Global Journalist

The Hidden Hand of Chávez

By Patricia Santa Marina Posted Jun 10 2010

Home / Recent Stories / The Hidden Hand of Chávez

When Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez came to power in 1998, few people imagined the influence one man could have over so many countries. Yet over the years, his hostile relationship with the Venezuelan media has spread throughout Latin America, creating what Enrique Santos Calderón, former Inter American Press Association president, claims is an accelerated deterioration in relations between the press and some Latin American governments. Although the cause of this conflict is unknown, many voices agree that Chávez is likely sparking this tense relationship between politics and journalism.

Despite all their differences, several countries in Latin America share a common element: stressed relations between the government and the press. This tense relationship exists because some governments seem to be willing to use the media as a tool of propaganda and social containment. Chávez sets the example.

A change in press freedom is currently found in member countries of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas, or ALBA, with special emphasis on Ecuador and Bolivia. Are these changes replicating Chávez’s press restrictions in Venezuela?

The press situation in Venezuela

Reporting in Venezuela has become a demanding task for journalists. Daniel Hadad, founder of Argentina’s C5N TV news channel, says real life in Venezuela is hard for the independent media, both national and foreign. He experienced this firsthand when the Venezuelan National Guard threatened his journalists while they tried to tape a manifestation opposing the Chávez regime.

In spite of the challenges that come with the job, Hadad encourages and supports continuing coverage of the country’s struggle. “International press cannot stop on its efforts on showing what happens in Venezuela,” he says. “With so much freedom around the world and such an active media, it is very difficult to silence anything. That is a merit of the Internet.”

Even though it is difficult for an outsider to report on Venezuela, it is much harder for the nationals because the content is being controlled. Carlos Carmona, president of El Impulso, the oldest journal in Venezuela, says 50 percent of printed media are state controlled, but that control is applied in various ways. The government buys the newspapers and then controls their editorial lines with the corrupted use of state-paid advertising. In some cases, it even installs in editors that politically support the government.

The broadcast situation is much worse. In Venezuela, over 450 of the 600 AM-FM stations nationwide are state owned or given to political allies, such as political organizations or civil associations, for propaganda use.

In the Venezuelan Congress, there was a proposed law to control the Internet in Venezuela, which follows similar legislation found in countries such as Cuba and China. The legislation was officially denied, but Carmona says that the project existed and would not be unlikely to happen in Venezuela in the future.

Does Chavez want to rule the region?

Meanwhile, Chávez’s government is experiencing a crisis as it faces social discontent and an economic downturn. The current political scene in Venezuela is very complex and entering a phase of clear imbalance. At this crucial moment, what will the Venezuelan government do next?

Luis Tonelli, director of the political science school at the University of Buenos Aires, says that Chávez is technically part of a democracy and therefore needs re-election to remain in power.

Although many think Chávez is becoming more of a dictator, Tonelli doesn’t think this is likely. “The possibility that the regime of Chávez evolves toward a dictatorship seems improbable since the coup d’etats made in Latin America always faced a political power vacuum and counting on the initial support of the establishment, even of the public opinion,” he says. “That does not seem to be the actual case of Chávez.”

As for his power expanding into a regional domination of Latin America, Tonelli says that Chávez is a conventional populist and therefore his political ideology, called “Chavismo,” would be by definition “non exportable.”

Ricardo Trotti, director of IAPA’s Press Institute, says that Chávez might have concrete intentions of transforming the regional scene by using the obstruction of press freedom and expression as one of his tools. “ALBA members, in fact, have a common plan to control communications.”

Trotti says Chávez’s strategy against press freedom is revealed by several of his recent actions. The Venezuelan president created state-owned media for the sole purpose of distributing propaganda, and he even bought former private media companies to further his message. Not only that, but he also created laws primarily aimed at controlling content.

This controlling of the media is also found in his careful distribution of state-paid advertising, his manipulation of the judges where he formulates false cases against journalists, and his attempts at bribing the media, Trotti says.

Armando Gonzalez, editor of La Nación in Costa Rica, points out that hostility toward press freedom is clear in ALBA countries. “Whether it actually is a ideological concurrence or a master plan organized by Chávez, it is difficult to say, but coincidences are real,” he says.

Despite being created as an alternative to the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas, ALBA might actually be a way for Chávez to gain political authority in the region.

David Natera Febres, founder of Diario del Caroni and president of the Venezuelan Press Bloc, says Chávez’s actions have shown his desire to create a regional model of communication similar to the one found in Venezuela. “He is financing and giving technical facilities to Bolivia and Ecuador, like giving radio transmitters to the Bolivian government,” he says. This type of behavior shows he is clearly trying to manipulate public opinion and shifting his press restrictions for Venezuela onto other ALBA countries.

CHÁVEZ’s impact on ALBA countries

These transferred press freedom ideals are clearly seen in Bolivia. President Evo Morales supports a media law that eliminates the declaration “off the record,” which would therefore prevent a sources-of-information defense. Morales demonstrates opposition to journalism through his proposed legislation, but others show their disagreement with press freedom through physical aggression. Numerous attacks, reportedly politically incited, were perpetrated against journalists and the media in Bolivia, according to the Country Report of the 2009 IAPA General Assembly.

The Ecuadorian case is nevertheless more extreme. The fear of over-regulation and censorship, along with judicial, political and economic harassment, has created confrontations between media publishers and President Rafael Correa.

Clemente Jose Vivanco, executive vice president of the newspaper La Hora in Ecuador, says in spite of the possible influence of the “Venezuelan model” in Ecuador, the issues between the government and the press are actually just a copy of a control and pressure method that has worked in other countries at other times.

Nevertheless, Vivanco says there are similarities between Ecuador and Venezuela such as the use of a state regulator to control what radio and TV stations are saying. Common threads also include the use of state-paid advertising to award or punish the media as well as the verbal harassment of journalists. Both countries also experience the abuse of radio and TV as a way to spread the “official message,” Vivanco says.

Until now, President Correa has always been very critical of the media. He supports a new communication act and defends the necessity of its congressional approval as a necessary mechanism to audit media. The legislation would create a regulatory institution of state officials that is headed by a representative of the president with the power to sanction, and even close, both audiovisual and written media.

Vivanco says this law is in fact not supportive of press freedoms. “Correa tries to make it appear like the new communication act is a necessity and a useful tool for the civil society when its actual conformation and dispositions are designed to be a media-restrictive law,” he says. “What Correa seems not to have measured is that this communication act as presented is a strong tool against media and democracy itself, whether the government is left wing, right wing or moderate.”

How will these governments evolve? Are they aiming for the total elimination of press and expression freedoms? The efforts of the governments of Ecuador and Bolivia do not clearly show a desire to advance toward press and expression freedoms. Tonelli says while there are obvious cases of censorship in each country, those cases are still fully condemned by their societies. “No one in present society admits total levels of informative manipulation on the part of any government,” he says.

What the future holds for Venezuela

When considering all the changes made throughout the continent and in Venezuela itself, it is clear that Chávez holds a leading position within ALBA countries. If they choose to follow, those countries would be implementing an absolutely retrograde way of interacting with the press by showing a decreasing respect for the right to know, to interpret and to discuss facts and ideas with the citizens.

While the Venezuelan president seems to be trying to implement measures to the end against independent press, other political societies seem to do it in a more timid way. Sadly, they do not understand that a healthy and critical press is the best ally of any government. After all, the only way a government evolves and moves forward is by facing its toughest critics.