News Hounds Part I

Their link: http://www.newshounds.us/2007/05/30/big_story_exaggerating_venezuelan_unrest.php

Ok, this people are against the biased reporting of Fox news. These people claim in their site that: "Appalled by our results, we, who would not meet in person until months later, banded together in cyberspace in concern and outrage over the failure of American media, and Fox News in particular, to relate the news properly. Rather than serve as the public's eyes and ears, Fox and other media conglomerates have become echo chambers for the rich and powerful with whom they have become all too cozy. This blog is an attempt to counter that alarming condition. We believe that a viable democracy depends upon viable media. We invite you to join us in our efforts here and elsewhere to make a difference in the future of our country."

So they seemed pretty much in favor with freedom of speech. I wonder what would Al Gore think if he saw something like their post in which, taking as a source an article on the L.A. Times by reporter Bart Jones who lived eight years in Venezuela and can give great detail and justify the closing of a media.
But after Chavez was elected president in 1998, RCTV shifted to another endeavor: ousting a democratically elected leader from office.
Reading the article in question we find this:

1. "But the case of RCTV — like most things involving Chavez — has been caught up in a web of misinformation." Yes Bart and Newshound people, misinformation like the one you are giving, thank you very much.
2. "But after Chavez was elected president in 1998, RCTV shifted to another endeavor: ousting a democratically elected leader from office." Seems like RCTV was against Chavez from the begining and that Chavez didn't win the elecation thank to the coverage of all the media plus the support of all the economic and social "estratos" (somebody please translate) of Venezuela.
3. "For two days before the putsch, RCTV preempted regular programming and ran wall-to-wall coverage of a general strike aimed at ousting Chavez." Yeah Bart, they where covering the events, you know, like people being shot and those sort of things.
4. "After military rebels overthrew Chavez and he disappeared from public view for two days, RCTV's biased coverage edged fully into sedition." Do you mean after Chavez resigned, asked to be taken to Cuba and was taken to Fuerte Tiuna while they decided if he was going to be granted safe passage to Cuba or was going to be tried in Venezuela?
5. "Thousands of Chavez supporters took to the streets to demand his return, but none of that appeared on RCTV or other television stations." I don't know about thousands, but I do know that some went to the TV stations to attack them, which they broadcast asking for help, btw, this wasn't on the 12 after Chavez resigend, this was on the 13 after Chavez came back to power.
6. "RCTV News Director Andres Izarra later testified at National Assembly hearings on the coup attempt that he received an order from superiors at the station: "Zero pro-Chavez, nothing related to Chavez or his supporters." Andres, who was later appointed Chief of Information and then Director or President of State managed TV Station Telesur. And the Zero pro- Chavez? It meant the sackings that were taking place.
7. "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." Exactly, why did this closure come after five years of the coup. If the closing is indeed because of their participation, where is the trial? Why did Chavez order it himself and not CONATEL (the organism in charge of communications, sort of like the FCC).
8. "Radio, TV and newspapers remain uncensored, unfettered and unthreatened by the government. Most Venezuelan media are still controlled by the old oligarchy and are staunchly anti-Chavez." This one has got to be the best one. You see Bart, and Newshounds, In Venezuela we have a law of social responsability we call the "Spring Law" or "Ley Resorte" (not sure why they call it that really). Anyways, this law basically prohibits the Media of openly criticizing the government. Yes, there are progams in which people give their opinion and actually criticize the government...wait a minute I am contradicting myself...oh, that's right, you can criticize but lightly. You see Brat, you can get penalized with 72 hours of closure for showing images of the failed attempt to kill the Pope. http://www.globovision.com/news.php?nid=57028 (Link in spanish). As fot the unthreatened part, well: http://freerctv.com/ I have to say that my favorite part is when he shows the picture of Ravell (President of Globovision, one of the main TV stations in Venezuela) and tell his followers they need to identify the enemies of the revolution.

Now, I have only talked about Brat's article but my post started becuase I found him on News hounds, actually, I saw the article previously and was getting ready to write when I found it again on News Hounds. But you see, the thing that pissed me more about News Hounds was this one: "we see four women smiling, chanting, and banging on kitchen pots - and uniformed officers firing (tear gas and rubber bullets, we're told) into a crowd." Oh my.