Two stories about Venezuela are in the news this morning. The Caribbean Development Bank is holding the annual meeting of it’s Board of Governors in Caracas on May 30 and 31. The Nation News does it’s “turn press release into boring story” treatment here.
In the real world though – meaning outside of the diplomatic pate-eaters – Venezuelan riot police are using teargas and water cannons to clear protesting crowds from burning barricades after strongman Chavez closed the opposition television station RCTV. (Yahoo News story here)
The Nation News has not seen fit to mention the closing of the television station or that the iron fist of Chavez has come down heavily on journalists. The Nation News has, however, published many positive articles about Chavez. Check it out yourself at the paper’s archives and see if you agree that The Nation News is presenting only positive stories about the dictator while totally ignoring his human rights violations.
29 Comments
May 29, 2007 at 5:30 pm
The Caribbean Net News up in the Cayman Islands is doing the same…
The truth about RCTV
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
http://www.caribbeannetnews.com/news-1746–7-7–.html
May 29, 2007 at 5:48 pm
This world now belongs to the RICH and the CORRUPT,
but day gyne run til night ketch it.
And it gyne be revolution, violent revolution, jes’ now, doan say a wurd!
May 29, 2007 at 6:02 pm
all this proves is that the coterie of international bankers and bureaucrats who live off the canapes and pates ( not to mention champagne ) of the public and corporate trough are prepared to lie down with anyone that is prepared to pay the price.
Where has all the integrity gone? or did it ever exist?
Lets hope Transparency International is going to hit both Barabados and Venezuela hard in the next report?
These countries deserve to be downgraded to junk bond status and mere dictatorships.
May 29, 2007 at 6:22 pm
Reality Check is completely right, and I hope both badly-run countries get what they have rightly deserved for some time now!
These countries deserve to be down-graded,
and speaking of Junk-Bond status,
anyone foolish enough to invest in Barbados Government securities is asking to be ripped,
coz jes now they gyne default on them too,
coz the country is broke, ripped-off to the max.
The Barbados Mafia will soon be living in the South of France, where all the criminals end up
May 29, 2007 at 6:23 pm
I admit to not having read the stories in detail and know that you guys mean well, and, believe me, I’m as much of a democrat as any of you but, I think I heard that the tv stn. in Venezuela was supporting one political Party in opposition to another. As you guys will know, that is not what the role of a tv station should be in a constitutional democracy. In a democracy the role of a tv stn. or radio stn i.e. the mass media is to be IMPARATIAL and it is not for no reason that this is so. I never thought that I would ever be agreeing with the Venezuelan president about anything but if that is the case, then I’m in agreement with him. I remind you that the carnage in Rwanda was instigated by a radio stn. agitating one ethnic group to rise up against another.
I have watched the BBC for years and could n’t tell you which political Party they favour because they never express an opinion. They facilitate others expressing their opinions for and against but never express an opininon of their own, and that’s the way it should be.
I hope that Chavez has got it right for the sake of peace and tranquility, in Venezuela as, as we have seen, the consequences of an irresponsible arm of the mass media can be catastrophic and usually, it’s the innocent, ordinary people who suffer the most.
May 29, 2007 at 7:15 pm
Bimbro, who said that the role of a TV station in a democracy is not to support one side or the other? That is called FREEDOM. You have a problem with that.
You deserve to live under Chavez or one of his kind.
May 29, 2007 at 7:41 pm
Bimbro, the comment by Anonymous is correct. Ever watch Fox?
Of course a radio or televison station may be politically partisan, that is freedom of expression, but not incite people to hate,violence, murder etc as in Rwanda.
May 29, 2007 at 8:05 pm
BimBro lives in an ideal, perfect world where all is harmonious.
Of course, Komrade Chavez doesn’t run a TV Sta. of his own, supporting HIS Nationalist policies, oh NO!
he wun’t do that..he’s a nice guy.
Venezuela will soon explode. (again!)
Watch for a rash of fleeing people seking asylum.
This is not new for Venezuela: these revo’s from time to time have been a part of Venezuelan life for 150 years now:
- that’s why half of Trinidadian society is made up of Venezuelan refugees from long time back, during the latter half of the 1800’s !
