Talk:Public image of Hugo Chávez

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

top[edit]

I question the POV of this article. It seems mostly anti-Chavez, rather than "fair and balanced."


I believe tottaly the opposite, the article is very prochavez! Eva Goliner is the ONLY cited bibliography, and she is completely pro chavez —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.79.222.123 (talk) 03:58, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

no links?[edit]

What do you think about adding a sample of ten links to media coverage about chavez? Ideally group the references into camps or select representative points of view. I assume that class struggle would be the main division. {rich vs poor) I found this article (href=http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=52184) to be interesting. It contains a video link and a rebuttal to the video. A reference to The Revolution Will Not Be Televised (documentary) I think would be something you'd want to have here. (This section seems to be so well planned out that I hesitate to "jump in".) (MartinGugino 07:34, 31 March 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Outside Venezuela[edit]

Why is this article limited to media representation in Venezuela only? It could be profitably expanded. Self-Described Seabhcán 17:58, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

This article really needs some sources. I'll tag the sections in due course.--Zleitzen 23:58, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The whole thing is seriously neglected, and needs a major expansion. There is volumes of literature on the topic, and I just don't have time to get to all of it. It would be nice if some of the many other editors would construct rather than deconstruct :-) Sandy 01:01, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try and concentrate on this article over time. As it has some interest to me! --Zleitzen 01:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'll go through my sources and post anything here that might help you. I'm not good at using El Universal's Spanish search engine, though. Sandy 01:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some sources[edit]

Some items to help in your research:

Chavez controlled the air waves — even before he passed laws which gave him even more control — through cadenas; he took over the airwaves far more than any other president, and used the two government-owned stations as his own to a level never before seen in Venezuela, even before he launched the new stations to spread his "revolution". His supporters say the media was against him, but he had more control over the airwaves than Venevision, et al. through cadenas and the government media. Need sources on the cadenas, I know he had a record number.

Absurd, hours long ramblings every week on Alo Presidente, contributing to his control of air waves. This is a factor that needs to be discussed: need sources.

He has passed a series of laws which restrict criticism of him in particular and freedom of the media in general. Notice that none of the El Universal articles have reporter bylines. If you follow El Universal daily, knowing that they can't truly report and criticize, you can get a sense of the extent of the issue. Their articles are exceedingly vague, short, and you have to read between the lines or wait for the international media to report.

Naim points out that the international media wsn't paying attention (that was my sense, having recently left Venezuela); they didn't start paying attention until around the end of 2004, 2005. Now, of course, Chávez commands the media's attention daily. Juan Forero, of the NYT, was reporting, as was the BBC, and their reporting was relatively pro-Chavez early on. (During the largest protests in Venezuela's history — against Chavez, and which you can see pictures of throughout these articles — the Times ran a picture with a Forero story of *one* protestor with a flag in front of a building.) I don't understand the statements that existed in older versions of these articles about international media being against Chávez, but they were unsourced opinion.

On the other hand, Chavez has had a very effective PR machine, both domestically and abroad. I've seen numerous references to the amount he spends on US PR, would have to find sources.

General sources[edit]

There are two sources that may help you locate reliable sources: VCrisis.com on the pro-democracy side, and as I've learned from Flanker, Venezuelanalysis on the pro-Chávez side. Neither are reliable sources, but searching through their content might point you towards reliable sources. For example, VCrisis carries a reprint of an old Naim article, which gives a very good overview of the factors that led to Chavez (material that is missing in the Chavez articles) [1].

ElUniversal.com has a search engine in English and in Spanish, but I don't know the names in Spanish of the laws passed by Chavez, so I haven't searched on them.

Some of what I have at hand:

Page 9 of the Noriego Senate testimony discusses laws restricting TV stations: [2]

Amnesty International, see Freedom of expression: [3]

Human Rights Watch, Senate testimony: [4]

HRW has numerous articles about manipulation of the press, curbs on freedom of expression, and the media laws: [5]

The Shifter article is an overview: [6] It discusses the changes in laws on page 48. Foreign Policy has another overview, which discusses the media laws: [7]

Thor Halvorssen's Chavez vs. the Media: [8]

Another Halvorssen article, and responses to Halvorssen from the liberal Larry Birns and Mark Weisbrot, of cepr.net (Weisbrot and Birns are consistent Chávez defenders, Halvorssen is a critic.) [9] I have not been able to use any of the liberal rebuttal material there, because it is a letter to the editor, rather than hard news, but it will give you some leads for research.

