Showing posts with label Freedom. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Freedom. Show all posts

Friday, July 6, 2007

Cisneros learns to live with Chavez. - Based on a NYT Article

Media Mogul Learns to Live With Chávez
By SIMON ROMERO
Published: July 5, 2007
CARACAS, Venezuela, July 4 — Three years ago, the media mogul Gustavo A. Cisneros was a leader of Venezuela’s opposition and his television network, Venevisión, regularly lambasted President Hugo Chávez.
So antagonistic were relations that Mr. Chávez accused him of conspiring to topple him. Government agents raided Mr. Cisneros’s ranch, fishing camp and offices.
The tensions were resolved only after former President
Jimmy Carter, a longtime friend of Mr. Cisneros, brokered a meeting between the men in 2004 before a referendum to determine whether President Chávez should be recalled from office.

Today, as more details of that encounter emerge, Mr. Cisneros, who sits at the helm of a family fortune estimated at $6 billion, has become a target of the same opposition he once championed. Venevisión, critics say, is now positioned to benefit from Mr. Chávez’s recent decision to push the station’s main rival, RCTV, off the public airwaves.

Mr. Cisneros, 62, in a rare interview here, bridled at such charges. “If you go off the air, then democracy loses,” he said, defending his reconciliation with Mr. Chávez and pointing to fears that Venevisión could yet suffer the same fate as RCTV, which was forced to stop broadcasting in late May.
“We decided that we needed to pull through,” said Mr. Cisneros, citing advice on the matter from Carlos Fuentes, the Mexican writer, who is an outspoken critic of Mr. Chávez. “And the way to pull through was to say, ‘Enough, we can’t be part of the story or play a role in politics but we have to report the story every day.’ ”
Gone, Mr. Cisneros said, was Venevisión’s “Fox News approach.” Executives replaced morning talk shows with astrology programs and gave priority to nightly soap operas over critical news programs.
By the time of the presidential election last December, the shift was an about-face from Venevisión’s previous coverage. Venevisión devoted 84 percent of its political coverage to Mr. Chávez’s positions and only 16 percent to the opposition, according to a
European Union report on the elections.
That 2004 meeting, as well as the subsequent softening of Venevisión’s coverage of Mr. Chávez, has been interpreted by critics of both the president and the media mogul as an example of how the moneyed elite bends to Mr. Chávez’s will.

Mr. Chávez, who has built an array of state-controlled broadcasters in the last three years, crows at such changes. Referring recently to the June 2004 meeting with Mr. Cisneros, Mr. Chávez boasted of Mr. Cisneros’s acquiescence to his authority.

“He wore a tie and told me, ‘I put the tie on because I want to tell you that I recognize you as president of my country,’ ” Mr. Chávez said in comments broadcast on Teves, the new state-owned broadcaster that has taken over RCTV’s signal.

Both men deny that any deal was reached. But what else happened at the meeting, which lasted about four hours and was held at Fort Tiuna, a military garrison here, has been shrouded in mystery.
A spokeswoman at the Carter Center in Georgia said Mr. Carter was unable to comment on the meeting, which he mediated after being flown to Caracas on Mr. Cisneros’s plane.
Jennifer McCoy, director of the Americas program at the Carter Center, said the meeting was part of a broader effort by Mr. Carter to ease tension between Mr. Chávez and private media groups
Mr. Carter put Mr. Chávez at ease by discussing their shared military background, according to people briefed on the meeting. (Mr. Carter had attended the
United States Naval Academy; Mr. Chávez is a former lieutenant colonel in the Venezuelan Army.) At the meeting, according to Mr. Cisneros, Mr. Chávez compared his social programs to those of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Mr. Chávez, he said, batted away the assertion that the political climate in 2004 was marked by violence and attacks against reporters and media owners. The only television channel that had been shut down, he said, was the state broadcaster, during the 2002 coup that he had previously accused Mr. Cisneros of backing, a claim Mr. Cisneros denies.

After the meeting, the referendum in August 2004 did not lead to a recall of the president, enabling him to tighten his hold on political institutions and the media. Critics see Venevisión’s subsequent shift in editorial policy as part of a wider trend to avoid confronting Mr. Chávez.
“Some companies bow to authoritarian regimes,” said Marcel Granier, the president of RCTV, which has been reduced to airing its broadcasts on YouTube in recent weeks. “This happened in Germany with the Krupps, Bayers and Thyssens.”

