Many of you wrote in to respond to yesterday's reader-submitted item about the closure of a television network in Venezuela.
As a friendly reminder, whenever text is presented on BoingBoing in blockquotes, you're reading the quoted words of someone, and not the blog-voice of a BoingBoing editor.
That said — many BoingBoing readers shared opinions about the media turmoil in Venezuela.
Emil says,
While normally a station
losing a license would be a sad thing, this is a TV station that
actively supported a coup against Chavez in 2002, and was partially
responsible for the violence and deaths that took place at this time.
These events, including the role of RCTV and others are well
documented in the (award-winning) film "The Revolution will not be
televised".I'd like to draw your attention to the following article by the
"Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting" group:
"Coup Co-Conspirators as Free-Speech Martyrs"
Craig Brozefsky says,
The article you quoted from Anonimo regarding the RCTV shutdown
completely fails to provide any context for the shutdown (a refusal to
renew their license), or the process by which it was carried out and
why. RCTV was a major participant in the April 2002 coup, as detailed
in these articles.If you want to see footage of RCTV and the other channels who
supported the coup and how they did so, please check out The
Revolution Will Not Be Televised, an excellent documentary by an Irish
documentary film maker who was in Caracas at the time of the coup.
Felipe Ledesma says,
The venezuelan situation is a very complex one. There is a lot of radicalization, so you will find very opposite POVs. But one small comment: Chavez rise to power came after a failed coup and the actual Ministry of Interior, Jesse Chacon, assasinated some workers when they assalted the goverment channel (the same one they have now under their control) during that coup attempt. This is a matter of free speech. Thanks for listening.
Carlos Martinez says,
While I too
think it is a bad idea, it is a litle more complex
than is being presented. I was in Venezuela during the
coup of 2002 and watched the private media coverage
daily. It was incendiary and flgrantly
anti-democratic. That station is guilty of faking
footage of violence in order to incite further
violence, and guilty of hiding the truth about what
was really happening from the electorate. I am no
pro-Chavez partisan, but I was genuinely horrified by
the coverage of the coup. Does this justify its
closing? No, but their calls for press freedoms ring a
bit hypocritical after their gross manipulations and
lying.
Tyson Schwertner says,
Although I am not a Chavez worshiper nor do I live in Venezuela, the article concerning RCTV seems flawed.
Firstly, it is not being shut down. Chavez is not renewing the license for the use of the public airwaves.
The can still broadcast over cable, internet, and satellite. Secondly, the poster failed to mention that RCTV openly supported and helped a coup of his government that was partially successful. Chavez did not shut it down immediately
but allowed the contract to expire 5 years later.He also allows other networks that are openly critical of him to continue, just not the ones that tell people to overthrow a democratically elected government.
It seems plausible that the US would do the same if ABC openly supported and helped enact a coup of the government.
This article sums it up better than i can, if you are interested. (not intended to be a bb link suggestion) It includes a few examples of similar actions in the US and UK and interviews with those opposing Chavez's decision.
Again, I have a plenty of criticisms of Chavez but in this case I do not think he is impairing free speech, at least not in the way it was presented on boingboing. I am open to being completely wrong though.
protoRoB says,
First off all, not only the problem was the exit off the public signal
from rctv, the thing is that the goverment is intimidating to the Cable television
against the possibility to transmit via this way.We know that is not the same but at least is something for us the venezuelans
almost everybody have cable tv acces, the poor people too, believeme
This is a very extrange country, i'm not saying it in the bad sense off the word
we are a very wonderfull yet extrange society.The second point is the potential expropiation of the MICROWAVE (microondas) transmition
stations, the new channel Tves, wich is now in the old RCTV frequency (que cagada coño!)
but is using a big part of the equipment of rctv wich they say is just a momentary resource
untill they build their own structure for broadcasting the new channel.
But here, in this wonderfull yet extrange country, we all know that there is nothing more permanent than the provisional.
and that is a very sad thing in this case.The new channel is not bad at all, sincerely, at least by now is very aceptable
we aspect not anther channel like Venezolana de Television (the country's public tv channel)
wich is almost "the Chavez´ propaganda channel"
The new Tves is wat VTV is suposed to be.This is a personal opinion Xeni, i know there are lots of things that i don´t know in that respect
as many persons in venezuela, but this is an obvius violation to the freedom of speech.
Bernard says,
First point : Under what legal process was this TV shut down? Because its
license to broadcast expired. It was granted in the 80's for 20 years and
was subject to renewal. That TV channel was not shut down, its contract
with the Venezuelan government expired. It may seems to be a
non-significant point, but it is not. The question is WHY was the license
not renewed ?If I may, I would like to stress that NO license is FOREVER granted. If
you does not like any provider, it's your right to change it at your
contract expiration. May you be a government and your provider a TV. It's
just a contract with a end-of-term.Second point : WHY was the TV closed/not granted a license renewal ?
