Rare Praises for NPR

I was going to write about yesterday's deceitful and stupid report on the CIA by Pamela Hess of the AP (Media Bloodhound and Left I on the News often expose the AP for being the lazy rebroadcaster of US government propaganda that it is) or Juan Forero's (the reporter who couldn't read straight) pro bono work this morning for the owners of Venezuelan plantations (farms in Forero-speak) or Inskeep's coffee-clutch against the public health insurance option with the PR man for Wellpoint the parent company of a foundation that just happens to be one of NPR's biggest annual donors (hint: it's the California Endowment).

(From NPR's 2005 [most recent] Annual Report -PDF file)

But heck, it's summer and let's give credit where credit is due. First to Robert Siegel (there I said it!) who, on Monday's ATC, presented the Alito remarks about empathy as a counter to the attacks on Sotomayor's remarks about empathy. Siegel was interviewing the twittering Chuck Grassley of Iowa and confronted him with the Alito statements AND even asked a few follow-ups when Grassley tried to squirm out of making a complete ninny of himself. It was delicious.

More importantly, this morning Peter Kenyon actually covered the story of the 25 IDF soldiers who have documented the systematic war crimes of Operation Cast Lead. NPR actually sent a reporter on the ground in Gaza and talked to a Gazan who lost his parents to Israeli shooters in a case similiar to one related by an Israeli soldier. Several commenters on the web site of the story thanked NPR for reporting this - one who summed it up well as a commendable "baby step."

Agent Forero Checks In

On Independence Day Guy Raz asked Juan Forero why Honduran President Zelaya was overthrown in a coup. Forero answered,

[His] "term is supposed to end in January, but Zelaya is allied with President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and other left leaning leaders in Latin America that have found ways to change their constitutions to stay in power...."

By "found ways", I think Forero means that evil, leftist ploy of free and fair elections.

This morning was even worse. Ignoring the coup government's shooting of unarmed demonstrators (no Neda here), ignoring Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch reports of School of Americas™ style repression, Forero spends almost the entire Monday morning broadcast featuring apologists and supporters of the coup. Here is a sample of statements that Forero made this morning:

• "...here though, rallies, complete with vendors and folk music, celebrate the ouster."
• "...foes justify the coup by pointing to what had been his increasingly friendly alliance with leftists Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. To them it signaled a dark turn."
• "...he says Zelaya would have practically handed over his rule to Chavez."
• "...an almost irrational fear of Chavez had gripped the country and that was what drove lawmakers, the courts, and the military to conspire against Zelaya."
• "...the last straw came late in June."
• "...the first step toward a power grab" [of Zelaya not the coup leaders].

Forerovision - NPR Keeps the Focus on Venezuela

I'm not going to defend every action of the Chavez government in Venezuela - reports of harassment of journalists and the narrowing of press freedoms in Venezuela deserve some attention. But one has to wonder who sets the agenda at NPR and Juan Forero's obsessive focus on Venezuela - a focus that mirrors US government perspectives on Venezuela [similar problems exist with human rights reporting on Venezuela].

If one considers the critiques of Venezuela by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), they appear serious and deserving of some news coverage. However, a glance at the CPJ's page parallel page on Colombia is eye-opening to say the least - many cases of government persecution of journalists, and a ranking of 5th worst in the world for unpunished killings of journalists. If you look at Forero's NPR coverage of journalism in Venezuela you'll see a focus on government restrictions, whereas his coverage of the same topic in Colombia has nothing about the problem - and in fact features one one story touting the amazing Colombian military and one alleging ties between Chavez and the FARC!

This morning Forero - regular Chavez critic and past apologist for Colombian death squads - was at it again, focusing on the Chavez government's campaign against the right-wing TV channel, Globovison. The report is unstintingly critical of Chavez; Inskeep introduces it, claiming that

"the president is threatening to close it down, which has press freedom groups raising questions about the future of democracy in the highly polarized country."

Forero explains that

"since taking power over a decade ago, President Hugo Chavez has had a thing about Globovision"

noting (as he does in his mirror piece in the WaPo) that Globovision's reporters have been "refused access to official functions." Forero's report features critics of Chavez; Carlos Lauria of CPJ states that "this is an attack against freedom of expression," while Globovision's news director, Ravel, claims that one can still say what one wants, but "you risk your life, your concession." Finally, Forero closes out his report by noting that Ravel "says that covering the news in Venezeula these days can carry serious consequences."