At one point, Chavez's currency controls caused newspapers to run low on newsprint. That was a Toothaker, Christopher, Associated Press report from March 19, 2003: I don't have an online copy. The opening sentence is "President Hugo Chavez is using currency controls to limit press freedom by denying Venezuelan newspapers the dollars needed to import newsprint, a newspaper director said Wednesday. ... The government published a list this week of 6,000 imported items, such as medicine and food, that will be eligible for private dollar purchases at a date to be announced. Newsprint is not on the list, although the government says it may be in the future."

Sandy 02:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Media reports[edit]

Sandy 03:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse of cadenas[edit]

Sandy 03:50, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An overview from Veneconomy (PDF), highly-respected economic group in Venezuela. Sandy 13:25, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chavez and Mercosur on media controls: Mercosur rejects Venezuelan proposal on media. Sandy 00:17, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Chavez Tachira.jpg[edit]

Image:Chavez Tachira.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion[edit]

This article should be deleted. It's a vulgar article to defend Chavez's policies. --Andrewire (talk) 10:55, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree we shoould delete the quote backed by footnote 18 which is attributed by a Venezuelan diplomat about freedom of press and add Hugo's persecution of GlobovisionI suggest a thread on Chavez persecuting all non goverment controlled media such as Glbovision.http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/06/05/venezuela.tvstation.owner/index.html.Tannim1 (talk) 00:22, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Support by US officials[edit]

I've tried to balance attacks on Chavez with documented support for Chavez by a US official Mark Lloyd with the FCC. This has been deleted for having nothing to do with Chavez. Isn't it relevant that this leader which is strongly criticized by the US press was mentioned by name by the official in charge of "diversifying" US broacasting to balance excessive conservative content? Assuming that Lloyd is familiar with closing down radio stations and dissenting opinion by Chavez, that would be an example of Chavez policy affecting that in the US potentially, which would greatly be in favor of Chavez. BTW, Mark Lloyd is currently a blocked stub, no one is allowed to talk about Chavez and Lloyd in the same article over there. Bachcell (talk) 17:58, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Media outlets in the United States, and in other parts of the world, have consistently suggested that Hugo Chavez is a "dictator" or is "headed in that direction",[1][2] in spite of the fact that he and his party have won numerous national elections certified by international observers, and confirmed by independent international polling companies.[3] However, there is some support in the US as a federal official appointed to promote diversity in broadcasting remarked about the "democratic revolution" of the people rebelling against property owners who dominated the media in Venezuela. Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).[2] in spite of the fact that he and his party have won numerous national elections certified by international observers, and confirmed by independent international polling companies.[4] - |url=http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2009/09/137_51119.html - |title= - |accessdate=23 September 2009 - |work=Jay Ambrose - |publisher=Korea Times, Scripps Howard News Service - |date= September 2, 2009May 1, 1987}}</ref>

  1. ^ John Edwards Partners with "Glover the Chavez Lover"
  2. ^ a b Pepe Escobar Colombia: What did Interpol find in the laptops? - The Real News, May 22, 2008 (video)
  3. ^ Independent International Polls Validate Official Results
  4. ^ Independent International Polls Validate Official Results

FAIR quote[edit]

"However, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) questioned whether, in the event a television station openly supported and collaborated with coup leaders, the station in question would not be subject to even more serious consequences in the United States or any other Western nation.[1]

