This video and fact sheet explain why RCTV is not getting its license to broadcast over the airwaves renewed in Venezuela. Practically every country on earth including the US regards the radio spectrum as public property owned by the government, and whoever uses it uses it with government permission. Ask Howard Stern if you can say whatever you want over the airwaves.
Press Freedoms in
Venezuela:
The Case of RCTV
Overview
In late 2006, the
Venezuelan government announced that it would not renew a 20-year license to
Radio Caracas Television (RCTV) to continue broadcasting on public airwaves.
Cable or satellite broadcasts however, would still be available for the
station’s use. Though the decision has faced criticism by some who say it is a
move to restrict press freedoms, most governments have the constitutional right
to make decisions on such licensing, a mandate that the U.S government also
enjoys with the U.S. media. In fact,
RCTV’s non-renewal does not violate legal norms in Venezuela, nor does it
significantly alter the balance of power in Venezuela's vociferous, opposition-affiliated
and privately-owned media. The decision
is not an isolated government action, but forms part of a larger policy program
for democratizing Venezuela's airwaves.
The Grounds for Non-Renewal
Throughout the years, RCTV
has demonstrated extremely poor business conduct and its frequent legal
infringements comprise the most important reasons for the non-renewal
decision. An editorial in the Houston Chronicle asserts that
"it's doubtful [RCTV's] actions would last more than a few minutes with
the FCC [in the U.S.]."[i]
In fact, RCTV has often
faced legal sanctions for its poor practices, and indeed has been closed or
fined numerous times by various administrations, including President Chavez's
most recent predecessors. This most
recent decision is not an isolated case, but is the first opportunity the
government has had to reconsider its licensing since the 20-year contract
began.
RCTV's Legal Offenses
1976 | Closed for 3 days | Tendentious news coverage |
1980 | Closed for 36 hours | Sensationalist programming |
1981 | Closed for 24 hours | Airing pornographic scenes |
1989 | Closed for 24 hours | Airing advertisements for cigarettes |
1991 | Programming suspended | Program "La Escuelita" suspended |
The television station is
also in default for tax payments spanning a three year period.[ii]
Most importantly though,
in 2002, RCTV ran ads encouraging the public to take to the streets and
overthrow the democratically elected president. Once the president was forcefully removed from office and an
interim government installed, the station continued colluding with the coup
government by conducting a news blackout and egregiously misleading the public
about important events occurring in the country. In fact, it is public knowledge that one of the managing
producer’s of Venezuela's highest-rated newscast, the RCTV program El
Observador, testified before the Venezuelan National Assembly that he had
received very clear instructions on the day of the coup from RCTV's owner,
Marcel Granier. On April 11 and the
following day that there should be "No information on Chávez, his
followers, his ministers, and all others that could in any way be related to
him."[iii] Instead the station reported that President
Chavez had resigned. Similarly, two
days later when poor masses of Venezuelans poured into the streets demanding
their president’s return, which occurred a few hours later, RCTV was silent and
aired only cartoons. [iv] A presidential guard at the palace
during those days overheard a group of media executives, including the
president of RCTV, at the palace to meet with the newly installed president,
saying “We can’t guarantee you the loyalty of the army, but we can promise you
the support of the media.”[v]
The Legal Right not to Renew
The government of
Venezuela, like most others throughout the globe, has the constitutional right
to make decisions regarding all public broadcasting. In the U.S., the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) controls
licensing and programming, and has regularly denied license renewals based on
public interest standards established in 1960.
A recent report by a
Spanish journalist looking at radio and TV station closures, revocations, and
non-renewals found that in 21 countries including the U.S. and Europe, there
have been 236 closures, revocations, and non-renewals in the last few decades.[vi] And out of the U.S. cases, not only have
there been non-renewals but there have been outright revocations of licenses by
the FCC. In 1969 a Memphis television station, also an NBC affiliate, had its
broadcasting license revoked for racial discrimination in its programming; in
1981 WLNS-TV was charged with being very selective in the hour it assigned for
political figures and had its license revoked; and in 1999 Trinity Broadcasting
Miami TV received a revocation. Fines
have also been issued to major televisions stations for airing inappropriate
scenes and programming. CBS was
recently fined 3.6 million for airing scenes with nudity that could easily be
considered pornographic and the WB television station has faced a similar fate.[vii]
Similarly, in Venezuela,
the Ministry of Telecommunication and Information grants and regulates access
to the broadcast spectrum in accordance with the Organic Law of
Telecommunications contained in constitutional Article 156 and is the body
responsible for compliance.
