Thousands of MAS (Movement Towards Socialism) supporters filled the
Plaza Murillo on Sunday, December 6, to catch a glimpse of the
re-elected Bolivian president Evo Morales on the balcony of the
Presidential Palace. Amidst the fireworks, clenched fists, celebrations
and MAS flags read a banner, "Now it is time to nationalize the private
media." Nationalization and Evo Morales go hand in hand, as the MAS
leader has returned control of the nation's resources to the Bolivian
state since taking power in 2006. But the banner did not represent an
ideological position as much it reflected the anger generated by the
opposition the extremely popular Morales continues to face from the
country's privately owned media.
Despite the country's impressive economic performance in the face of
the global downturn, the vast investment in the country's
infrastructure and Morales's fulfilment of most of his electoral
agenda, his relationship with the private media continues to be
fractious.
In the week leading up to the historic elections (historic for the
number of Bolivians that voted and the landslide victory for MAS),
Morales clashed with local journalists. "Perhaps a hunger strike is
needed, to free you from you owners," Morales told reporters just days
before voters went to the polls. It was in part self-reference -
Morales conducted a five-day hunger strike in April to push forward the
approval of a new election law in the face of resistance of the
opposition-controlled senate. But his comment pointed to the vested
interests of the large media corporations in Bolivia, which, according
to Morales, impose an anti-MAS editorial line.
The media in Bolivia is largely controlled by a small group of
corporations, in particular the Spanish Grupo Prisa, Grupo Líder, and
the vociferously anti-MAS Universal de Televisión (UNITEL). The UNITEL
network is owned by the Montesinos family, which participated in the
Sánchez de Lozada government that was ousted by a popular uprising in
2003. Protected by legislation over printed press that dates back to
the 1920s, and legislation pushed through in the neoliberal 1990s,
private media sets the conservative opposition's agenda.
"I wouldn't even talk about 'coverage' of these elections," MAS
congressman Gustavo Torrico tells NACLA while waiting for Morales to
appear in Plaza Murillo on the day of the elections. "I would talk
about the partisanship of the Bolivian media," he says. "It has reached
such a level that they should name themselves mouthpieces for the
opposition, and stop hiding behind the smokescreen of 'free press,'" he
says.
He goes on to give an example he had seen just hours before. "The
political analysts on the broadcaster UNITEL said earlier today 'MAS
won with around 60%, but democracy lost.' Am I the stupid one who
doesn't understand what's going on?! How does democracy win, if it is
not with the vote? You can't separate the people and the vote in a
democratic system!"
It is the democratic system that permitted nearly 200,000 Bolivians
living abroad, as well as the local population to ratify Evo Morales as
president in the historic elections earlier this month. Private media
operates as the effective opposition to MAS, given the poverty of ideas
and leadership amongst the other political parties and movements in
Bolivia. And many MAS supporters are calling for new media legislation
that would proportion the same representation in the media as the
various social movements and groups have won on a political level.
Community and social media in Bolivia have strong traditions, with
roots in the militant mining community. In the late 1940s a number of
radio stations emerged that were created, financed and run by the very
communities that they served - the miners and their families. They
spoke out about the injustices they faced, and provided a dissident
voice against the oligarchy that ran the industry. After the 1952
revolution, with which vast agrarian reform and universal suffrage were
introduced, the number of local radio stations grew, and community
radio flourished.
Yet the power and influence that the miners were harnessing through
their independently produced radio did not go unnoticed. In 1967 the
military massacred workers in San Juan at the Siglo XX tin mine and
destroyed radio installations both as a warning and attempt to silence
critical voices. The example of miner's radio offers the reference
point for independent media in Bolivia, but community radio stations
continue to be excluded from the legal framework of the media.
A potential change in legislation in Bolivia would not be without
precedent in Latin America. Venezuela, Argentina and Ecuador, for
example, have all recently introduced significant new legislation in
relation to the media. Hugo Chávez pushed forward new legislation after
the complicit and active role in the 2002 coup played by the
anti-Chávez media. In Argentina, the government of Cristina Fernández
de Kirchner recently passed a new media law to prevent media
monopolies. Ecuador's Rafael Correa has spoken of the need to find a
"balance" in the power of information that mass media possesses.
Many journalists in the private media are concerned about what MAS's
forthcoming term in office will bring. Three days before the
presidential elections, the journalist Tuffí Aré Vásquez wrote an
opinion piece titled "What will 2010 bring for journalists?" in La Prensa.
"Our nerves [in the press] are based on facts. The President has
classed the majority of the non-government media as his chief
opposition. He humiliated one journalist at the Government Palace. His
supporters have attacked journalists. He even called us 'farm
chickens.'"
While private media defends its corner, it is not as clear-cut that
MAS will push forward a new media law. In 2007, the former journalist
and MAS congressman Iván Canelas proposed a new media law, but MAS
quickly distanced itself from the proposal, stating that it was a
personal project, not one endorsed by the movement.
"I'm not 100% sure that President Morales will push through new
legislation," says MAS congressman Gustavo Torrico. Indeed, any move
from Morales to propose new legislation would be interpreted as a
unilateral attack on the private media. Yet Morales may find that the
diverse social movements that constitute MAS demand change.
NACLA