March 26, 2008
Asked about the visit of the Inter American Press Association (IAPA) to Venezuela, professor and member of the media observatory Daniel Hernández and the President of Vive TV, Blana Eckhout, explain us what is behind this organization’s visit to the South American country.
The Inter American Press Association (IAPA) has mercilessly and continuously attacked the government of President Hugo Chávez, whom it has described as a clear enemy of freedom and press expression. Actually, this organization has issued different press releases condemning the Venezuelan president’s statements regarding the media behavior; this stance reached its peak after the broadcasting license of the Venezuelan private TV station RCTV was not renewed.
The IAPA’s attacks have persisted and it will visit Venezuela next March 28 in order to analyze and debate freedom of speech and information, as well as the so-called threats to TV, radio stations and newspapers in Venezuela.
Such an agenda has been described by many media specialists as a provocation; but this visit clearly proves that the Bolivarian government does open spaces to freedom of expression since it has not put any obstacles in the IAPA visit’s way.
The IAPA record
The Inter American Press Association (IAPA)’s web page states it “is a non-profit organization dedicated to defending freedom of expression and of the press throughout the Americas.” It gathers many newspapers’ and press agencies’ editors of the region.
Its creation dates back to 1942, in La Havana, Cuba, one year after the Permanent Commission of the II Pan American Congress of Journalists, held in Mexico City, announced its results. It is also in charge of the Press Institute, a scholarship fund and granting annual awards.
Likewise, it is member of the International Freedom of Expression Exchange (IFEX), a worldwide network gathering important associations in the defense of freedom of expression and taking on stances about press freedom in different countries.
Notwithstanding, many people think the IAPA’s influence is consolidated thanks to the economic power sponsoring its position, represented by big media corporations, something that undoubtedly distorts its actions.
Also, the IAPA’s founders include CIA agents Jules Dubois and Joshua Powers, and U.S Department of State’s Tom Wallace, which gives this organization a hard line against anything smelling like “communist,” “unionist” or affecting the United States’ foreign policy.
Such links make the IAPA inconsistent with its “chief aims”: “defend freedom of expression and of the press; advocate the dignity, rights and responsibilities of journalism; encourage high standards of professional and business conduct; and foster the exchange of ideas and information that con-tribute to the professional and technical development of the press.”
IAPA Venezuela
In Venezuela, IAPA members include: El Universal, El Nacional, El Nuevo País, 2001, Meridiano; regional newspapers El Impulso y El Informador (Barquisimeto), El Carabobeño y Noti Tarde (Valencia), Diario la Verdad y Panorama (Maracaibo), as well as their web sites; Revista Exceso, The Daily Journal, Grupo Editorial Producto, Bloque de Publicaciones De Armas, Globovisión.com and RCTV.
IAPA open to insult governments not kneeling down
According to the President of the Venezuelan TV station Vive TV, Blanca Eckhout, IAPA’s visit to Venezuela is part of the constant attacks of this organization, whose corner-stone is the non-renewal of RCTV’s broadcasting license, an action they have tried to describe as a political position.
“First, let me tell you that few governments in the world are as open to the media as Venezuela’s. The IAPA? It’s a terrible mafia defending the interests of big corporations; it’s hypocrisy open to insult the image of those government that do not keel down before them, and the U.S. Department of State.
Eckhout thinks that boycotting this visit would play along with this organization, which has changed its defensive role to an offensive role.
“The IAPA is a tool of the United States’ lies. They accuse us of dictators, of abusing freedom of expression, but they don’t see the other side of the coin; they don’t see what happened during the coup (April 2002). RCTV was not only penalized in the Fifth Republic, but also in the Fourth Republic; they don’t realize that this TV station reproduces what the U.S. Department of State says,” stressed the President of Vive TV.
What kind of freedom of expression does the IAPA defend?
Daniel Hernández, a well-known professor and member of the media observatory, says that the interests of the Venezuelan private media involve an attachment to corporative interests.
“I understand that this is a visit they have planned for years, since 2003 I think; however, I think that the Venezuelan government must take on a stance regarding the media problem, which has been discussed in the OAS. As a matter of fact, they are working on a resolution proposed by our government regarding the problem of the interpretation and reach of the principles on freedom of expression of the Inter American Commission on Human Rights.”
The aforementioned principles state: “Freedom of expression in all its forms and manifestations is a fundamental and inalienable right of all individuals. Additionally, it is an indispensable requirement for the very existence of a democratic society.” Likewise, “all people should be afforded equal opportunities to receive, seek and impart information by any means of communication without any discrimination for reasons of race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinions, national or social origin, economic status, birth or any other social condition.”
Hernández also refers to principle 12, which refers to monopolies. According to Hernández, it uncovers many activities that have been called “information” by private media, which hide behind press freedom when their interests are touched.
Principle 12 states: “Monopolies or oligopolies in the ownership and control of the communication media must be subject to anti-trust laws, as they conspire against democracy by limiting the plurality and diversity which ensure the full exercise of people’s right to information. In no case should such laws apply exclusively to the media. The concession of radio and television broadcast frequencies should take into account democratic criteria that provide equal opportunity of access for all individuals.”
Hernández thinks this principle has to be explained to the Venezuelan people in order to “show the real intentions of this shady deal between the IAPA and the Venezuelan private media. It is necessary to bring to light all their plans.”
According to Hernández, the Bolivarian government stance is the Venezuelan people’s stance because it expresses a national interest. This interpretation focuses on law since it originates from different principles. The first time people start talking about freedom of expression, the people’s sacred right to express through different means was not only established, but also the responsibility of having that right.
He also mentioned Resolutions 53 an 244 adopted by the UNO in 1999: “Everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, to know, seek, obtain, receive and hold information about all human rights and fundamental freedoms, including having access to information as to how those rights and freedoms are given effect in domestic legislative, judicial or administrative systems (of each country).”
“Unfortunately, this is not mentioned as a defense against the IAPA’s attacks,” he added.
Hernández explains that “all this lead us to the reflection of how we exercise our right to information, even when we must ask ourselves: Are the private media, turned into big monopolies, the ones that can guarantee us the right to information regarding our human rights? The experience says NO.”
Has freedom of expression in Venezuela been undermined?
Both experts agree that the IAPA’s game will be tested, since this organization has been discredited worldwide.
“The first fundamental principle is that when we talk about freedom of expression, we talk about freedom of thought, a fundamental constituent mediation in human beings. We are not talking of a secondary thing, but abut the conscience of human beings. Conscience is a constituent element of humanity; it is something involving rationality, self-awareness, and sensitivity. Information is unfortunately communication that has unfortunately been distorted in the form of news. The media reduce everything to news related to the interests of media owners,” explained Hernández.
According to Eckhout, press freedom is only seen from the particular perspective of the media owners, who focus on generating opinions aimed at “heating up” the country and finding a dark panorama regarding the image of the President.
“Freedom of expression is experiencing its best time in history. Private media are not attacked here; it’s enough to see what Globovision broadcasts in order to build up an idea of how it manages their media agenda. That’s why I think that the President should not pay attention to the IAPA’s invitation to its assembly because it would be legitimizing an organization devoted to imperialist interests,” she concluded.
Ministry of Popular Power for Communication and Information