May 29, 2007 at 10:31 pm
Think this couldn’t happen here?
Remember a few years back when a peaceful UWI student demo was violently broken up by cops in full riot-gear wielding machine-guns?
And just bear in mind that the thuggish Chavez is openly admired by the likes of Arthur, Mottley, Precod et al.
I say again: yuh tink dis cyan happen in Buhbados?
May 29, 2007 at 10:34 pm
I watched the close down (live) of RCTV, ..a privately owned and operated TV station with more than 50 years of srvice to the Venezuelan community..it was sad,very sad, employees crying and singing the Gloria al Bravo Pueblo national anthem. (3000 of them ) as Dictator Chavez not only closed them down, but expropriated all of their equipment and facilities to start his own station “TVES” . This is more than about Press Freedom, this is about the change that Chavez is making of Venezuela….. a Cuban copycat, but the difference is that Chavez is loaded with petro dollars! It has gone to his ignorant head, and he is destroying a beautiful country under the pretex of taking from the rich and giving to the poor.
After 8 years of Chavez, there is more poverty, more crime, more murders, more corruption, more shortages of food etc, and he is now ruling (approved by his fixed cabinet) by DECREE….Venezuela is going down the tube…and faster than most people had thought..Chavez`s friends are Castro (and we all know what a success Cuba is), Iran`s President, the madman in North Korea, and other misfits and Madmen.
The Venezuelan Bolivar has lost its value, with an official rate of 2100 to a US$, while the true value is that traded on the street, 4100 today.
One day he too will suffer the fate of all Dictators..I just hope that our Caribbean Leaders dont fall for his tricks.
May 29, 2007 at 11:29 pm
yatinkinkiteasy
May 29th, 2007 at 10:34 pm
” Chavez`s friends are Castro (and we all know what a success Cuba is), Iran`s President, the madman in North Korea, and other misfits and Madmen. ”
*******************************************
Do not forget to include Owen Arthur among his friends…!
When we really examine it check this out….!
In 2005……after years of promising a referendum on a change to Republican Status….Owen Arthur says there will be no referendum.
In 2006……Owen Arthur pooches a critic ( Clyde Mascoll ) of his government……only for all the issues UDC , GEMS , National Debt to remain unaddressed…..!
In 2007…..Owen Arthur , Minister responsible for CBC presides in SILENCE over the mauling of a CBC journalist & others by police in bullet – proof vests…!
And Barbadians are asked to give him another term to support this creeping….DICTATORSHIP….!
Awake the conscience of our NATION…!
Bridgetown is in peril….not only CARACAS…!
May 30, 2007 at 12:30 am
Is it not expected that Chavez will seek friendship with someone (Castro) who, like him, had seen his country raped by the few, for the few,at the expense of the many, and then acted to attempt in reversing this scenario?
Yes, events since their taking control of their countries may have shown that their own administrations are themselves less than perfect.
But, what these events do show categorically is that anytime that a large proportion of the population are marginalised, then events will naturally take a turn to ‘balance the books’.
Yes, such can happen here, what do YOU think, if we continue on the road to marginalisation of the majority.
Why do you think I write here? Because my fingers need exercise?
I, along with others have recognised that we are indeed at a crossroads. The selfish road will take us to marginalisation and eventual ‘rebalancing’, as a matter of the unavoidable natural course of events.
Do you not understand that Chavez, unlike the Iraqi Gov’t for example, is a democratically elected leader? A democratically elected leader!
So what is the problem? He is what the Venezuelan people want. Why should we interfere?
As explained before, the majority of the South American governments, again elected, are what some like to label as socialist.
Again, a result of extensive and long-term marginalisation, now being ‘reversed’.
The only realistic and sustainable approach to prevent social upheaval and long-term societal problems is to address critical issues for the majority as soon as one can.
Verbiage and criticism of states where such marginalisation has resulted in what some regard as unacceptable administrations will achieve little without addressing the underlying cause of such events.
As noted, yes it can happen here.
Which is why I am adamant that we must address the prioritization of our public expenditures and ensure that we spend on revenue earning, foreign exchange earning and social-benefit programmes instead of unnecessary construction programmes.
That said, there will always be a negative for each positive.