Democratization of the Airwaves
The decision not to renew
RCTV's broadcasting license will allow for a broader democratization of
Venezuela's airwaves, offering access to the broadcast spectrum. RCTV has long had a disproportionate
influence in the Venezuelan media by maintaining the most powerful broadcasting
signal in the country for more than 50 years and is currently one of two
private channels that together claim 70% of all TV revenues each year. RCTV's non-renewal will allow for a
redistribution of the airwaves, and may be used to provide community
programming and public television, allowing new voices and views to be heard in
Venezuela.
Revenue shares of television
companies in 2006
The Opposition and Freedom of Expression
With President Chavez's
landslide electoral victory as an alternative to the two major political
parties in 1998, the privately-owned media in Venezuela assumed the role of the
traditional political parties, and became an outlet for them to challenge and derail
the actions of the newly elected President.[viii] The fact that the media – which is majority
privately owned – is closely associated with the opposition is undisputed and
may shed light on why the government’s decision not to renew RCTV’s license is
currently being criticized.
In 2002, Human Rights
Watch found that, "Far from providing fair and accurate reporting, the
media by and large seek to provoke popular discontent and outrage in support of
the hard-line opposition." [ix] Several journalists have even noted, "the five main privately owned channels—Venevisión,
Radio Caracas Televisión (RCTV), Globovisión, Televen and CMT—and nine out of
the 10 major national newspapers, including El Universal, El Nacional, Tal
Cual, El Impulso, El Nuevo País and El Mundo, have taken over the role of the traditional political parties, which
were damaged by the president’s electoral victories. Their monopoly on
information has put them in a strong position. They give the opposition
support, only rarely reporting government statements and never mentioning its
large majority…Their investigations, interviews and commentaries all pursue the
same objective: to undermine the legitimacy of the government and to destroy
the president’s popular support…the media is still directly encouraging
dissident elements to overthrow the democratically elected president – if
necessary by force…”[x]
The Venezuelan private
media, then, plays a controversial role in the political life of that country,
but human rights organizations cite no deterioration of freedom of expression.[xi] In fact, the Venezuelan government has respected
and defended civil liberties, including freedom of expression and freedom of
the press. The decision not to renew a
broadcasting license that has run its course simply does not qualify as an
infringement on press freedoms.
Media Ownership in Venezuela
Television Of 81 stations | … 79 (97%) are privately owned |
Radio Of 709 stations | … 706 (99%) are privately owned |
Newspapers Of 118 companies | … 118 (100%) are privately owned |
[ii] "RCTV
ha sido el canal más sancionado en Venezuela," Agencia Bolivariana de Noticias, March 29, 2007.
[iv] Eva
Golinger, "The Media War Against the People: A Case Study of Media
Concentration and Power in Venezuela," in Olivia Burlingame Goumbri, ed., The Venezuela Reader: The Building of a
People's Democracy (EPICA, 2005).
[vi] “Venezuela:
On the non-renewal of RCTV's open signal broadcasting license” by J. David
Carracedo, Axis of Logic, March 31, 2007, http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_24223.shtml
[xi] Maurice
Lemonine, "How Hate Media Incited the Coup Against the President," in
Gregory Wilpert, ed., Coup Against Chavez
in Venezuela (Fondación Venezolana para la Justicia
Global, 2003), p. 158.
6 comments:
Sadly, Chavez, the clown and the shame, has been able to become the first 21st dictatorship in Latin America. Thanks to the oil generated revenues used to buy neighboring countries' opinion, and weak Bush policy, is slowly closing down this beatiful country. Give me liberty or give me death.
11 footnotes and only 1 online source? Make the sources avaliable online or people will question the context of the quotes.
The provenance isn't clear, are you the author? Unlike your other posts it seems pasted from another document.
If RCTV supporting the 2002 coup is the "most important" reason for shutting down the broadcaster then why wait until 2007 to act?
