Representation of the Closure of RCTV in Venezuela by U.S. News Media - Case Study Example

Representation of the closure of RCTV in Venezuela by U.S. news media Radio Caracas Television (RCTV), Venezuela’s oldest private TV network, broadcasted until the midnight of May 27, 2007. The President of this Latin American country, Hugo Chavez, refused to renew the license of the television station, founded in 1953. This government’s decision responds to the support given by RCTV for a failed coup attempt against Chavez in 2002. RCTV provided a full coverage of an opposition march, which ended in violence, on April 11, 2002. President Chavez was overthrown for two days, while a coup-installed leader, Pedro Carmona, took his place in Miraflores, the government palace. Marciel Granier, chief of RCTV, supported Carmona actively. After Chavez’s return, the TV network continued its critics against Venezuelan government, which led to the decline to renew its license. The international news media have been concerned about the closure of Radio Caracas Television. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the Committee to Protect Journalists and members of the European Parliament, the U.S. Senate, and other reliable institutions have denounced this fact, which casts doubts about the freedom of expression in Venezuela. This paper considers three news articles on this topic: first, “Hugo Chavez versus RCTV”, by Bart Jones, from Los Angeles Times (May 30, 2007); second, “Chávez’s Move against Critic Highlights Shift in Media”, by Simon Romero, from The New York Times (May 27, 2007); and third, “Is Chavez Stifling the Media?”, by Jens Gould, from TIME (May 29, 2007). Starr’s theory on the political origins of media, advertisement analysis by Schudson, and the semiotic approach by Danesi are considered, in order to provide a description about how the reporters and the media produce information. Media and Power The relationship between the communications media and the exercise of power has been studied by Starr. The development and the constitutive choices about media are understandable in the political framework, since politics contribute to generate and transform communications. Constitutive choices about communications, in the approach I take in this book, fall into three broad areas: first, the general legal and normative rules concerning such issues as free expression, access to information, privacy and intellectual property; second, the specific design of communications media, structure of networks, and organization of industries; and third, institutions related to the creation of intangible and human capital –that is, education, research and innovation. All three of these, especially the first, are relevant to the development of the “public sphere” –the sphere, that is, of public discussion, public knowledge and public opinion (Starr 5). As Starr pointed out, the ideological beliefs influence constitutive decisions about the public sphere. This theory enables a comprehension of the communications problem in Venezuela, and an analysis of the three articles considered in this paper. The influence of the media on the exercise of power is the key point of discussion on the closure of the TV network. Did RCTV use its communicative influence in order to ouster the government? Did President Chavez close the network because it affected his political power? Does he use the new communications media for the consolidation of his government? These questions arise during the reading of the three articles. Starr argues that communications media can be difficult to handle by states, and this situation leads to a knowledge-power dilemma. The informational and communicative capacities allow a government to have more control over the state, while the independent communication is able to destabilize and promote propaganda against it. This conflict is present in the Venezuelan TV networks. RCTV played a role on the 2002 coup attempt against the president, but the government reacted against the broadcaster, while promoting state media. “When he was first elected, the government had just one television station and two radio stations. Now there are four new television stations controlled by central and regional governments and seven new radio broadcasters” (Romero, par. 13). Advertisement, interpretation and power Venezuelan government holds that RCTV made an advertisement campaign which aimed to ouster the president. The power of advertisement cannot be denied, as Schudson states, because it could persuade the public to a determined view. Not only taste and consumption patterns can be influenced by media, but also social representations concerning goods, status, values, social roles, styles and art (Schudson 208). In the case of Venezuela, the forces of political advertisement are struggling. The opposition, represented in media by RCTV and Globovision, criticized the government by means of news, political satire programs, and interviews to opposing groups. The government has also benefited from the power of advertisement through new communication spaces. It is important to remark that advertisement allows newspapers and TV networks to profit, as Schudson states; and Venezuelan government is a great provider of advertisement. Danesi’s semiotic perspective explains the relationships between representation and interpretation. The three articles considered in this paper constitute representations of a phenomenon (the closure of RCTV), and they can be interpreted in various ways. “Interpretation is a purposeful selection of specific meanings among the boundless meanings of which the human mind is capable” (Danesi 26). The journalists favor a determined interpretation due to the arguments and the concrete references to persons, statements and situations that they present in their articles. Analysis of “Hugo Chavez versus RCTV”, from Los Angeles Times. May 30, 2007 In the article “Hugo Chavez versus RCTV”, the journalist Bart Jones is presented as a foreign correspondent for the Associated Press who lived in Venezuela, as well as an author of a forthcoming book on President Hugo Chavez. These facts seek to legitimate the position of the journalist in his article. Jones begins the text with a language which inspires doubts: “Venezuelan President Hugo Chavezs refusal to