ANA MARÍA HERNÁNDEZ G.
EL UNIVERSAL

The near future for the domestic media is neither clear nor optimist. This is what can be speculated about the words of Andrés Cañizález, professor and researcher with the Communication Research Center (CIC), Andrés Bello Catholic University, and a member of the editorial staff, Communication magazine, edited by Gumilla Center.

As the rescission of the broadcast license for private TV channel Radio Caracas Televisión (RCTV) is just a few days away, Cañizalez has issued an opinion as specialist both in politics and hot spots related to freedom of expression.

Q: How long has freedom of expression being a subject matter at CIC?

A: A guideline entitled "Political communication and freedom of expression" was implemented two years ago. It is clear for us that the issue of communication and the media was and will continue being for quite a long while the centerpiece of political talks, in addition, of course, to freedom of expression.

Q: What is the opinion of the students of information media on these subject matters in the classroom?

A: I feel widespread concern about the country. Students do not view freedom of expression as detached from ongoing events. There is the case of RCTV; the unification of a single political party intended to obliterate anybody who dare think otherwise; a constitutional reform is being discussed secretly, without citizens' participation; there is a whole process to speed up the 21st century socialism. Students feel that the rules of the game are changing. I can see a critical mass. Obviously, many students fear to take part in any event that may make them prominent. Do not forget the underlying effect of the Tascón role. Most people beware of signing anything because they think that the government can retaliate against them.

Q: What is the procedure to study freedom of expression?

A: Unfortunately, as far as I am concerned, not systematically in the schools of information media. This issue is associated only to the juridical, legal scope; yet it should be also a question of citizen empowerment. Everybody understands that, regardless of any law, they have the right to law. This right is taken for granted. This should be the case also of freedom of expression.

Q: Is there any thesis on these topics?

A: Yes. Over the last few years, I have acted as tutor of four theses which explored multiple issues related to freedom of expression. There is concern indeed, but also I can say that sometimes I have perceived fear in journalism students. Some in the classroom take an active part and discuss a few issues. But whenever I ask them to prepare a thesis in this regard, they answer: "No way, teacher. I need to find a job eventually." The State is growing a lot in terms of communication and many students are likely to be retained by the State. Therefore, they think that delving into burning matters could result in reprisals.

Q: What are the professional expectations of future journalists?

A: This is part of what many students consider. They wonder about the labor market, because they find that the government has a higher profile in some areas. Telesur bought CMT, resulting in layoff of dozen people who were not reabsorbed by Telesur. When students realize that a major media outlet in Venezuela, such as RCTV, with a significant payroll of 3,000 employees is to be punished by the government, then, they fear that it will make an impact on the labor market for journalists.

Q: How does CIC views the case of RCTV and its transformation into anything else?

A: There is a whole assumption handled by the government. They claim that it is not closure; that they are just not granting a broadcast license; that the company may continue operations. There are quite a few legal tricks over this speech. Underlying this discussion there is the attempt at punishing a business group that has kept a critical stance. The government is not discussing the license for Venevisión, official TV channel 8 or some hundred radio stations. It seems that the only license next to expire is that for RCTV. I wonder if that decision will result in a better television, which is one of the government allegations. I wonder why this promise of public service television has not been made over the past few years for channel 8, Vive TV or Asamblea Nacional TV. Why do they have to shut the signal of channel 2 to turn it into a public service signal? Is it that the State does not own additional signals, where it could implement such project?

Q: Have you assessed this effect on the public?

A: No, we have not. According to the surveys conducted by pollster Datanálisis, the public opinion is divided indeed. Since it is an unprecedented case in the country and we have undergone a number of situations that have affected freedom of expression, but still have the media we are acquainted with, I think that people are not keenly aware yet of the outcome. We are facing the most dramatic shift in the history of the media in Venezuela. As far as I am concerned, the RCTV case is not the arrival point but the departure point. You can see international condemnation, any remarks, every day, but the government does not give a damn. Once the government implements this decision, no matter the high political cost, what can you expect for remaining, less powerful media outlets? Such a decision is sending the rest of the media a very clear signal -either they get in line with the government or might be taken off the air. The independent media are clearly at risk of being the next after RCTV.

Q: Just to speculate about where we are going under the 21st century socialism, how do the media in socialist societies look like?

A: In China, for instance, there is much trade opening, but not in the media, which continue being managed by the state. In the so-called socialist or communist societies, such as Cuba, Vietnam or China, there is hegemonic control of the media and communications. As a matter of fact, there are no private media there. The media are a strictly state issue.

Q: There cannot be freedom of expression in this way.

A: Of course not. Freedom of expression is related to diversity. This is the point at issue with the single party. If eight minor political parties remain to support the President, there will be eight points of view. When the President says, 'It does not work for me,' he is finishing off debate and diversity. This is the case of the media. The State says, 'I am the only one who has the monopoly on what is being informed and said.' Diversity is over. I can hardly imagine global nationalization of the media. However, I do envisage a progressive situation where the State will constrain some independent media by means of spots apportionment, monitoring by (the Integrated National Customs and Tax Administration Service) Seniat, Social Security. The government will put them in a tight corner and make it difficult for them. Some media outlets in Venezuela will pay it dearly for being independent.

Translated by Conchita Delgado
cdelgado@eluniversal.com