In recent comments about the meeting, the president said Mr. Cisneros, whose other companies range from breweries to the Leones baseball team in Caracas, understood he could coexist with the socialist-inspired transformation of society that Mr. Chavez says he wants.

“There are others who furiously launch themselves in attempts to overthrow a government,” Mr. Chávez said.
As Mr. Chávez acknowledged, Mr. Cisneros’s strategy at Venevisión, a national network developed in the 1960s in a partnership with ABC by Mr. Cisneros’s father, has uncovered rifts within a once cloistered elite that is being shaken by Mr. Chávez’s policies.

For instance, Mr. Cisneros and Mr. Granier are married to cousins, descendants of William H. Phelps, an American businessman and ornithologist who settled in Venezuela more than a century ago.
But Mr. Cisneros and Mr. Granier rarely speak to each other now, both men said in interviews. They have pursued different strategies as Mr. Cisneros pushed into markets in the United States and Latin America while Mr. Granier focused on growing RCTV in Venezuela.

Still, Mr. Cisneros, who has moved his family outside Venezuela and lives mainly at homes in New York, Spain and the Dominican Republic, rejected claims that Venevisión stood to benefit from luring advertisers lost by RCTV.

Pointing to laws that limit the advertising networks can sell, Mr. Cisneros said he expected next year’s revenue to climb no more than 5 to 6 percent, after accounting for annual inflation of more than 20 percent.
“There’s no advantage to us whatsoever in having RCTV go away,” said Mr. Cisneros. “Having President Chávez as our main television competitor is not in our interest.”
Mr. Cisneros said Venezuela’s president maintained leverage over private media groups, including Venevisión.

Mr. Cisneros’s case in point: the government renewed Venevisión’s license in May for only five years, setting it to expire before Mr. Chávez’s third term as president ends in 2012.
Comments by Tank:
For those that might not know Gustavo Cisnero's father came to Venezuela from Cuba as an inmigrant to do what he could not do at home in Cuba. The freedom in Venezuela allowed him to create his Media empire and become the "Media Mogul" he is considered today.
Now he lives in NYC and has benefited much from the revolution. Venevision actually RAN ADDS in support of closing RCTV. Venivision has not covered ANY of the opposition marches... How is this beign impartial? He is clearly pro-goverment. Cisneros sold his country out.
You are going to tell me that closing your biggest competitor down and leaving you with no competition does not benefit you?. Gustavo do you think we are stupid?. Atleast admit the obvious.
Chavez has him on a short leash, hence the reason Venevision's concesion is set to expire right BEFORE the next presidential elections just like the concesion of several Radio Stations.
Extortion anyone?
I would rename this article to:
"Gustavo Cisneros, from Media Mogul to Lap Dog".

Thursday, July 5, 2007

WP Editorial: Mr. Chavez's Friends

I apologize for the lack of updates lately.. work has been driving me crazy. I have started to write a couple pieces which will be posted this week.

Meanwhile I leave you with this interestign read from the Washington Post:

Mr. Chavez's Friends
Wednesday, July 4, 2007; Page A14


THE LATEST Global Attitudes survey by the Pew Foundation contains a lot of bad news for the United States, but there was one relative bright spot in
Latin America: Venezuela. According to Pew, 56 percent of Venezuelans say they have a favorable view of the United States, a higher number than in Britain or Canada. Seventy-one percent say they like U.S. television and movies and a stratospheric 84 percent feel positively about Americans. Though only 23 percent say they have confidence in George W. Bush, the U.S. president's rating is almost 50 percent higher in Venezuela than that of Russian President Vladimir Putin or Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Those numbers cast an interesting light on the foreign policy of Venezuelan President
Hugo Chávez, who describes the United States as an evil empire and Mr. Bush as "the devil," and who just completed a tour of three countries he sees as close allies in a global anti-American alliance: Russia, Iran and Belarus. He addressed each of their leaders as "brother" and called for ever-closer economic and military bonds between their governments and his. This raises an obvious question: For whom was Mr. Chávez speaking?

His hosts clearly had something to gain. Belarus, known as
Europe's last dictatorship, is such a pariah that its ruler, Alexander Lukashenko, is now shunned even by his longtime patron, Mr. Putin; he was delighted to be visited by any head of state. Belarus and Venezuela share "absolutely identical" views, Mr. Lukashenko giddily proclaimed.

