Will NPR do an anti-fascists/anti-neoliberal story on Venez.? Not today.

[AP]

Venezuelan Opposition Seeks Recall Vote on Chavez

Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez will likely face a recall referendum this summer. Opposition groups have apparently collected and confirmed the required two-and-a-half-million signatures, a process more than a year in the making. If Chavez defeats the referendum and stays in office, the petition will leave an awkward legacy. As NPR's Martin Kaste reports, the Chavez government now knows the names and ID numbers of millions of its opponents.

http://www.npr.org/rundowns/rundown.php?prgDate=07-Jun-2004&prgId=2

The government published a list of the names in dispute (only the ones for which there was some indication that they might be fraudulent) so that people would know if their names were listed as yes voters for the referendum and could remove themselves from the list if they wanted to (78,000 ended up removing their names from the list.)

How else would you have any idea that your name was on the list? OK, I guess they could have tried to send letters to all one million, but the point was that government DIDN'T believe the people whose namese they published wanted to remove Chavez (a point which Kaste doesn't make).

Kaste says they can't prove any of their anecdotes of discrimination are because of the list, but the perception is strong. He saves that nugget for about 1/2 way through the story.

About 3/4 the way through they have the sole, short quote from the chavez government (listen to the very different tone the translator uses for that quote). But the tone of the report is that Chavez sucks.

A couple days ago I posted a comment about CBC's interview with an opposition leader and former Vene. energy minister. Today they had the listener's comments and listeners did NOT like that piece of propaganda.

I hope NPR gets and earlful from their listeners.

[dumpster_baby]

1. I'm afraid your point is not too clear

at least not to me....

[AP]

2. NPR is blatanly hostile to Chavez, & is blatantly sympathetic towards the

fascists and neoliberals who are trying to defeat Chavez.

This story was not very journalistically rigorous.

CBC did the same thing the other day and callers complained.

I hope callers complain about NPR.

Claro?

[redqueen]

7. I hope people are calling about this as well

NPR needs to hear our voices. If we don't demand the truth, why should they care if their work is sloppy (or worse)?

[AP]

8. Here's my letter to the ombudsman:

<[e-mail]>

Starting a couple months before the coup in Venezuela in April 2002, I noticed that NPR's coverage of the Venezuelan politics tended to lean towards the skeptical, pro-neoliberal (ie, the oil companies could do no wrong, and Hugo Chavez could do nothing right).

In the last few days, since it has become apparent that there will be a recall election, I've noticed that NPR is stepping it up again. Martin Kaste's report last night made me think NPR is getting back in the swing of cheerleading for neoliberalism in Venezuela (which, incidentally, I find they do everywhere else).

I find the bias in Kaste's piece fairly self-evident, so I'll just draw the broad strokes here. Kaste was reporting on the recall repair process. The whole reason they had the repair process was because 800,000 signatures (if I recall correctly) came off "walk lists" during the first referendum. The opposition begged for walk lists so they could get people who were in hospitals, they said. Everyone else had to sign the petition at a polling station, where they had computers and witnesses and staff.

Well, the walk lists came in and, unlike the station lists, they had tons of evidence of fraud -- missing ID numbers, similar handwriting, names of dead people. So both sides agreed to a repair process. Part of that process was that people could REMOVE their names from the lists (80,000 did remove their names). Now, how do you tell people their names are on the list (especially if it's due to fraud and they'd have no idea their name was there in the first place) if you want to give them a chance to remove it? You have to publish the list.

Kaste didn't provide any of this background information. Furthermore, he interviewed several people who said they felt they were discriminated against because their names were on the published list. Only after hearing about their allegations at length does Kaste admit that there's no evidence of bias other than what these people are saying. He waits until two-thirds of the way through the report to point out that he's not really going to do an investigative journalism in this piece and that he's only going to tell you what people think.

(And I should note there's a basic logical inconsistency here: the government published these names because they believe they were fraudulently put on the lists. The government believes none of these people wanted their names on the list. If I understand what I've read from non-NPR, non-New York Times sources, the names on the repair list are only there if there was some evidence of fraud, like they were written in the same handwriting as blocks and blocks of names.)

Another thing about Kaste's report that bothered me -- and I've noticed this in other NPR reports -- is this: when an NPR reporter wants to convey sympathy with a person who speaks a foreign language, the translator speaks sympathetically. When the reporter wants to indicate they don't like a foreign language speaker, the translator sounds like an ass. Kaste has a single quote from a Spanish-speaking representative of the government and the translator speaks in the same tone and speed they use in the Viagra adds when they're reading the warnings:"maycausecerebralhemorhageforerectionslastingmorethanfourhoursconsultadoctorimediately."

I know the New York Times has had to fire their Venezuela stringer because of close ties to the opposition. Listening to Martin Kaste makes me wonder if he's under the same influences.

I'd be grateful if you'd look into this.

I'd also be grateful if NPR would stop being such a cheerleader for neoliberalism (and if you can't find it in yourselves to do that, then at least you could wear your biases on your sleeve the way that Fox does, which is much more ethical than trying to hide them behind journalism like Kaste's, or like that sill piece I heard on ATC last night about the wife whose husband wants to turn down the heat and save water, but she thinks it's enough to support him other ways, and she'll still be turning the heat up and taking long showers.)

Thanks,
AP

[Az]

3. Um they just did a big peace on the list

They covered the harm the list is doing because how the government is using it to blacklist people from jobs.

Listen here: http://www.npr.org/rundowns/rundown.php?prgId=2&prgDate=current 3/4 down the page article Venezuelan Opposition Seeks Recall Vote on Chavez

[AP]

4. They actually said there's no evidence that the list is being used that...

..way.

They just broadcast what people were saying and then let themselves off the hook. They didn't follow up to see if it was true.

Listen to the report. They spend 2/3rds of the story telling these stories before they admit they're not talking to anyone else about it except the people making the claim.

Also, as I said, the story leaves out some important information.

The whole reason they had a list was because 800,000 (IIRC- not 1 million) signatures came off "walk lists." The opposition begged for walk lists so they could get people who were in hospitals, they said. Everyone else had to sign the petition at a polling station, where they had computers and witnesses and staff.

Well, the walk lists came in and, unlike the sation lists, they had tons of evidence of fraud -- missing ID numbers, similar handwriting, names of dead people.

So both sides agreed to a repair process. Part of that process was that people could REMOVE their names from the lists.

Now, how do you tell people their names are on the list (due to fraud) if you want to give them a chance to remove it? You have to publish the list.

Now the names you are publishing are names of people you believe never wanted to be on the list in the first place.

The NPR story didn't give ANY of this background information.

Don't you wonder why?

[Az]

5. Perhaps not as detailed as you would like

But it was not friendly to those abusing the list. It certainly got more coverage than CNN or MSNBC are throwing it.

[AP]

6. There were two sides to that story, and NPR told one.

And I repeat, they didn't find any evidence that people were abusing the list other than the claims of people who felt they were being discriminated against. The reporter, Martin Kaste, even said in the report that there's no evidence that any of this is true. He said that long after he let everyone make their claims.