Because its contract with the Venezuelan government included a couple
legal clauses. One of them was that the TV had to respect the Venezuelan
law. And among the numerous violations along the last years, this channel
have been a key asset in the right-wing opposition to conduct a COUP
against the legal, elected, president. And conducting a COUP is not a
legal activity for a TV channel. If you didn't yet, you should see "The
revolution will not be televised" documentary about this US-backed coup.I agree that any government
closing a "free" channel to replace it by a "government" TV should be, at
first, suspected of wrongdoing. The fact is, to my understanding, this
case deserve deeper investigation to be perfectly covered. And you can't
rely on US media to tell this.
Rick Potthoff says,
The other side of this is that RCTV deserves to be shut down because they supported the coup against Chavez. Do you think that if, say, ABC had come out against Pres. Bush during a coup that failed they wouldn't end up in Gitmo? Revoking their broadcast license is still retaliation, but mild retaliation. Don't repeat the BS that because Chavez is trying to help the poor of Venezuela he is 'socialist.' All that means is that he doesn't toe the line of the WTO/FTA free trade agenda. He is as 'socialist' in the same sense FDR was.
Chris Asp says,
Another view of RCTV: Link.
John Coulthart says,
I'm no expert on South American politics by any means but I thought you should know that not everyone regards the Venezuelan TV shutdown as unwarranted state censorship. British MP Colin Burgon wrote in The Guardian this week:
Almost all Venezuelan newspapers remain in private hands. The press is free to report, and express opinions, without government interference. Most do so with considerable brio on a daily basis. No media outlet has encountered licensing problems for the expression of political views. No journalist has been imprisoned or punished for report or comment.
In RCTV's case, the broadcaster failed to meet basic public-interest standards. The criterion for this assessment is similar to that used by the US Federal Communications Commission. RCTV will be free to broadcast via cable and satellite, which are available across the country.
In the UK, if Channel 4 aided an attempted coup against the government that resulted in civil unrest and even death, would anyone be supporting the renewal of its licence? RCTV has lost its licence because its wealthy owners slanted news coverage to provide support to the April 2002 coup against Chávez and the elected government. This will not be news to those who gathered in parliament last week to view John Pilger's excellent documentary The War on Democracy, which shows footage of RCTV involvement.
As the coup failed and Venezuelans questioned Chávez's "resignation", RCTV prohibited correspondents from airing these developments.
Full piece here: Link.
Burgon and others sent the following letter to the Guardian the day after:
We believe that the decision of the Venezuelan government not to renew the broadcasting licence of RCTV when it expires on May 27 (Chávez silences critical TV station, May 23; Comment and Letters, May 25) is legitimate given that RCTV has used its access to the public airwaves to repeatedly call for the overthrow of the democratically elected government of President Hugo Chávez. RCTV gave vital practical support to the overthrow of Venezuela's elected government in April 2002 in which at least 13 people were killed. In the 47 hours that the coup plotters held power, they overturned much of Venezuela's democratic constitution – closing down the elected national assembly, the supreme court and other state institutions.
RCTV exhorted the public to take to the streets and overthrow the government and also colluded with the coup by deliberately misrepresenting what was taking place, and then conducting a news blackout. Its production manager, Andrés Izarra, who opposed the coup, immediately resigned so as not to become an accomplice.
This is not a case of censorship. In Venezuela more than 90% of the media is privately owned and virulently opposed to the Chávez government. RCTV, far from being silenced, is being allowed to continue broadcasting by satellite and cable. In Venezuela, as in Britain, TV stations must adhere to laws and regulations governing what they can broadcast. Imagine the consequences if the BBC or ITV were found to be part of a coup against the government. Venezuela deserves the same consideration.
Colin Burgon MP
Dr Julia Buxton
Jon Cruddas MP
Tony Benn
Billy Hayes General secretary, CWU
John Pilger
Professor Jonathan Rosenhead LSE
Hugh O'Shaughnessy
Rod Stoneman Executive producer, The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
And 16 othersLink.
John Leach says,
I read your post about RCTV on boingboing and thought I'd drop you a few
resources I found about the other side of the coin (rather difficult to
find in the "mainstream" media):
Link 1, Link 2, Link 3, Link 4.
Frederic Renet says,
There is always two faces in a story, the TV in question was also part of the
plot to replace Chavez with a coup d'état.May be you should also publish the response made to the washington post about
this decision: Link.
Previously on BoingBoing:
(posted from Central America / Xeni)
