Researchers from the University of the West of England in the UK have uncovered the systematic and persistent bias of the BBC whenever this news outlet covers or reports news on Venezuela. The researchers, Lee Salter and Dave Weltman have analyzed the news coverage on Venezuela as presented by the BBC since Hugo Chávez won the presidential elections in December 1998.
 
Although the study is not yet completed there is sufficient evidence available from partial results to demonstrate that the BBC is not abiding by its legal obligation to provide impartial, opportune and true information about this country.

The researchers studied 304 reports published by the BBC between 1998 and 2008. Of these 304 items just three (rpt THREE) mentioned the positive social policies put in place by the Chávez government.
 
The BBC has not informed its readers about any of the democratic initiatives or legislation promoting human rights, food programs, primary health care initiatives or measures taken by the Venezuelan government to reduce poverty. Mission Robinson, the largest program in world history to eradicate illiteracy, has only been mentioned in passing by the BBC:

“The BBC tends to be in denial about the accomplishments”, affirmed Salter who then added, “In our research we took into account the history, orientation and the constitution of the BBC and one of our hypotheses is that one of the facts which limits the reporting ability of the BBC is its very own internal cultural organization, since the BBC is essentially a liberal-nationalist institution."
 
British people who think that Venezuela is some sort of dictatorship run by some crazy called Hugo Chávez have been conditioned for more than ten years to think like this. This is thanks to the BBC and independent/private UK news organizations which control the airwaves, news selection and how the news is reported. This is without mentioning BBC reporters based in Caracas who have done a sterling job defending their cultural one-sidedness, probably without even realizing the implications of what they are doing.
 
The open question is why does the BBC act like this? Is it just cultural as maintained by the two researchers from the University of the West of England? Or does the BBC, as does the British tabloid press, continue to spin tall tales and manipulate news about Venezuela and Chávez knowing that the Great British Public (sic) will lap up such sensationalistic, mendacious farragoes on the “antics” of alleged “third world idiot politicians”?

Part II

Will Grant BBC Reporter

In Part I of this critique of the BBC and its reporting on Venezuela we mention the BBC correspondents and note: “…….BBC reporters based in Caracas who have done a sterling job defending their cultural one-sidedness, probably without even realizing the implications of what they are doing.”

A case in point is the current BBC correspondent, Will Grant. A quick search of the BBC web site throws up a short list of recent articles by Grant which are extremely interesting to read. Grant covers various aspects of life in Venezuela such as the recent banking scandal, electricity rationing, promoting reading and the government closing down and expropriating businesses for price speculation.

What characterizes these articles is Grant’s penchant for quoting the opposition point of view – nothing implicitly wrong in that – but which always gives the impression that things simply do not work in Venezuela.

Quoting opposition buddies to pad out his screeds

A good example is the article "Venezuelan Banking Scandal widens" in which he quotes opposition economist José Guerra who has been predicting the collapse of the Venezuelan economy since 2003 and never got it right; publisher of the right-wing, rabidly anti Chávez daily Tal Cual, Teodoro Petkoff, who has been predicting the downfall of the government since this newspaper was launched in 2001 and never got it right.
Grant does not, however, appear to be aware of the Ministry of Communication and Information, MINCI, where he would get objective facts presented to him. By waving his BBC press credential he could probably just waltz in to see Minister Blanca Eekhout and discuss any of the subjects he has covered and quote Ms. Eekhout, instead of Mr. Petkoff or Mr. Guerra. But he chooses not to do so.

In the same article Grant mentions rumors about President Chávez’s brother Adán, as somehow being involved in the banking scandal. This “information” could have been lifted off the pages of Tal Cual or other anti-government media which operate in an atmosphere of total fantasy and base their accusations on rumors or outright lies. This is not exactly what one would have learned at journalism school, Will, and this style of reporting is anathema to what many people worldwide assume the BBC is all about.

To make things worse for himself and the BBC, Grant did not write a follow-up to the Banking Scandal article since, on December 21st, the whole scandal had been solved and depositors were guaranteed to recover their money. This lack of consistency on Grant’s part is tantamount to “throw a rock and then hide your hand”, as the popular Venezuelan saying goes. Surely any serious journalist would have written a follow-up confirming that the rumors he published in his original article had been proven to be without foundation.

Of course, the reader is quite capable of forming her or his own conclusion about why the BBC chooses to report in this fashion – and it is clearly a policy choice on their part. In my personal view, consistent with the Mission Statement of Axis of Logic, the answer lies in the BBC’s mission to defend the capitalist system and at the cost of their own journalistic integrity, to present socialism negatively. As a columnist and reader at Axis of Logic, I would be most interested in your understanding of this practice by journalists like Will Grant and his masters at the BBC.  

READ HIS BIO AND MORE ESSAYS BY
AXIS OF LOGIC COLUMNIST, ARTURO ROSALES