To the first anonymous poster- You call Chavez names but he has headed a government that is building up the infrastructure of the country, building tens of thousands of homes for the ill housed, bringing medical care to people who previously did not have it, raising the wages of the lowest paid workers, expanding employment, operating a food distributuion network that assures no more hunger in Venezuela, allowing its opposition to function, building alliances with its neighbors and also importantly other oil producing nations... the accomplishments go on and on.
I read what you mean by "weak Bush policy" is that you wish Bush to wage economic or military warfare against Venezuela. Tell me, are you a Venezuelan? Don't you want what is best for your own country's people? What the devil is wrong with you? You really want the United States to try to starve out or to bomb out your own country? An opposiiton like yours would not be tolerated anyplace else in the world but Venezuela.
To Anonymous number two- I republished a fact sheet from the government of Venezuela. I usually don't copy other people's work here but I felt that Venezuela's elected and legitimate government had a right to be heard in my country - and I make efforts to have this website seen and read by my countrymen and women.
Just what facts are you disputing?
You ask-
"If RCTV supporting the 2002 coup is the "most important" reason for shutting down the broadcaster then why wait until 2007 to act?"
I can only speculate. I say on this blog that Venezuelans are a most gentle people, and so it seems to me. I do know that had Granier and company done what they did in Venezuela here in the US they'd be in jail if not under the jail.
I'm going to take this opportunity also to clarify what I've said about General Romero in another post. It's known that he was in the Pentagon in December prior to the coup. It's known that the US government was aware that a coup was in the making prior to the event that was used as a pretext, the alleged shooting by Chavez supporters of oppositionist demonstrators who were innocently storming the presidential palace. General Romero was head of the army. He wouldn't have been retained in this country. He would have been held suspect.
I think President Chavez has offered the olive branch and advocated reconciliation over and over again to the oppositionists. Now General Romero is ambassador to Portugal, a good job, but not head of the army.
Unfortunately no amount of good will or reconcilation will satisfy the opposition. They want to be in charge whether or not they have lost vote after vote. They are willing to solicit the United States to bludgeon their own people into submission.- No, I am not including General Romero in this statement. I'm sure the Bolivarian Republic would not knowingly allow a person who wants his own country to be attacked to represent it, or to hold any important post regarding national security or the economy. That's reasonable.
"I republished a fact sheet from the government of Venezuela"
Okay.
"Just what facts are you disputing?"
I think reading primary sources is valuable. With a document on the internet I expect footnotes to link to online sources. By the way, the only online link (to the closure report) is not even a primary source (although, it does link to the report).
The post mentions the 1999 revocation of a Trinity TV license to show that the RCTV case is not unprecedented. As i recall, that was due to their committing fraud in the application for the license. For RCTV the stated "most important" reason is :
"Most importantly though,in 2002, RCTV ran ads encouraging the public to take to the streets and overthrow the democratically elected president."
Is that so bad? Should encouraging the public to take to the streets be illegal? Should there be no right to protest? Chavez participated in a coup to overthrow the democratically elected president I find it no surprise that others would follow his footsteps.
The answer to 'bad' free speech is more free speech, not less.
-Anonymous #2
Anonymous number two there is something you are missing here. The airwaves belong to the sovereign state. Venezuela has laws that allow the executive branch to not renew a private license to use these airwaves without any sort of hearing or process. This might not sit well with you or with me, but this is not a law that Chavez wrote, it's been there. He used it against an unrepentant coupmonger who continued to flaunt the law including non payment of taxes.
Immediately after the coup the courts were still firmly in the hands of the oppositionists. They ruled that there had not been a coup, something that is ridiculous but it was their ruling. Chavez was not in a strong position. Since that time he has won several elections and has improved the lives of Venezuelans. the oppositionists didn't even contest the legislative elections knowing that they would be humiliated. The license renewal came up and Chavez did what the law allows.
Now there is a new television station owned by Venezuela (RCTV is owned by US citizens) that will give access to television frequencies to Venezuelans. RCTV is free to continue operating on cable and satellite and also free to syndicate their programs. The media remains anti-Chavez. What they cannot do over the airwaves is incite violence and disobediance of the law. They can not urge people to march on the president's residence to kick him out for example as they did on 2002.
Thank you for coming to my blog.
I added a link to this one.
I've been debating this issue with left, right and center people all week,
The opposition has majority Venezuelan support, the support of parliments, human rights groups and world media, and they still lose. They couldn't put together an effective campaign if they tried.
Post a Comment