Balance will prevail.
May 30, 2007 at 3:53 am
“Do you not understand that Chavez, unlike the Iraqi Gov’t for example, is a democratically elected leader? A democratically elected leader!”
Just because a leader is democratically elected is absolutely no guarantee he won’t consolidate dictatorial powers after said election.
The name Adolph Hitler ring a bell?
May 30, 2007 at 5:48 am
Anonymous, you really, don’t need to be rude about this. Clearly, you’re not persuaded by my argument above. However, it is my experience here, in the UK and seems eminently, sensible, to me. I assumed it was the case in all reputable, democracies.
For example, do you know what CNN’s position is on the Iraq war, or whether they support Bush for President or somebody else? I doubt it very much.
May 30, 2007 at 5:58 am
Thanks, ‘Just Asking’. Please see my reply to ‘Anonymous’. However, I should n’t like to live in a country where the media took a pointed-stand on anything. You might not either, if they turned their attention towards YOUR community.
I thought the purpose of the media was to report the news impartially, in an unbiased way and to facilitate discussion. That is how its done in the UK and works very, successfully and here, is often known as, ‘the home of democracy’, so I think we know about democracy.
I did n’t know and don’t agree that the media should be pushing its own agenda.
May 30, 2007 at 6:49 am
Bimbro says “I didn’t know and don’t agree that the media should be pushing its own agenda.”
In a perfect world Bimbro, but in the real world all media has an agenda, even if it is only to make money by printing what people want to hear rather than the truth.
U are naive to think as you do. Look at Reuters publishing a thousand doctored photos to push the Arab side over the Israelis. Look at Dan Rather who used documents he had been told were forged because they supported his story on Bush. If two of the biggest do it, why do you believe that it is not common?
Peace
May 30, 2007 at 4:27 pm
akabozik, you said; “In a perfect world Bimbro, but in the real world all media has an agenda, even if it is only to make money by printing what people want to hear rather than the truth.”
Does that apply to the BFP, too? I thik it’s a silly, generalisation to say that ‘all media, etc.” because, I certainly, am not aware of any agenda of the BBC except to report as truthfully, and accurately as they can. Maybe you’ve been watching and reading, the wrong media!
Even if somebody does it, that does n’t mean to say that it’s correct and the best course of action, because it clearly, is not.
May 30, 2007 at 9:42 pm
The fact that the domestic arm of the BBC is always criticized for bias by the government of the day is a very healthy sign that it’s doing its job as fairly and objectively as possible.
Moreover, the BBC World Service is by common (global) assent broadly agreed to be just about the only reliable source of unpartizan reportage.
That said, I assume Bimbro would also agree that when it comes to discussing the media, the BBC is a special (and especially honourable) case.
“Home of democracy” or not, the UK press is a different kettle of fish altogether, and is quite definitely not free (editorially speaking) from political bias or agendas.
Readers of (say) The Sun or The Daily Mail (both mass-circulation, owned by right-wing proprietors) will get a very different spin on both world and domestic news from readers of (say) The Guardian or The Independent.
Important point is, of course, that unlike here in Bim, in the UK there’s a choice.
May 31, 2007 at 5:53 am
samizdat, I largely, agree with everthing which you’ve said, above. However, newspapers are a slightly, different case from television and the convention seems to have arisen to allow them more latitude in their expression of opinion than with television. I guess that it has to do with the immediacy, of tv as opposed to newsprint where at least, one has more time to contemplate the true import of what the journalist has written.
You say; “Readers of (say) The Sun or The Daily Mail (both mass-circulation, owned by right-wing proprietors) will get a very different spin on both world and domestic news from readers of (say) The Guardian or The Independent.”
I don’t know if they get a VERY DIFFERENT spin on the news although I agee that it could, at least, be slightly, different! I don’t do an awful lot of reading of newspapers – I have n’t got the time, but, I daresay, that you could be right.
Television and radio are a very different ‘kettle of fish’ because of their immediacy. Newspapers are a very different option because of the usually, large number of them and different shades of opinion. I suppose that a newspaper could have a similar effect to television or radio, if it were the only one in existence, in a particular country.
