It is a very simple story:
One month and eight days before the the National Assembly elections, the number one concern of the electorate is:
Crime
And as the press notes and emphasizes the fact that crime has tripled in the eleven years of Chavismo, a Judge issues the following prohibition:
“For the next four weeks, no newspaper, magazine or weekly of the country can publish images that are violent, bloody, grotesque, whether about crime or not”
This is done to protect the “psychic and moral integrity of children and adolescents”. The four weeks “temporary” protection alone should tell you how electoral this decision is.
Of course, these people have been nowhere to be seen as kids and adolescents get murdered day after day by the uncontrollable crime that Chavez and his cohorts refuse to admit as a problem, but only as plot by the opposition.
Another noose has sadly tightened around Freedom of Speech in Venezuela and in clear violation of Art. 57 of the Venezuelan Constitution, which says:
Article 57:Everyone has the right to express freely his thoughts, his ideas and opinions either spoken, in writing or through any other form of expression and be able to use to that end any media of communication and diffusion, without the possibility of establishing censorship…
Can it be any clearer than this, it is simply another act of censorship and a violation of Freedom of Speech in Venezuela?
The Devil's Excrement 
January 4, 2012 at 3:25 am
puerto prinsesa hotels puerto princesa palawan
August 23, 2010 at 6:38 am
[…] nach einer richterlichen Verfügung, die für die nächsten vier Wochen das Abbilden von “gewaltätigen, blutigen [und] grotesken” Bildern sowie Informationen über Morde und Tode, welche das Wohlbefinden von Kindern und […]
August 18, 2010 at 6:46 pm
“The noose tightens around freedom of the press”
An all too typical manuver to avoid the truth and throw up a smoke screen. Today Chavez said that all this talk from the opposition about security is part of a plot to destabilize the government. Does he really think that security is only seen as a problem by the opposition. He can’t be that stupid. Nobody can be that stupid. But I’ve been wrong before.
August 18, 2010 at 6:28 pm
“Fairness” is unachievable.
Fairness can be achieved when you have a consensual relationship and somehow all the parties involved agree that the deal is “fair”. And then they can change opinion midways. That’s the reason people draw contracts and sign them, so that they are bound by what they agreed to.
You can try to be fair, and it would be YOU striving for virtue. Don’t expect others to see you that way. Fairness in society as a whole, is a chimera, and is incompatible with freedom. It only creates excuses and pretenses for legal action that in the best of worlds is an expression of tyranny of the majority. Usually it expresses the will and whim of those in power.
When (honestly or not) you fall for “fairness” and “truthfulness” or “protection of the innocent and/or stupid”, you always finish by making easier the lives of those who govern. They will enforce their own version of “fair” and “truthful” and protect only those they deem “innocent” when it suits them.
August 18, 2010 at 6:24 pm
The fairness doctrine does not censor anyone. It gives a right to respond only, and usually in a limited manner. So it actually INCREASES the number of voices and the amount of information made public.
The prior restraint of the Venezuelan media is an attempt to prevent information from becoming public. It lessens the amount of information available, and in fact does so only to limit the government’s exposure on crime.
It is wholly undemocratic.
August 18, 2010 at 12:40 pm
Firepigette, sounds like you don’t believe “fairness” is not only unachievable, but “unfairness” should be welcomed with full glorious 12-gun solutes!
August 18, 2010 at 9:38 am
One common factor authoritarians use to excuse themselves to the public, is calling on false ethics whether it be equal opportunities( fairness doctrine in the media) or the protection of the innocent.Many who are prone to a false sense of guilt( stemming from a sneaky desire to look good in the eyes of others), will kowtow to these authoritarian calls.
Here in the US many hate Fox News and all the wildly popular radio talk show hosts, as well as anyone who listens to these “unapproved” sources of news.That in itself is okay.We are entitled to our feelings.But there is so much propaganda on this issue with the intention of silencing opposition, that even conservatives are afraid to admit watching Fox News in many circles.
MSNBC’s Ed Schultz has been calling for the “Fairness Doctrine,” because he wants government to level the playing field
Sounds like Mr. Schultz would be VERY comfortable living in Venezuela…
Remember that we need the guaranty of equal opportunity ,AND FREEDOM TO EXPRESS, but nobody but an authoritarian can guarantee an equal result!
August 18, 2010 at 7:34 am
[…] Devil's Excrement The noose tightens around Freedom of the Press in VenezuelaStray bullet was “isolated” incident. How about this one?The Picture by Teodoro PetkoffTal Cual […]
August 18, 2010 at 7:06 am
OT:
The World’s Best Countries as per NewsWeek:
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/15/interactive-infographic-of-the-worlds-best-countries.html
Venezuela:
Education – 48/100
Health – 42/100
Quality of Life – 61/100
Economic Dynamism – 100/100
Political Environment – 77/100
Overall – 71/100
We are absolute last in Economic Dynamism.
August 18, 2010 at 4:59 am
Time to pull out the sarcasm. Such as “he was ‘kissed’ and then expired. And you should find a creative way to illustrate the violent crime also.
Of course, challenging the ruling will require COURAGE and SACRIFICE. I haven’t heard of too many opposition leaders with the courage or willing to sacrifice.