International Action Center - June 1, 2007
http://www.iacenter.org

The truth behind the media campaign against Venezuela

The International Action Center stands with the people of Venezuela
and their democratically-elected President Hugo Chavez and we condemn
Washington's propaganda campaign against the Venezuelan government,
carried out with the complicity of the U.S. corporate media.

We have included below a letter from Venezuelan Ambassador Bernardo
Alvarez Herrera to Nancy Pelosi (in English and Spanish) responding to
her attack on President Hugo Chavez.

Over the next few days, the International Action Center will be
launching an campaign to challenge and expose Washington's campaign of
lies and disinformation against the people of Venezuela.

Also see: "Myths and Facts About the Radio Caracas Television Case" at
http://www.embavenez-us.org/RCTVFactSheetFinal_2007.pdf

------------------------------------------------------------------------

May 30, 2007

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Speaker of the House
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C.

Madam Speaker Pelosi,

I am writing in the opportunity to respond to your May 30 statement on
Venezuela's decision not to renew the broadcast license of Radio
Caracas Television (RCTV). In it, you accused President Hugo ChC!vez of
engaging in efforts to "suppress the media." I would like to assure you
that the decision was made in full accordance with Venezuela's laws and
does not represent a threat to the country's vibrant media or the
ability of the Venezuelan people to receive information and opinion
that is critical of the government.  Equally, and as many observers
have pointed out, since President Chavez came to power the government
has tried to democratize the media to foster a diversity of voices to
combat the historical monopoly on the broadcasting of information that
causes so much harm to any democracy.

The decision not to renew RCTV's broadcast license was a simple
regulatory matter that was made according to the country's
constitution, laws and public interest standards. It was not made based
on RCTV's critical editorial stance against the government, nor was it
directed at silencing criticism of the government. The Venezuelan media
has enjoyed, and will continue to enjoy the right to report and offer
opinions, whether or not they agree with President ChC!vez. This has
also been recognized by numerous observers. As Bart Jones, a longtime
correspondent for the Associated Press wrote in an op-ed published in
the Los Angeles Times on May 30, "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-ChC!vez."

It is also important to note that while RCTV enjoyed access to the
public spectrum, it far exceeded its prescribed role as a media outlet
in a democracy. In April 2002, RCTV promoted a coup against the
democratically elected government of President ChC!vez.  After that, it
participated and encouraged the sabotage of the oil industry of
Venezuela, causing tremendous suffering on the Venezuelan people.

In both instances, RCTV went beyond taking a critical editorial stance
against the government.  It used its privileged position as a media
outlet to help subvert Venezuela's constitutional order. In no other
country would a media outlet be allowed to play such an overtly
undemocratic role, much less using a public broadcast spectrum. Again,
in so doing, RCTV single-handedly subverted Venezuela's democracy. I
wonder how the FCC would have responded had such events taken place in
the United States.

The decision to not renew RCTV's license will not affect Venezuela's
longstanding commitment to freedom of expression, freedom of the press
and freedom of information as your statement suggests. In fact, the
majority of Venezuela's media outlets remain in private hands -- of the
81 television stations, 709 radio broadcasters and 118 newspapers
throughout Venezuela, 79, 706 and 118, respectively, are privately
owned and operated. More importantly, they all exercise their rights
freely, often criticizing the government in strident terms reflecting
the vitality of Venezuela's democracy. Since the non renewal took
effect, the great majority of media outlets in Venezuela have openly
reported on and offered their opinions on the decision.

If you have any questions or concerns about Venezuela or the Venezuelan
media, please do not hesitate to contact me. I would welcome the
opportunity to meet with you at your earliest convenience to discuss
this matter. Most importantly, I invite you to visit Venezuela and
judge for yourself the vibrant state of the media and freedom of
thought and expression enjoyed by all Venezuelans.

Respectfully,

Bernardo Alvarez Herrera
Ambassador

--------------------------

30 de mayo de 2007

Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Presidenta
CC!mara de Representantes de Estados Unidos
Washington, D.C.

