The opening of the Copa América football competition on 26 June, one month after the forced closure of the audiovisual group Radio Caracas Televisión (RCTV), sparked protests as journalists took to the streets to demand the reinstatement of RCTV’s licence.  Index on Censorship´s Philippa Nicholson reports

It should have been a great moment for the people of Venezuela – an opportunity for national celebration and pride.  It could have been an even greater moment for the country’s controversial President, Hugo Chàvez – a chance to unite his people behind him.  However, the Copa América, which, this summer, was hosted in Venezuela for the first time in its 90-year history, has exacerbated tensions that have been brewing since Chàvez was first elected to power in 1998.  
It seems that Chàvez has gone to great lengths to use the occasion of the Copa América to his own political advantage.  He spent US$1 billion (€740 million) building two new stadiums and renovating seven others in an attempt to boost his public image both inside and outside the country.  He banned protests in and near stadiums and, according to some reports, tried to ensure that only his supporters would be able to obtain tickets.  During an elaborate opening ceremony in the Pueblo Nuevo Stadium in San Cristobal, Chàvez kicked the ball around the pitch with ex-football star Diego Maradona and the Bolivian President Evo Morales. 

However, the opening of the competition, on 26 June, coincided with the first anniversary of the forced closure of the private audiovisual group Radio Caracas Televisión (RCTV) a month ago and none of Chàvez’s efforts could keep the protesters at bay.  On the second day of the competition, thousands of journalists, opposition leaders, students, actors and workers marched through the capital, Caracas, to demand that RCTV’s licence be renewed.  Meanwhile, in the central Plaza Bolivar, pro-Chàvez journalists and activists held a political rally under the banner of ‘Journalists for the Truth’.

Would-be dictator or protector of the truth?
Such political divisions in Venezuelan society are nothing new but the recent crackdown by Chàvez’s government on press freedoms has undoubtedly aggravated the situation.  From one point of view, the media in Venezuela has been guilty of abusing its freedom by disseminating lies about Chàvez in order to provoke the overthrow of a democratically elected president.  When, for example, in 2002, an anti-Chàvez demonstration ended in violence, RCTV allegedly manipulated footage to create the impression that only Chàvez supporters were to blame.  From another point of view, Chàvez is a dangerous would-be dictator who is violating the most basic of democratic freedoms.  The picture is confused yet further by an unprecedented international interest in the Venezuelan political situation which carries with it echoes of old Cold War tensions.  Reactions in the British and U.S. press to the closure of RCTV were fierce; one British journalist likened it to the ‘death of freedom’. On 24 May, the European Parliament adopted a resolution condemning Chàvez’s government for its refusal to renew RCTV’s licence. Why is it that the closure of a television station in Venezuela has caused such a commotion internationally?

After carrying out a failed military coup in 1992, Hugo Chavez launched an election campaign and was democratically voted into power in 1998.  Within a few years, his administration began land reform, improved women’s rights and introduced free healthcare and education up to the university level.  However, it seems that these reforms were not welcomed by all sectors of Venezuelan society and on 11 April 2002 Chavez was overthrown by a coup d’état.  As the seizure of the presidential palace took place, RCTV and other media outlets organised a news blackout – a clear violation of free expression.  When mass street protests forced the coup leaders to return Chàvez to the Palace on 14 April, RCTV broadcast cartoons and Hollywood films without interruption.  However, according to some reports, the role of the media in the 2002 coup went beyond simply turning a blind eye.  A documentary entitled The Revolution Will Not be Televised, produced by Rod Stoneman, director of the Huston School of Film and Digital Media in Ireland, shows clips of journalists and military leaders boasting of their involvement in the coup.

Crime to ´disrespect´ the president
 Chàvez’s government did not act immediately to close down those media outlets implicated in the coup. Instead a raft of new legislation was introduced which placed new restrictions on all independent media in the country.  On 7 December 2004 Chàvez promulgated a law giving the national telecommunications commission, Conatel, the power to shut down radio and television stations that ‘encourage, justify or incite war, criminal offences or disturbance of the peace’.  However, it was the series of amendments added to the criminal code on 16 March 2005 that really began to concern supporters of press freedom worldwide.  The new Article 14, for example, makes it a crime punishable by up to two and half years in prison to ‘disrespect’ the president.  The penalty is 30 per cent higher if the insult is made publicly.  Article 297A provides for jail sentences of between two and five years for news put out by the media, by phone or by email that ‘creates public panic and anxiety’.  The broad application and ambiguous wording of these laws is particularly disturbing. 

However, it was not until after he had won the December 2006 election that Chàvez used the newly passed laws to act against the main target of his wrath – RCTV.  In public comments made before and after his inauguration, Chavez said that his administration would not renew RCTV’s broadcasting licence, which he claimed expired on the 28 May 2007, on the grounds that the audiovisual company had violated the 2004 Law on Social Responsibility in Radio and Television by, for example, broadcasting sexually explicit programmes during daytime hours.  The government also claimed that it was not revoking RCTV’s licence but applying a 1987 decree that sets a maximum of 20 years for broadcast concessions.  The station was allowed to resume its broadcasting activities on satellite and cable television, which it did on 16 July, after renaming itself RCTV Internacional and relocating its headquarters to the US.  According to IPYS Executive Director Ricardo Uceda, although the government does have the right to assign broadcast frequencies, ‘this function must be based on clear rules and transparent procedures’, which were notably lacking in this case. For its part, RCTV argued that since Conatel had not replied to their formal request for renewal, as required by law, the licence should automatically be extended.  The station also claimed that under its interpretation of the law, its licence did not effectively expire until 2020.  Given the history of mutual antipathy between Chàvez’s government and RCTV it is difficult to know who to believe.

Others accused of reckless reporting
However, it is not only RCTV that can be accused of irresponsible reporting: Chàvez’s administration directly controls four TV channels of its own and a large number of radio stations, none of which can make any claim to responsible or balanced reporting.  Every Sunday, state radio and television stations broadcast a live programme called ´Alò Presidente´ which lasts between five and seven hours and is hosted by Chàvez himself.  In one recent Sunday broadcast, Chàvez threatened with deportation any foreigners who come to Venezuela to criticise the country or its president.  Chàvez also has the power, by a telecommunications law of 2000 and the Broadcast Media Social Responsibility Law of 2004, to interrupt all terrestrial television and radio broadcasts at any time in order to broadcast overtly political messages called ‘cadenas’.  This iron control over the media gave Chàvez an enormous propaganda advantage in the 2006 election campaign and freedom of expression groups are concerned by plans announced by the Information and Communication Minister, William Lara, on 16 July, to extend the system of ‘cadenas’ to pay-TV satellite and cable broadcasters, including RCTV Internacional.

So what of the future for Venezuelan media?  Seconds after RCTV was shut down, on 27 May, its signal was given to a new ‘public service’ channel called TVes, part of Chàvez’s plan to democratise the media, ‘to give a power of communication to those who almost never have a voice’.  However, there are fears for the impartiality of Venezuela’s new ‘community’ television which at the moment is state-funded.  Programming begins everyday at 6am with the national anthem, which is repeated at midday and again at midnight.  News, old documentaries and chat shows are interspersed with political advertisements for Chàvez’s party.  One of the station’s directors, Roberto Hernandez Montoya, says that the channel eventually aims to be self-financing.  If this happens, it could be a great step to towards creating a more impartial and responsible media in Venezuela.  However, the track record of other state-owned channels does not bode well for the future of TVes.  

Further reading: Rob Hughes, International Herald Tribune

Phil Gunson, openDemocracy

Venezuela 2006 Annual Report, Reporters sans frontieres