renew the license of Radio Caracas Television might seem to justify fears that Chavez is crushing free speech and eliminating any voices critical of him” (Jones par. 1). In the third paragraph, the author denounces that a part of the story that has not been well informed. “But the case of RCTV — like most things involving Chavez — has been caught up in a web of misinformation. While one side of the story is getting headlines around the world, the other is barely heard” (Jones par. 3). Jones’s article intends to justify the closure of RCTV by telling that it aimed at ousting Chavez, because his politics were against the interests of Venezuelan “wealthy oligarchy” (par. 5), such as the RCTV chief, Marcel Granier. The actions of RCTV in order to achieve this purpose –e.g. its role on the coup attempt in 2002– are covered by the journalist, who quotes a former RCTV executive admitting that he received superior orders of not to communicate pro-Chavez news. A rhetoric question by Jones presents a hypothetical comparison with the United States. Thus, he provides concrete referents about the situation, which could be more familiar to his readers. Jones’s position is strengthened by means of this semiotic procedure: Would a network that aided and abetted a coup against the government be allowed to operate in the United States? The U.S. government probably would have shut down RCTV within five minutes after a failed coup attempt — and thrown its owners in jail (Jones par. 9). As a conclusion, the closure of the TV network is portrayed as a responsibility of its chief, Marcel Granier, who would have ended its long-running tradition in Venezuela because of his political bias, as shown in the last paragraph: “If Granier had not decided to try to oust the countrys president, Venezuelans might still be able to look forward to more broadcasts of Radio Rochela” (Jones par. 11). Analysis of “Chávez’s Move against Critic Highlights Shift in Media”, from The New York Times. May 27, 2007 The article by Romero covers the phenomenon of the shift in Venezuelan media due to the government of Hugo Chavez. It is based on the testimony of Arturo Sarmiento, owner of a television network in Venezuela. The fact that the journalist chose to interview a Chavez’s ally such as Sarmiento reveals that he favors Chavez’s actions towards RCTV. Romero notes the rising of more state media in Venezuela, which is not seen as a negative aspect, because it would lead to a “democratization of television” (Romero par. 15). A paradox takes place within this news. On the one hand, the U.S. Senate and other international organizations have condemned the closure of RCTV, because it goes against the freedom of expression. On the other hand, Venezuelan government and its supporters consider that the closure of RCTV is an action which indeed favors the freedom of expression. Romero’s position could be interpreted as favorable to Venezuelan president. The selected quotes by different Chávez’s allies give insights about his position. “Freedom of expression is flourishing in Venezuela,” Mr. García Ponce said in an interview. “We are not repressive of minority opinions in Venezuela” (Romero par. 22). “While the decision has been distorted to make it seem like Venezuela’s government is closing a television station, this is simply a regulatory matter,” Mr. Álvarez said in a letter to Senator Richard G. Lugar” (Romero par. 28). Analysis of “Is Chavez Stifling the Media?”, from TIME. May 29, 2007 The article by Jens Gould represents a contrary position, in comparison with the previous two analyzed in this paper, as its title suggests: “Is Chavez Stifling the Media?” It covers other facts that were not considered or slightly mentioned in the other two articles, such as the massive protests against the closure of RCTV. Gould states that this fact was not even enough covered in the Venezuelan media: But if you were one of the many Venezuelan television viewers who dont get 24-hour news channel Globovision, you might not have seen the protests. Thats because besides the station available only on pay cable outside of Caracas and Valencia, other networks barely covered the demonstrations (Gould par. 1). In addition, Gould takes the words of the RCTV chief and the president of Globovision, the other opposition TV network, now threatened of closure. “After telling TIME on Sunday that Chavez was headed ‘towards a totalitarian regime,’ RCTV chairman Marcel Granier scoffed at those who ‘still believe that there is democracy in Venezuela’.” (Gould par. 3). Chavez’s words about this possible new closure support Gould’s position, because they show a threatening and ironic language: “On Tuesday, in a speech that all TV stations were obliged to broadcast, Chavez suggested Globovision ‘take a tranquilizer, that they slow down, because if not, Im going to slow them down’” (Gould par. 5). The journalist presents the contradiction between Chavez’s positive opinion of CNN, when this network made a favorable report about his situation on the coup attempt, and his supporters’ accusation of CNN in a moment in which the international opinion is not favorable to the president’s measurements. It could be inferred that Venezuelan government does not denounce news media or institutions per se, but as soon as it is criticized by others. This can be seen as a delegitimation strategy used by Gould. Work Cited Danesi, Marcel. “What Does it Mean?” Of Cigarettes, High Heels, and other Interesting Things: An Introduction to Semiotics. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999. 23-46. Gould, Jens. “Is Chavez Stifling the Media?” Time. 29 May 2007. . Jones, Bart. “Hugo Chavez versus RCTV”. Los Angeles Times. 30 May 2007. < http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/?track=leftnav-opinion>. Romero, Simon. “Chávez’s Move against Critic Highlights Shift in Media”. The New York Times. 27 May 2007. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/27/world/americas/27venez.html?ex=1337918400&en=5ade31188abddd95&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss>. Schudson, Michael. “The Emergence of New Consumer Patterns: A Case Study of the Cigarette”. Advertising, the Uneasy Persuasion. New York: Basic Books, 1984. 178-208. Starr, Paul. The Creation of the Media. New York: Basic Books, 2005. Read More