At 18:32 02/06/2007, raghu wrote:
Hi Michael,
A naive question: on the face of it, cancelling licenses of unfriendly
TV stations does sound like a suppression of free expression. What is
the background to this? Was this decision taken in a democratic way?
Thanks.
-raghu.
Hi Raghu,
Firstly, there was no cancellation.
Rather, this station (which was an active
participant in the coup, going so far as to tape
a day in advance of a march in 2002 an
announcement by military leaders of deaths in
that march) did not have its VHF license for the
prime channel 2 renewed. That is the government's
right--- a license is not the granting of
perpetual property rights to private interests.
Secondly, this station continued (along with a
cable news network, Globovision-- the main CNN
feed) to act as an opposition party. It was not
the only private station which was complicit in
the coup. Another one which was very active in
promoting the coup and the subsequent bosses
lockout in 2002-3 was Venevision, owned by
Gustavos Cisneros (one of the richest people in
Latin America). After the failure of the lockout,
Venevision became a normal station-- still
broadcasting critical attacks on the government
but in a relatively balanced way. They have been
accused of betraying the Venezuelan people by the
rabid opposition, and when you hear RCTV
described as the only opposition network by
foreign sources, it is because they have entirely
accepted this spin by the opposition rather than
that they have looked at Venevision or Televen
(the other VHF 'traitor'). In any event, as the
following statement indicates, RCTV has not been
denied a UHF license and, to the best of my
knowledge, has not applied yet (as it would
undermine the political campaign). Given recent
statements by their spokesmen effectively warning
about Chavez's death, I personally would not be
inclined to grant such a license at this point---
and I know of few countries which would.
Here's an excerpt from a recent Green
Left Weekly article: 'A May 18 statement by the
communications ministry reported that, according
to the government's research, there have been
more than 600 cases of non-renewal of TV
broadcast licences around the world, but it is
only the Venezuelan government that has been
singled out and condemned for allegedly violating free speech.
Green Left Weekly spoke to Federico Fuentes, who
recently returned from Venezuela after
coordinating the May Day solidarity brigade of
the Australia-Venezuela Solidarity Network, about the RCTV case.
"It is almost amusing to see this international
campaign against this decision by the Chavez
government", Fuentes said. "None of these
organisations that have been outspoken in
relation to the RCTV case have pointed out that
at exactly the same time the Peruvian government
shut down five to six TV stations. That is, not
simply withdrawing their concessions, but
actually shutting them down, which is what Chavez
has falsely been accused of doing to RCTV.'
Here's a statement about the RCTV non-renewal released in the UK:
Leading voices in Britain call for respect for Venezuelan government's RCTV
decision
By Hands Off Venezuela Wednesday, 30 May 2007
We believe that the decision of the Venezuelan government not to renew the
broadcasting licence of RCTV when it expires on May 27 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.
Yours,
Tariq Ali,
Tony Benn,
Colin Burgon MP,
Julia Buxton, academic,
Ruyuyyah Collector, Black Students' Officer, National Union of Students,
Jeremy Corbyn MP,
Jon Cruddas MP,
Megan Dobney, Regional Secretary, SERTUC
Billy Hayes, General Secretary, CWU,
Gordon Hutchison, Secretary, Venezuela Information Centre,
Kelvin Hopkins MP,
Chris Martin, Director, The War on Democracy
Joni McDougall, International Solidarity Officer, GMB,
Gerry Morrissey, General Secretary, BECTU (Broadcasting Entertainment
Cinematograph and Theatre Union)
Kaveh Moussavi, Head of the Public Interest Law Programme at University of
Oxford's Centre for Socio-Legal Studies.
John Pilger,
Harold Pinter
Professor Jonathan Rosenhead, LSE,
Keith Sonnet, Deputy General Secretary, UNISON,
Hugh O'Shaughnessy, writer and journalist,
Rod Stoneman, Executive Producer, The Revolution Will Not Be Televised,
Jon Trickett MP,
Gemma Tumelty, President, National Union of Students,
Cllr Salma Yaqoob.
=========
michael
Michael A. Lebowitz
Professor Emeritus
Economics Department
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6
Director, Programme in 'Transformative Practice and Human Development'
Centro Internacional Miranda, P.H.
Residencias Anauco Suites, Parque Central, final Av. Bolivar
Caracas, Venezuela
fax: 0212 5768274/0212 5777231
http//:centrointernacionalmiranda.gob.ve
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