Sra. Presidenta Pelosi,

Le escribo en la oportunidad de responder a su comunicado del 30 de
mayo sobre la decisiC3n de Venezuela de no renovar la licencia de
transmisiC3n de Radio Caracas TelevisiC3n (RCTV). En ella, usted acusa al
Presidente Hugo ChC!vez de participar en esfuerzos por "suprimir a los
medios de comunicaciC3n". Quiero asegurarle que la decisiC3n fue tomada
en plena concordancia con las leyes venezolanas y no representa una
amenaza a los medios de comunicaciC3n vibrantes del paC-s o la habilidad
del pueblo venezolano de recibir informaciC3n y opiniones que son
crC-ticas del gobierno. De la misma forma, y como muchos observadores
han indicado, desde que el presidente ChC!vez llegC3 al poder ha tratado
de democratizar los medios de comunicaciC3n para promover la diversidad
de las voces para combatir el monopolio histC3rico sobre la transmisiC3n
de la informaciC3n que causa tanto daC1o a cualquier democracia.

La decisiC3n de no renovar la licencia de transmisiC3n de RCTV, fue una
simple medida regulatoria que fue hecha de acuerdo a la constituciC3n
del paC-s, las leyes y los estC!ndares del interC)s pC:blico. No fue tomada
basC!ndose en la lC-nea editorial crC-tica de RCTV en contra del gobierno,
y no fue dirigida a silenciar el criticismo del gobierno. Los medios de
comunicaciC3n venezolanos han gozado, y continuarC!n gozando del derecho
de reportar y ofrecer opiniones, asC- estC)n de acuerdo o no con el
Presidente ChC!vez. Esto tambiC)n ha sido reconocido por numerosos
observadores. Como Bart Jones, un corresponsal de larga trayectoria en
Associated Press, quien escribiC3 en un editorial, publicado en "Los
Angeles Times" el 30 de mayo, que "la radio, la televisiC3n y los
periC3dicos continC:an trabajando sin censura, constricciones o amenazas
por parte del gobierno. La mayorC-a de los medios de comunicaciC3n
venezolanos todavC-a son controlados por una vieja oligarquC-a y siguen
siendo incondicionalmente opositores a ChC!vez."

Es tambiC)n importante seC1alar, que mientras RCTV ha gozado del acceso
al espectro pC:blico, excediC3 sobremanera su rol preescrito como un
medio de comunicaciC3n dentro de una democracia. En abril de 2002, RCTV
promoviC3 un golpe de estado en contra del gobierno democrC!ticamente
elegido del Presidente ChC!vez. Luego de eso, participC3 y promoviC3 el
sabotaje de la industria petrolera en Venezuela, causando un tremendo
sufrimiento al pueblo venezolano.

En ambas instancias, RCTV fue mC!s allC! de tomar una lC-nea editorial
crC-tica en contra del gobierno. UtilizC3 su posiciC3n privilegiada como
un medio de comunicaciC3n, para ayudar a subvertir el orden
constitucional venezolano. En ningC:n otro paC-s se hubiera permitido que
un medio de comunicaciC3n juegue un rol tan antidemocrC!tico, ni mucho
menos que utilice el espectro de transmisiC3n pC:blico. Una vez mC!s, al
hacerlo, RCTV trastornC3 unilateralmente la democracia venezolana. Me
pregunto cC3mo el FCC hubiese respondido si tales eventos se hubieran
llevado a cabo en Estados Unidos.

La decisiC3n de no renovar la licencia de RCTV, no afectarC! el largo
compromiso de Venezuela con la libertad de expresiC3n, la libertad de
prensa y la libertad de informaciC3n como su comunicado sugiere. De
hecho la mayorC-a de los medios de comunicaciC3n venezolanos permanecen
en manos privadas---de las 81 estaciones de televisiC3n, 709 estaciones
de radio y 118 diarios a lo largo de Venezuela, 79, 706 y 118,
respectivamente, son controlados y operados por el sector privado. Lo
que es mC!s importante es que todos ejercen sus derechos libremente, a
menudo criticando al gobierno en tC)rminos estridentes reflejando la
vitalidad de la democracia de Venezuela. Desde que la no renovaciC3n
entrC3 en efecto, la gran mayorC-a de los medios de comunicaciC3n en
Venezuela han ofrecido abiertamente sus opiniones sobre la decisiC3n.

Si tuviera preguntas o preocupaciones sobre Venezuela, o los medios de
comunicaciC3n venezolanos, por favor no dude en contactarme. Le darC-a la
bienvenida a la oportunidad de reunirme con usted cuanto antes para
discutir este asunto. Mejor aun, la invito a que visite Venezuela y
juzgue por usted el vibrante estado de los medios de comunicaciC3n y la
libertad de expresiC3n disfrutada por todos los venezolanos.

Respetuosamente,

Bernardo Clvarez Herrera
Embajador

                                *
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective    *    A Service of Blythe Systems
.          Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us         .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012     http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives:   https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================