In Moscow, where Mr. Chávez next stopped, the interest is mostly pecuniary. Mr. Putin has sold Mr. Chávez $3.5 billion in weapons in the past several years and is eager to peddle more. While in Russia, Mr. Chávez talked of buying submarines and toured an aircraft factory, inspecting
Moscow's latest attack helicopter and petulantly asking why he hadn't been shown it before he bought 53 less-advanced Russian helicopters last year. Then he gave a lengthy speech in which he rued the demise of the Soviet Union.

Mr. Ahmadinejad also had good reason to welcome Mr. Chávez at a time when his government faces a new round of sanctions by the
U.N. Security Council. His Venezuelan visitor obliged, defending Iran's nuclear program and promising to "unite the Persian Gulf and the Caribbean." "I thank God that Iran and Venezuela are standing together forever," Mr. Chávez said.

According to Pew, 81 percent of Venezuelans oppose
Iran's acquiring a nuclear weapon, but Mr. Chávez is looking beyond his country, hoping to become the leader of global opposition to the United States. As the Pew survey shows, there's plenty of it out there, but Mr. Chávez is not the beneficiary. In only three of the 47 countries surveyed by Pew does he inspire confidence in 50 percent or more of those questioned: Venezuela, Mali and Ivory Coast. In Russia his rating is 21 percent. In Peru, Chile and Mexico, Mr. Chávez's numbers are far below those of the despised Mr. Bush. The answer to the question of whom Venezuela's president represents emerges from the data: No one, other than himself.

I really have nothing to add.

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

Caracas Marches..... nobody listens?


Journalists and different media workers called for a march to protest against discrimination and the lack of freedom of expression in Venezuela.

Students, workers, journalists and different political parties took the streets of Caracas in what turned out to be one of the largest peaceful protests in the last 9 years. Students also protested in Puerto la Cruz and a few other cities in the country.

Meanwhile.. Chavez is visiting Russia, Bielorussia and Iran.


A few images are worth a thousand words:




























































































































































































A video of the concentration:

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

USB Marches for Autonomy




The students of the Universidad Simon Bolivar, a well-known school with a high reputation in scientific and engineering careers, decided to march to the "Board of Supreme Education" (the goverment entity that regulates universities) to demand that the university's autonomous status be recognized. (an status every university in Venezuela enjoys).

Funded in 1967 as an experimental school, today the USB is one of the most advanced and successful houses of high education in Latin America. However, it has not been granted "autonomy" by the goverment.

Students also protested for those students that have been victims of goverment aggression and for those that have been detained for protesting against the ilegal close of RCTV. The fourth and last demand made by the students was for Freedom of Speech, they asked the goverment to give them space in the goverment controlled TV channels and allied channels so they can voice their concerns and opinions.

Wednesday, June 6, 2007

Wednesday the 6th - A March for Freedom



Professors, workers and the students of the UCV (Universidad Central de Venezuela) had called upon a march on Tuesday, the students from all the other houses of study answered. However the goverment refused to allow them to march that day, so the date was switched to Wednesday. Once again the goverment tried to not allow the march to happen, however this time the students decided that theyre were going to march.

at 7:00 am the concentration of people started inside the UCV, a couple loud explosions went off somewhere in the school but nothing happened. The leaders of the student movement blamed the government and its followers as it was obvious that they wanted to scare the students from marching.



The goverment has lost the youth....
*Pink Floyd - Another Brick on the wal















Students from universities from cities relatively close to Caracas tried to join the march; to their surprise they found contingents of Police and the National Guard holding traffic in all highways leading to Caracas. The buses of the students were stopped for 2-3 hours and either turned back or arrived to Caracas too late.

Some of the students reacted by sitting in the highways and singing and yelling demanding their rights. However, It was pretty much impossible to get to Caracas.




This guy was seen at the top of buildings. A member of the Army. What was he doing there? Why so heavily armed?
Are you scared Hugo? I bet you are.



Hugo.
The youth isn't with the Revolution.

"When one voice is silenced, we all become mute. When one thought is eliminated, we all lose some awareness. And when a space for the expression of ideas becomes closed, we all become trapped in the dungeons of dictatorship. The authoritarian populism of Venezuela strives to convert all of the people of Latin America into silent citizens, and we cannot permit this.

Latin America’s common enemies are poverty, inequality and exclusion — not dissident thought. Hunger is not fought by silencing critics. Unemployment does not disappear by exiling those who think differently. We cannot have bread without liberty. We cannot have nations without democracy."

