

In British Columbia, our NDP government couldn't do anything since broadcasting falls under federal jurisdiction.

That left BCTV (now Global), a major contributor to the BC Liberals, free to mount an unprecented smear campaign complete with televised home invasions of the Premier's home.

Robert McChesney, THE authority on corporate media monopolies and Richard Gott of the Guardian who writes of The Battle Over the Media is About Race as Well as Class.

And here's an interestingly timed op-ed piece by a FCC commissioner in the NYTimes that outlines what everyone else should be doing to regulate media monopolies, rather than acting as a rubber stamp for perpetual private ownership of the public airwaves.

[ 09 June 2007: Message edited by: ceti ]