Forero does give the slightest nod to the fact that there is a context to this "thing about Globovision" that Chavez has: "Globovision did black-out coverage of a counter-coup that put Chavez back in power - the station also gave favorable coverage to Chavez foes, but investigations of Globovision's alleged role went nowhere and no one at the station was charged in the overthrow." Forero's brief aside minimizes the role of private media such as Globovision in supporting the coup, a role that - as McChesney and Weisbrot point out in an article on RCTV - would not be tolerated by any government.

Finally, Forero's report is noticeable for the lack of any real critics of Globovision's activities or it's role in helping to make Venezuela the "highly polarized" country that Inskeep refers to.

Going Nowhere with Juan Forero

This morning Juan Forero was on the anti-Chavez beat for the second day in a row. On Saturday he runs a fine CIA-inspired piece about how anti-democratic the Chavez government and its supporters are. This morning he was beating the drum again, but with a twist. In the piece, we hear Chavez supporters chanting "Oooh, aaah, Chavez no se va!" and Forero claims that it translates to "Oooh, aaah, Chavez is going nowhere!"

My Spanish is not fluent, but it is adequate - and I'm confident that "no se va" never means "going nowhere." An accurate translation would be "Chavez is not going away" or "Chavez is not abandoning [the struggle]."

It's no secret that Juan Forero works very hard to discredit and misinform listeners about the situation in South America, but I was surprised that he would employ such an easily discredited mistranslation to forward his agenda. I mean it's not like the mistranslation of Ahmadinejad's Farsi statement about Israel's Zionist government "vanishing from the pages of time" being stated as "wiping Israel off the map" - where hardly anyone in the US speaks Farsi. There are millions of people in the US who speak Spanish fluently and millions of others who know enough Spanish to catch such a crude mistranslation as Forero employs.

Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to matter how inaccurate and misleading Juan Forero's "reporting" for NPR is, he definitely "no se va" - Que lastima [What a pity.]

Related update: Last week I posted on Forero's nasty piece alledging how anti-Semitic the Chavez government is. I won't be holding my breath for a correction, now that the case has been solved - with aggressive action by the Chavez goverment.

Get Chavez

FAIR has an illuminating study recently published showing the huge disparity in US Newspaper coverage of human rights in Venezuela and Colombia over the past 10 years. Their findings show that in spite of Colombia having an "appalling" human rights record - horrific compared to Venezuela's shortcomings - the US press coverage focuses almost exclusively on Venezuela and Hugo Chavez. Like the US Newspapers, NPR has a thing about focusing on Venezuela and Chavez and their main man for such assignments is Juan Forero.

Forero - always happy to push the State Department or CIA narrative on Latin America - is on this morning to portray the Chavez government as dangerously antisemitic.

Forero notes that despite Chavez' denunciation of the recent synagogue vandalism "questions are being raised over whether the government's recent language against Israel is creating a climate of hate. In January Chavez broke relations with Israel over that country's military strikes against Gaza. He called Israel's actions genocidal and expelled Israeli diplomats." Of course Forero doesn't note that Israel's violent actions against Palestinians fit the legal definition of genocide: "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group."

Forero purports that Chavez's remarks have had "an aggressive tone" "that borders on antisemitic." Forero sneers that in the past Chavez claimed the 2002 coup against him was "hatched by the CIA and Israel's secret service Mossad" and "claimed the gunmen that day were Jewish." Now what kind of nutbar would claim Israel's involvement in genocidal and rightwing Latin American governments. He also fails to mention that a prominent Venezuelan rabbi was present with the coup leaders in the immediate aftermath of the coup.

Forero closes his piece with this chestnut: Andreas (a Holocaust survivor) "knew exactly what the ramifications were. He's a Romanian Jew who survived the Holocaust and then came to Venezuela..." Ah yes, the Chavez denunciations of Israel's slaughter of Palestinians caused the antisemitic attack on the synagogue and it's like Kristalnacht all over again!

Like Oil for Chocolate

It's not enough that our own rotten economy is hammering folks at home, NPR (like the Miami Herald) is very excited that dropping oil prices might hurt their favorite bogey man, Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez.

Montagne begins the report by gleefully stating that Venezuela's "oil based economy is highly vulnerable to instability in the oil markets, so the recent drop in oil prices...is likely to hit Venezuela [pause] HARD."

Then Juan Forero, sounding positively jazzed at he possibility, jumps in with "...the sharp drop in the price of oil...may whipsaw Venezuela harder than most oil producers." As the Borev.net piece on the Miami Herald article notes many, many economists have weighed in on Venezuela's generally good economic health. Borev.net cites Reuters and Bloomberg articles among others, but Forero limits his consultations to...guess who?...enemies of Chavez.