/Alejandro Toledo, ex-president of Peru -Pulled from the New York Times.
ps: thank you John Galt.

Hurray For Condi!!..but.. What the heck is the OAS for?

The history of the OAS (Organization of American States) goes back to 1959.
In the words of Article 1 of the Charter, the goal of the member nations in creating the OAS was "to achieve an order of peace and justice, to promote their solidarity, to strengthen their collaboration, and to defend their sovereignty, their territorial integrity, and their independence."

Article 2 then defines eight essential purposes:

  • To strengthen the peace and security of the continent. (Has anything improved?)
  • To promote and consolidate representative democracy, with due respect for the principle of nonintervention. (haha.. yeah right.)
  • To prevent possible causes of difficulties and to ensure the pacific settlement of disputes that may arise among the member states.
  • To provide for common action on the part of those states in the event of aggression.
  • To seek the solution of political, judicial, and economic problems that may arise among them (or to look the other way)
  • To promote, by cooperative action, their economic, social, and cultural development. (just like in Cuba and Venezuela)
  • To eradicate extreme poverty, which constitutes an obstacle to the full democratic development of the peoples of the hemisphere.
  • To achieve an effective limitation of conventional weapons that will make it possible to devote the largest amount of resources to the economic and social development of the member states. (What about the army Venezuela has built?, The Choppers? The 30 Russian combat planes?, the submarines?, the missile systems?)

In the year 2001 The Inter-American Democratic Charter was adopted by a special session of the OAS, held in Lima, Peru. It is an inter-American instrument with the central aim of strengthening and upholding democratic institutions in the nations of the Americas . The Charter, which is binding on all 34 of the currently active OAS member states, spells out what democracy entails and specifies how it should be defended when it is under threat.

So all this talk of history and goals is to ask the following question:


------ WHAT IS THE FUCKING POINT?!? ----------

All the OAS has proven is that just like everything else in Latin America it is an organization full of corruption, where regional power plays are made for the benefit of any particular country.


Condolezza Rice got into a heated debate with Venezuela's Canciller Mr. Maduro where she asked the OAS to consider sending an envoy to Venezuela to see what the hell is happening in my country. However, while delegates from every member of the organization expressed concern over Freedom of Speech in Venezuela, they decided against sending an envoy to Venezuela because it violates the sovereignity of the country.





(Maduro answered by critizicing the USA detainees in Guantamo Bay and the CIA and some other crap. You know what? I say heck yeah, investigate it all.. but do something. Maduro's answer was to basically change the subject... because he had no answer. )

So basically, the only way the OAS will even INVESTIGATE (nobody is asking it to take action) is by having more Venezuelans die, and more money go to waste. 110.000 (last numbers released by the official goverment media) Venezuelans have died during the last 9 years thanks to the violence. How many more need to die?.


We LOVE to critizice the USA, but they have been the only country who's delegate has clearly expressed concern about the situation in Venezuela, and the only one that has asked the organization to take action. However, Hugo's lapdogs from Argentina, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Chile beleive that the OAS investigation would violate the sovereignity of the country. Surprisingly Chavez is financing these same countries while Venezuelans starve to dead.

Jose Miguel Inzulsa: you are the worst mankind has to offer. Beign the secretary of the OAS means you have a MORAL and a SOCIAL responsability to the people of the Americas. Its not only to talk about "nice things" where every member will agree and ignore everything that could create any situation of conflict. Beign the secretary of the OAS is not only staying in 5 Star Hotels, wearing $3,000 suits and eating at the nicest restaurants. The position comes with a responsability, live up to it.

Just to give an example of how Insulza has worked: A month ago Insulza critiziced Chavez for the possible close of RCTV. Chavez answered by insulting him, making fun of him and threatening him with Venezuela leaving the OAS if the the OAS made a pronouncement against Venezuela and the closure of RCTV.

What did Insulza do? He looked the other way and basically justified it by saying it was a "Sovereign" decition of the Venezuelan authorities to either close RCTV or Not to.

Tuesday, June 5, 2007

Next Stop: Freedom - Caracas subway stations.



A group of students protested all over the subway stations of the city of Caracas. They walked in complete silence wearing signs with messages such as " We apologize for the inconveniences. We are currently working for your freedom", "Peace", "Justice", "Freedom of Speech"....