Alan
MacLeod looks at the role of the media in the regime change operation
in Venezuela
by
Alan MacLeod
Part
3 - Coverage of two elections: A case study
Using
this paired example method to test the propaganda model I studied
Western media coverage of the 2018 elections in Colombia – a key
U.S. ally – and Venezuela, a sworn enemy. In Colombia, the
conservative Ivan Duque triumphed; in Venezuela, the socialist Maduro
won.
The
elections in Colombia took place under a heightened state of terror,
with the left-wing candidate Gustavo Petro narrowly surviving an
assassination attempt and right-wing paramilitaries issuing
generalized threats to those who tried to vote for him. The incumbent
conservative party under President Alvaro Uribe had massacred over
10,000 civilians, while American election observers, such as
University of Pittsburgh law professor Daniel Kovalik, were mistaken
for voters and offered bribes to vote for Duque. There were over 250
official electoral fraud complaints.
The
mainstream media, however, overwhelmingly endorsed the elections in
the U.S.-ally state, presenting it as a moment of hope for the
country and downplaying any negative aspects, especially violence.
CNN reported that "though there have been isolated incidents
of violence related to the election, they have been minimal."
The Associated Press went further, claiming the real danger
facing Colombia was that Petro would push the country "dangerously
to the left" while NPR described Alvaro Uribe as "immensely
popular," and failed to mention any connection to the
massacres his government had implemented.
In
contrast, the mainstream media virtually unanimously presented the
simultaneously occurring elections in Venezuela as a travesty, the
"coronation of a dictator," according to The
Independent. Other major outlets described them as "heavily
rigged," "the fortification of a dictatorship"
and a "farce cementing autocracy." The Miami Herald
called them "fraudulent," a "sham,"
a "charade" and a "joke" in one
column alone.
There
were certainly some questionable aspects to the Venezuelan election.
However, the idea of a full-blown "sham election" was
flatly contradicted by every international election observation
organization monitoring the elections, many of whom produced detailed
reports attesting to their exemplary organization and implementation.
There were a number of prominent international observers monitoring
the 2018 elections, including former Spanish Prime Minister Jose
Zapatero, who said he "did not have any doubt about the
voting process" and the ex-President of Ecuador, Rafael
Correa, who declared the “impeccably organized” elections
proceeded with "absolute normalcy."
But you
would have been hard pressed to find any acknowledgment of this in
Western media outlets.
Source,
links:
Comments
Post a Comment