Televison and radio are the truly, ‘dangerous organs’ of the media if not handled responsibly, which is why given my premise above of the stn. siding with one of the political parties in preference to another, so far at least, I’m still in agreement with Chavez.
I keep my eyes and mind open to any further info. on this story to make me change my mind but so far, have seen none.
P.S. Arthur is the leader of a right-wing government and Chavez a left-wing, so why is it in some of our contributors’ view that they are such close ‘friends’!
May 31, 2007 at 6:29 am
At the heart of all this is the issue of freedom – the freedom to dissent from the government line. Chavez is systematically dismantling this freedom in Venezuela. By shutting down RCTV (and now threatening to so the same to Globovision), he is moving closer and closer to the Cuban one-party paradigm where all media dissent from the Castro line is stifled (not to say illegal).
The thing is, bimbro, it’s not a question of whether you agree or politically sympathise with a broadcaster. For example, I might dislike the extremely right-wing Fox News (owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation), but I would never want a left-leaning US administration to shut it down.
Finally, I’m surprised that you wonder how two leaders from apparently opposite ends of the political spectrum can be friends.
If modern history has taught us anything (remember Stalin, Hitler and the Nazi-Soviet Pact?), it’s that authoritarian leaders, whether on the left or right, have far more in common than we might like to think.
May 31, 2007 at 6:44 am
I guess what I’m trying to argue here can best be summed up in the classic phrase attributed to Voltaire (and quoted by liberals and good democrats everywhere):
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
(As opposed to “I disapprove of what you say, so I will shut down one TV station and threaten to do the same to any others that disagree with me.”)
Seeing it my way yet, friend bimbro…?
May 31, 2007 at 6:52 am
Bimbro, what part of Owen’s government is right wing?
May 31, 2007 at 2:08 pm
Samizdat, moving to a one-Party state system is a different matter altogether, and obviously, something with which I would never agree.
You further, said; ” The thing is, bimbro, it’s not a question of whether you agree or politically sympathise with a broadcaster. For example, I might dislike the extremely right-wing Fox News (owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation), but I would never want a left-leaning US administration to shut it down.
You THINK that you would n’t like them to close it down but if they were sufficently, right-wing, e.g.Ku-Klux-Klan type of right-wing, believe me, you would campaign for them to be closed-down, especially, if they seemed to be making significant, political progress.
Sam, you seem to be attributing motives to Arthur which I’ve never suspected him of having. Are you sure you’re not guilty of ’seeing reds under every bed’!
I guess what I’m trying to argue here can best be summed up in the classic phrase attributed to Voltaire (and quoted by liberals and good democrats everywhere):
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
Sam, in reply to this, please see my note re: the KKK.
I know that you mean well ‘Sam’ but can you see what I’m saying, yet? The mass media is too dangerous, an animal to allow uncontrolled, reign. Think of the danger to your own self-existence and that of your family, if the KKK were to come to power with the aid of FOX or CNN. With CNN and/or FOX behind them it would be an easy thing to acheive.
‘Right Wing’, I’m only a distant observer of politics in Bim but I was of the clear impression that the DLP was the left-wing Party and the BLP, the right-wing one but do please correct me, if I’ve been getting this wrong for all these years.
samizdat, you said;
May 31, 2007 at 4:11 pm
Bimbro
we are in a one party state
The opposition has been absent for a number of years now and the next gang of pigs are silent for obvious reasons.
June 1, 2007 at 3:28 am
“The Nation News has not seen fit to mention the closing of the television station or that the iron fist of Chavez has come down heavily on journalists. The Nation News has, however, published many positive articles about Chavez. Check it out yourself at the paper’s archives and see if you agree that The Nation News is presenting only positive stories about the dictator while totally ignoring his human rights violations.”
BFP, I think in fairness you ought to acknowledge that The Nation DID cover this story, and at some length (an AP article, along with a colour picture)…and on the same day (Tuesday 29 May) you posted the above comment.
And bimbro, I hear where you’re coming from in your last post, and take your point…
****************
BFP comments
Hi Samizdat
At the time we posted, (which was the day before the Nation article) the Nation News had not posted anything about the story. We post at 00:00 hrs GMT so we were on the story almost 24 hours ahead of The Nation News. Perhaps they had it in the works, perhaps not. The other criticism is totally valid… Chavez can do no wrong at the Nation News.
