Media Falls Short on Iraq, Venezuela

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=45&ItemID=5643
The opposition accused President Chavez of trying to illegitimately deny the people's right to a referendum, and the press here has overwhelmingly echoed this theme. But some vital facts were omitted from the story: the disputed signatures were in violation of the electoral rules, and could legitimately have been thrown out altogether. Furthermore, these rules -- requiring signers to fill out their own name, address and other information -- were well-known to organizers on both sides and publicized in advance of the signature gathering process. [1] These rules are also common in the United States, including California.

Even worse than most news stories on Venezuela are the editorials of major newspapers, where factual errors have become commonplace. The Washington Post has accused Chavez of holding political prisoners and having "muzzled the press," [3] and referred to the Electoral Commission as "Mr. Chavez' appointees." [4] All of these allegations are incontestably false.

According to the U.S. State Department, "There [are] no reports of political prisoners in Venezuela." [5] And far from being "muzzled," the press in Venezuela is one of the most furiously partisan anti-government medias in the entire world. Two months ago one of Venezuela's most influential newspapers actually used a doctored version of a New York Times' article to allege that the Chavez government was implicated in the Madrid terrorist bombing!

Of course Venezuela has rarely been front page news, unlike Iraq. But our government's involvement there has already caused considerable damage and could well push the country to civil war -- especially if our media continues to go along for the ride.