FAIR is a hyperpartisan, pro-Palestine, pro-Chavez source who while is generally allowed to provide facts or give unique analysis, generally mentioning their opinion or a rhetorical point by them is considered WP:UNDUE. With that reasoning I would like to remove this purely rhetorical question as it neither adds anything to the discussion and only forwards their pro-Chavez support.Wikiposter0123 23:02, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"pro-Palestine" - why didn't you say so? The horror! ... Anyway, it is a relevant counterbalance to the other points made in that section, about lots of international opinion going the other way. It would violate WP:NPOV to remove it without replacing it with something similar (perhaps from a more prominent or more acceptable source). Rd232 talk 08:13, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The problem isn't them being pro-Palestine, its being hyper-partisan. Anyway the point they make questioning whether "in the event a television station openly supported and collaborated with coup leaders, the station in question would not be subject to even more serious consequences in the United States or any other Western nation" is a total irrelevant strawman, and presenting it is not NPOV it's UNDUE.Wikiposter0123 (talk) 20:10, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"is a total irrelevant strawman" - not it isn't, and I don't see how you can claim it is, but if you do, at least try and justify the claim. PS you might want to look up straw man argument. Rd232 talk
Fair is misrepresenting the argument that everybody is making and is making a strawman of their argument and attacking that. Everybody is saying "Chavez is closing down broadcasters who disagree with him under the pretext of them having worked with coup leaders" to which Fair is responding "How would the US respond if people were working with coup leaders" which completely ignores the fact that no one believes they were actually stating they are working with coup leaders and is framing their arguments as if they were arguing "Even though they were working with coup leaders they shouldn't be shut down." This is an obvious misrepresentation of their argument which is by definition(look it up) a strawman. For future reference one of the most common ways a strawman is formed is to respond with a loaded answer that frames the question as having presumptions it doesn't (like it does here). Wikiposter0123 (talk) 17:45, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, OK, so our disagreement is really about the facts. In fact the private TV stations' support for the coup, documented at 2002_Venezuelan_coup_d'état_attempt#Media_role, is totally in keeping with their behaviour both before and after the coup (Venezuela_Media#History). More details eg here (drawing on a variety of footnoted sources); feel free to expand on the issue. If you want a single quote from that link: The LA Times recalled that [RCTV head Marcel] Granier went to the Presidential Palace to swear his loyalty to “dictator Pedro Carmona who had eliminated the Supreme Court, the National Assembly and the Constitution.” Rd232 talk 09:11, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, that's fine then. I didn't realize that they were supporting the coup. If that's the case then I have no qualms over its inclusion. Cheers. :)Wikiposter0123 (talk) 22:09, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "Coup Co-Conspirators as Free-Speech Martyrs"."

Orphaned references in Media representation of Hugo Chávez[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Media representation of Hugo Chávez's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Kraft":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 13:15, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Coatrack-ish?[edit]

The article subject is supposed to be about how the media portrayed Chavez but the actual content is almost entirely just a history of the Venezuelan media during Chavez's tenure. Any thoughts?  Mbinebri  talk ← 14:02, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Mbinebri: I didn't like this article that much and I tried to summarize it since much of the things are in more detail in other articles like 2002 Ven. coup media role section, Bolivarian propaganda, etc. The best I could find through the sources is the Venezuelan media was originally friendly with Chávez yet cautious, became aggressive after some serious scuffles with the GOV and ultimately was neutered to the point where Chávez now has a cult of personality. There are also the arguments of the 70% private media yada, yada but human rights groups say that self-censorship eventually cuts that number down greatly and the 70% should be asterisked.

Internationally, Chávez was criticized but saying it was a multinational conspiracy against him is pretty fringe worthy if this article eventually turns into that. So yes, this article is mostly a Coatrack and there is only one other "Media representation" article I have found. It just seems like this article was created without any sources in order to show how ruthless the media was to Chávez. I wouldn't miss this article if it was deleted because any political figure as large as Chávez was would have to deal with "media representation" whether they liked it or not, but theres not articles for everyone else on here.--ZiaLater (talk) 20:49, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh and my explanation for the Venezuelan government sources removed was Goumbri and Golinger. Goumbri worked for VIO and I'm pretty sure most of us know who Golinger is.--ZiaLater (talk) 04:31, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I returned some of the info you removed—your edits still appear to be downplaying the media's role in favor of the media's own explanation. You seem to have this concern that anyone even remotely connected to the government is biased and their info shouldn't be included—which is highly debatable (but no, I didn't restore Golinger or Goumbri). Flipped around, by that logic the Ven media's own explanation should be dismissed as well for likely bias.
Either way here, this all feels somewhat pointless (yet I debate content anyway). As you pointed out, this is the only article of it's kind, and if we stripped out the unrelated stuff, what would even be left? This article should probably be AfD'd.  Mbinebri  talk ← 16:52, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Mbinebri:I wasn't trying to downplay the media's role, I was just trying to slim down the section if anything because this info is in many other articles. Anyways, if you could put the article up as an AfD, I would support it since you can probably explain why it should be deleted better than I can.--ZiaLater (talk) 17:10, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 30 June 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Unopposed for over three weeks. Jenks24 (talk) 15:45, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Media representation of Hugo Chávez → Public image of Hugo Chávez – Per the standard in Category:Public image of politicians. Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 13:24, 15 July 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 20:04, 7 July 2015 (UTC) Cambalachero (talk) 18:43, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Public image of Hugo Chávez. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:43, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Public image of Hugo Chávez. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:38, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Public_image_of_Hugo_Chávez&oldid=1201647175"