June 1, 2007 at 6:47 am
Thanks for your replies, guys. It’s nice to know that we actually, make some progress in understanding each other, in these discussions. Perhaps, the situation in Venezuela is much, more serious than I realise. I’m not sure that we should be too, worried about the rioting. People, like children, often rebel when something which they’ve been accustomed to has been taken away from them – that’s not to say that it was n’t right to take it away. Let’s wait and see what this stn is replaced with and how responsible it is. You never know, the people might even come to prefer it to what they had, before.
As for ‘what opposition’; as you have n’t rebutted my analyis of the political, situation in Bim vis. which Party is left-wing and which right-wing, I can only assume that I am right.
As for the lack of active opposition, from this distance of being in the UK, it’s difficult for me to comment. I think that I’ve heard this criticism of Thompson, before, recently. I admit to having been surprised because he seemed to burst on the scene again with so much drama and promise, but now he’s gone, quiet?
Perhaps, he’s ‘keeping his powder dry’, for now? Or, is it that he simply does n’t have any policies? Mind you, it’s not that far to the next general election, so – I dunno???
Re: the Nation not giving sufficent coverage to the Chavez story; I can’t recall anybody mentioning ‘The Advocate’, any other newspaper, or radio and television. I assume that you have a multiplicity of media in Bim to keep the people well informed.
June 1, 2007 at 9:20 am
Bimbro: In a nutshell, and this is just my opinion – neither one of the political parties in Barbados is truly “left-wing” or “right-wing”. They tend to be middle-of-the-road, for which we must be thankful. However, the DLP has always been seen as the party for the masses (the grassroots people) because of the image Mr. Barrow highlighted, and the DLP has continued to portray down through the years. BLP members/parliamentarians tend to be drawn from the middle and money classes and white business persons. But if you contrast the Dipper with Owing, the very opposite is true – the Dipper was from the middle classes (yet he was a man of the PEOPLE) and Owing? Well, you only have to hear him speak and watch his body language and it speaks a volume! I hope this gives you at least some idea of how the two parties are made up. I could go further but I hate lengthy discourses. Thompson? Well, perhaps he’s keeping quiet for a reason. He may have another bombshell (like the $75,000) up his sleeve, who knows?
June 1, 2007 at 10:35 am
Saw pics in the Advocate of student demonstrations in Venezuela. The young have no businesses yet, no assets; they are not yet wise to what happens.
In Venezuela owners have been shot outside their businesses for no apparent reason. People have been hauled off by the police on trumped up charges if they are seen as a possible opposition. How far off Zimbabwe is Venezuela?
Many people admire the policies of Venezuela which are based on helping the masses of poor, but I will put to you the following:
Chavez is dealing oil to the USA still and is not locking off the pipes. He is no fool and plays both sides, otherwise he might well end up like the business owners who oppose him. Is this light a good one to cast Chavez? Corrupt from not one, but TWO angles?
In Barbados we see the 4 term mentality starting to kick in. Power has got the rulers drunker than rum and things are being done that will become apparent when elections get close. Market forces of three terms have gagged the news media, and this is parallel to what is presently Venezuela. If that is a free country, then why won’t Chavez leave both stations? No, he cannot, because they have caught him red-handed in something we don’t know, and he has to kill them now. That is the drunken nature of power.
When exposure of the corruption starts to come out publicly how will King Arthur fire the knights of the round table? Answer: he won’t, as it is suicide to do so. They will close ranks and declare themselves lily white.
And it is suicide for us to accept them for the thieves they now appear to be if half of what we hear is true. It is not our fault on BFP that these things are true. We’re just watching, seeing and reporting them.
It is suicide for us to give another term. Perhaps three was too many, and this is said most apologetically to the Prime Minister. It would be best for him to retire gracefully.
June 2, 2007 at 12:44 pm
Thistle, thank you for the additional analysis. You’ve confirmed my earlier assessment. However, I’m slightly, puzzled by your gratitude that there’s hardly, any difference between the two parties. If that’s the case, then is there much point in changing either of them.
Perhaps, that’s part of the problem – does there need to be more of a difference between the two?