|
The
easiest way to understand the institutional bias of western media is to
analyze reporting from the developing world. The economic summit in Mar
Del Plata, Argentina, provides an excellent opportunity to evaluate the
coverage and decide whether such partiality exists.
Although
tens of thousands of working people came to protest George Bush and his
suspiciously-named “free trade” economic policies; they were invariably
smeared by the corporate media as “Leftists” or “radicals”; eliminating
the possibility that they were simply concerned citizens participating
in the democratic process. This is the familiar tactic of the media to
marginalize ordinary people whose interests don’t correspond to those
of the ruling elite.
“Latin America’s radical leftists took to
the streets on Friday,” Jack Chang breathlessly reported for Knight
Ridder, but all the other news outlets invoked the same disparaging
language.
The main target at the event was Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, a
leader who is invariably slandered by the media with the monikers
“leftist firebrand”, “radical president” (Financial Times) or fiery,
populist president (NY Times). At some point in every article, Chavez
is lumped together with Fidel Castro or Che Guevara in a conspicuous
attempt to dismiss him as an anti-American troublemaker. In fact,
Chavez was among the first countries to come to America’s aid following
Hurricane Katrina, offering doctors, medicine and oil to the devastated
region. No major media source publicly credited him for his charitable
contributions.
Chavez, of course, is guilty of redistributing some of Venezuela’s
prodigious oil wealth to the poor and needy of his country. This has
made him an imminent threat to the entrenched oligarchy and their
teammates in the media.
“We are creating a great political body in the south, and not only
geographically,” Chavez opined. “This is the great task of our region,
to create a consensus of ‘the south’ that will bring better lives to
all our people.”
Chavez’s innocuous comments were vilified in most of the reports as
inciting anti-Americanism or, worse still, “subverting democracy in his
country”. (Knight Ridder) In fact, it is the rising tide of democracy
in South America that has Washington so concerned. Chavez has captured
the imagination of the common man and is pointing to a way out of the
neoliberal policies that have kept Washington’s boot placed firmly on
neck of southern hemisphere economies for 20 years.
“We’ve come to bury FTAA,” Chavez roared to the capacity crowd. “I even brought a shovel”.
The Venezuelan president’s remarks were enthusiastically applauded by
the thousands in the crowd who chanted back, “Fascist Bush, You are the
terrorist”.
Chavez was flanked by antiwar activist Cindy Sheehan and former
footballer Diego Maradona. Maradona added to Chavez’s stinging
repudiation of free trade by calling Bush, “human rubbish.” (This was
only reported in one outlet; the Australian based News.com) Like many
Argentines, Maradono believes that the US policies precipitated
Argentina’s economic meltdown which left 40% of the population living
in poverty.
Most of the articles failed to report this crucial fact which
contextualizes the negative sentiment that many in the south feel for
America. It has nothing to do with the “fiery oratory” of Chavez, but a
clear grasp of the devastating effects of US free trade policies.
The majority of Latin Americans are now opposed to the creation of a
free trade region in the Americas. They are also against the repayment
of the foreign debt and the growing threat of US militarization. They
are increasingly frustrated with the increasing disparity of wealth
between rich and poor as well as with rising unemployment.
Again, none of these factors has anything to do with Chavez who is mistakenly held responsible for inciting hatred of America.
Chavez has, however, been a unifying figure who has shared his oil
wealth with other countries in the region and created an alternate
economic model, Mercosur, which challenges the US’s dominance in the
hemisphere. It was a stunning blow to the Bush team when free trade
loyalist Vicente Fox announced at the summit that Mexico would be
joining Mercosur.
Chavez’s comments only added insult to injury:
“The planet is being destroyed under our own noses by the capitalist
model, the destructive engine of development. Every day there is more
hunger, more misery, thanks to the neo-liberal, capitalist model.”
The rejection of FTAA is a mainstream position emerging from the
political awakening of the people themselves. Simply put, the methods
applied by the Washington Consensus have been tried and have failed
rather spectacularly. The new majority doesn’t want to “destroy local
industry, roll back social safety nets and labor protections”, destroy
the environment, or prolong America’s supremacy in the region.
“We have come to bury FTAA because it’s an old project of the imperial
eagle that from the beginning planned to sink its claws into Latin
America,” said Chavez.
The media coverage of the summit obscured the details that would have
provided the necessary background for understanding the rage at Bush’s
appearance. The event was framed as a “showdown” between Chavez and
Bush. Even on this superficial level the corporate media demonstrated
its deftness at tip-toeing around what really took place. As Reuters
pointed out, the strutting Texan, who exudes confidence and courage
behind a phalanx of security guards and concertina wire, “carefully
avoided” Chavez while the world waited with baited-breath.
“Carefully avoided”!?!
“This summit is not about Hugo Chavez,” one Bush advisor said defensively. “This is not news.”
But, of course, it is news. And, when the word gets out that the
boastful Bush slinked out of Argentina rather than face his arch-rival,
it will be very big news indeed.
* * * * *
Mike lives in Washington State with his charming wife Joan and two spoiled and overfed dogs, Cocoa and Pat-Fergie.
This article appears courtesy of Opednews.com.
|
