Last Updated:
|
Volume 16, Spring 2004 |
Business & Government
Crisis In Venezuela
Staff Writer
The Roman emperor Tiberius once said, "In a free state there should be freedom of speech and thought." Most nations that try to mold their governments in the democratic ideal hold freedom of the press in high regard. Without it, there would be no freedom of speech, information or thought.
The nation of Venezuela is far from free.
Based on that adage, current events point to the conclusion that the nation of Venezuela is far from free. Venezuela is a country where the media and the government are polarized in separate camps; journalists are threatened, injured, and killed. Information and the truth -- the pillars of a democratic society -- are withheld from those who need them most: the people. The integrity of journalism and the safety of journalists are also at stake.
Venezuela, a country once prosperous from its natural oil resources, depends on that supply for at least one third of its gross domestic product. The country used to have one of the most stable governments in South America. However, since the late 1970s, when the world's oil prices were reduced dramatically, Venezuela has been thrown into a downward spiral of economic instability, stagnation and inflation. Unpaid debt and the flight of domestic and foreign capital further worsened the situation, until the two dominant political parties finally collapsed under corruption and criminal charges.
When the current president, Hugo Chávez, was elected in 1988, more than half of the Venezuelan population was below the poverty line.
When the current president, Hugo Chávez, was elected in 1988, more than half of the Venezuelan population was below the poverty line. Annual inflation exceeded 30 percent and oil prices sank. Chávez's populist platform promised reform, redistribution of power and wealth and poverty relief. However, as his promises began to fall through, a strong opposition arose to displace him, and his violent relationship with the media began.
"Venezuela has had a free press for decades, but media concentration is a problem," said Rick Rockwell, journalism professor at American University and author of "Media Power in Central America." "Like many systems in Latin America, the media have identified often with political parties and have a strong tilt toward oligarchic forces and the elite class structure of the country."
Because opposition parties in Venezuela are either discredited or divided; the media has taken the helm of the anti-Chávez movement, and has become a powerful source of government opposition. Stemming from Chávez's increased abuse of the state-run media to advance his own agenda, the private media attempted to counterbalance the state rhetoric and tell both sides of the story. However, they only succeeded in creating a polarized state.
The private media has also become a mouthpiece, but one of the opposition.
The private media has also become a mouthpiece, but one of the opposition. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, "some high-profile journalists have become such ardent Chávez opponents that many Venezuelans say the media, in filling the void left by discredited political parties, has become the opposition." Yet the diverse opposition is bound mostly by its anti-Chávez sentiment and has not come forth in unity or even near agreement in support of an alternative candidate or party. In the face of an impending recall, this is a serious deficit for the opposition.
However, Venezuelans can hardly turn to the state-run media, including the radio station Radio Nacional, Venezolana de Televisión (VTV) and Venpres. Chávez has coined the term escuálidos, which means "squalids," in reference to the opposition and the media and continues to control the state-owned outlets. "I've always argued that we have to cover both sides, but that's not our communications policy," says one journalist who works for Venpres, the state press agency. Fairness and balance is in short supply here as well.
Chávez has done little to curb the current violence or investigate the deaths, injuries, and threats that have already occurred.
Chávez has also used the cadenas, his nationwide simultaneous radio and television broadcasts, to single out individuals for reproach often naming journalists and media owners. By encouraging his supporters to react violently to the media, he has created a dangerous atmosphere where journalists are the main targets. Reporters Without Borders said that in 2002 alone, a brief list of violence by Chávez supporters included one journalist's death, about 50 who were physically attacked, around 20 others who were threatened, and six news organizations that were targeted with explosives. Chávez has done little to curb the current violence or investigate the deaths, injuries, and threats that have already occurred.
As the Human Rights Watch reports, "Although freedom of expression is present in Venezuela, full guarantees for the exercise of such freedom are lacking, as illustrated by several recent judicial rulings that have permitted prior censorship or have penalized criticism of public officials." However, judicial censure is far from the worst repercussion of freedom of speech in Venezuela , as the violence continues unchecked, despite the ardent petitions of organizations such as the Committee to Protect Journalists, which have been sent to Chávez since early 2002.
In the end, it is the journalists who suffer.
In the end, it is the journalists who suffer. As one reporter for a private newspaper says, "The president is on one side and the media owners are on the other. We journalists are in the middle, completely defenseless, exposed to attacks from both sides. Whenever I go out on the streets, I immediately take my credentials off and hide them."
"It is no better with the state-run media," says Ernesto Villegas, a journalist formerly with the daily El Universal who now works for the state-run television station, VTV. "It can bring risks for journalists to maintain balance, because you may be considered a traitor by both sides, who believe that the role of a journalist is to be a politician, that a media outlet is a revolver, and that journalists are bullets." There are also the journalists' reputations that suffer. Many Venezuelan journalists complain that their bylines reflect the biases of their editors. After reporters have collected the information and facts surrounding an event, the information is manipulated in the story to reflect a certain viewpoint.
In the political turmoil of a state near anomie, it is the democracy, the truth and the information it depends on, that is more vital than ever. How can people ever hope to reconstruct a stable government and a sound economy without these? However, journalists who are trying to bring truth and information to the people through freedom of speech have themselves become the victims of a violent backlash from Chávez supporters that threatens their work, their integrity, and their lives. When a polarized state can only offer its citizens two media mouthpieces of opposing opinions, there seems to be little hope for the people to get the truth, and the journalists to be able to report it.