El Libertario editorial collective

The case of RCTV and the fictional democratization of communication

April 6, 2008

Since two decades ago, by means of our publications, the Venezuelan anarchists have denounced and been against the vices and slants of the private media corporations as RCTV. This company had guaranteed its economic success combining evil oligopolistic practices, opportunist bonds with the current state power and the emission of “garbage-content” with the excuse of “giving the people what they want”. However, the problems that indeed this company represented are taken now as an excuse for the imposition of a solution that means a repetition and multiplication of the same vices. In the 2007´s Venezuela, the meanness of a part of the private oligopoly is supposed to be corrected by the dreadful of a state monopoly, increasing the unprecedented insane advantages for the government and justifying the production of “garbage-content” with the condition of being “rojo-rojito” (red-small red) [1]. In concrete terms: we do not have Miguel Ängel Rodríguez anymore but we will have the acclaimed Mario Silva, the presenter of the journalistic paradigm of the 5th Republic.

The history of Venezuelan television teaches that the private owners of the media have never recognized the right to freedom expression, particularly when this right affects their profits and its privileged political and cultural position. However, the State – before or after 1999 — has never made anything different in this field to understand the television to consider it as one for the exercise and defense of their power interests. For that reason, the little space that could have been constructed for free diffusion and discussion of ideas on the TV has been very weak because those who have the power in this field have always want it to be this way.

And if that wasn’t enough, in the struggle unleashed after the coming of Chávez to the presidency for the control of the state and the consequent access to the oil rent, the governmental and oppositionist factions have compete equally in order to use opportunistically and tendentiously the mass media because this has been converted in a battlefield scenario where the recognition of the right to freedom of expression means to give in space to the enemy, within this perverse logic of polarization that we have suffered in the last times, in where those of us that dissent and criticize to the contenders of power had been equally detested and excluded for both sides.

However, despite all the nuances and warnings that are applicable to the Venezuelan case, the struggle for guaranteeing the little one that could be preserved in terms of freedom of expression today when several evidences lead to think that the main risk that faces up this freedom in the current situation comes from the state with its clear intention of creating a communicational model suit made to the size of a so-called “socialism” that is nothing more than the new face of the capitalistic domination in Venezuela. We have no doubts of that we have to be so naïve to believe in vociferating important figures of today like Granier of RCTV or Ravell of Globovisión (and that for not mentioning the today´s silent Armas Camero of Televén or Cisneros of Venevisión), but the measures taken against those figures will be prompt adopted against the rest of the dissidence of the country, including those within the governmental sector.

We have no doubt about the fact of that we suffer from a regime that is so opposed to any kind of critique or disagreement that they even proclaim as a virtue to repress any manifestation of this class between their adepts because they immediately discredit the legitimacy of the reactions of protest against the abuses of power and official incompetence attributing them to so-called criminal conspiracies (the “CIA”, the “Colombian paramilitary groups”, the “right that wants to give a coup d‘état”, etc.) that would be behind any possible kind of dissidence in Venezuela. According to this paranoiac-Stalinist approach, the mere demand of rights is just the unquestionable proof of the evil conspiracies that threaten the “revolutionary process” and also for not to agree to or to repress to those who make that demand. Indeed, just from the authoritarian dogmatism that is characteristic of the Venezuelan government could be justified the aggression to those rights in the name of an absurd “socialism” that is proud to damage seriously to Granier but comes to an agreement with Cisneros, gives rights of property to multinationals and gives its protection to the brand-new “boli-bourgeoisie” [2].

Faced with that situation, we the Venezuelan anarchists could not do another thing that put ourselves firmly in the defense of the now mutilated right to free expression as so as of all the other social and political rights which are indispensable for the mere existence and rising of autonomous grass roots social movements. The faculty of communication, in the fullest and more human sense that has this word is –for us- a mean but also a goal in this proposal of a society of free and equal people that we want to come true. At the same time, we denounce the use of the current situation of confrontation to advance in the way of the criminalization of the dissidence and the structuring of a juridical ordination that are fit of a police state. In this way, the left wing authoritarian state is supporting measures (illegalization of the closes of ways and the burning of tires for example), that in a short term will be used against popular sectors that will demand claims. We also denounce the use of armed gangs to confront the demonstrators in the streets; a brand-new kind of paramilitary groups that serve to the Venezuelan state to copy the practice of its commercial partners: Álvaro Uribe and the North American multinationals. Finally, we will point out the clear relation between the Venezuelan government and sectors of the globalised economy such as Gustavo Cisneros, relation that wants to ensure precarious employment, the subordination and the servility of the entire male and female oppressed of our country.

Numbers and facts of the “democratization of the radioelectric spectrum” (that often are not to mention by the “Bolivarian socialism” and the “democratic opposition”):

[1] “red-small red” is a phrase used by the President Chávez and their people to describe the color of the socialist sign of their political movement with an emphasis using the expression “small red” to mean that is very or totally red.

[2] A word composed of “boli” of Bolivarian and “bourgeoisie”.


Retrieved on 2020-04-06 from libcom.org