Forero talks to "Robert Bottome [who] runs the VenEconomia newsletter in Caracas...he says low oil prices could end Venezuela's free spending ways..." Then we hear Bottome claim that for the past 5 years "we've had a consumption-led expansion of the economy but no investment." No investment? Really? Even a recent critical CFR report notes significant social investment, while spotlighting a lack of investment back into the state controlled oil company, PDVSA. Facts be damned, Forero just reasserts Bottome's claim and says "that lack of investment also means Venezuela relies almost solely on oil for export earnings." (Of course Forero doesn't mention Bottome's brother who is a big-wig of the pro-coup RCTV in Venezuela.)

Forero has to admit some reality in his piece, noting that "economic analysts agree that the economic crisis will not hit Venezuela soon...but those same analysts say the government has not shown it's about to slow spending." With that sly admission he quickly turns for more critical "analysis" to Chavez critic Ramon Espinasa who "stepped down as PDVSA's chief economist when Chávez took office in 1999."

It's kind of funny to have NPR working away down in South America, keen on a "story" about an administration that has championed a "consumption-led expansion" while woefully ignoring infrastructure and long-term investments. Seems to me that story might just be a little closer to home than anyone there wants to admit.

Joker Discusses Race Card

Bolivia is voting in a presidential and governorship recall vote and Juan Forero is there. Seabrook insists on telling us how to view the vote in Bolivia: "The referendum has exposed sharp divisions in Bolivia between those who support the President's socialist agenda and those who worry he's concentrating too much power in his own hands."

O.K., I'm sorry that's just too simplistic. She doesn't give any indication that Morales' administration is also opposed by the extremely wealthy and reactionary and racist elites in Bolivia who fear losing their right to exploit the indigenous poor for their own gain. No doubt that there are fears among the middle class of Bolivia that Morales is seeking too much power and is indifferent to their interests. A much better description of the situation is available from the Democracy Center blog; it also has better reporting on the results.

Seabrook does ask Forero, "And I understand race also plays a role?"

Given the really appalling racism of the opposition [on vivid display in May of this year], this is an important question (Imagine the coverage that such racist thuggery would garner if it were employed by Morales - or Chavez in Venezuela). Now take a look at Forero's duplicitous answer:

"It does. The government is very much allied with indigenous groups here....There is certainly an element of race in a lot of this, in this crisis among the two sides here because many opposition leaders - though not all - are of European extraction. But some analysts also say that Morales has been using the race card to sow divisions and paint his foes as racists - in other words delegitmize their concerns."

It's quite a performance really. It's not racism; it's just "because many opposition leaders - though not all - are of European extraction." Chew on that one for a while... And then not only does Forero minimize the racism of the opposition, he pulls out the ubiquitous "some analysts" to blame Morales for "using the race card." Scary.

For more leftist (and funny and irreverent) analysis on the situation it's hard to beat Borev.net.

Waterboy for Empire and Oil

Several readers were ticked off at this morning's Venezuela report on NPR. I want to look closer at this report because I found it interesting for how incredibly hard Inskeep worked to get Forero to spin the story to the right, and how - to my surprise - Forero resisted, and actually seemed to try to do a decent job. Readers of this blog know I'm no fan of Forero, but consider the interchange:

Inskeep: "This is May Day, International Workers Day, not a huge holiday in the United States, but a big one in socialist countries."
(Spoken like a wannabe Fox in NPR clothing!)

Forero: "...nationalization, not a seizing of property, but rather the state exerting control over it resources...multinationals that came here years ago...lured by what was considered very low royalty rates, virtually no taxes....Chavez has seen these companies rack up record profits...Venezuela should get a bigger and bigger piece of the pie. In this way he’s not all that different from Putin and...or from other governments around the world..."
(I think Forero is actually trying to normalize the actions of Venezuela and put it in the context of the predatory practices of the multinationals. Now watch where Inskeep tries to take it.)

Inskeep: "...the oil companies get to stay...they are essentially put on notice they could be kicked out at any time, is that right?" (Well Steve, if you are a tool of the oil companies that's right.)

Forero: "Well, they’re not really..." He then points out that they are taking 60% controlling interest in oil projects.

Inskeep: "Could any of this affect the oil supply to the United States?" (Inskeep plays the fear card.)

Forero: "Chavez blames the US for trying to oust him in a coup a few years back..." (This is the worst part of Forero's report. It's not just a matter of "blame;" the US did back the coup-and the mainstream press in the US too). Then Forero makes a great point, "Venezuela is interested in sowing the oil, as they call it here, and so what they want to do is spend it on social programs: literacy programs, health care, and so on..." (He reports this as a decent, reasonable goal, and then Inskeep - like Dick Cheney's wooden dummy - comes back with what follows).

Inskeep: "Could some of this money be used to spread Venezuela’s power through the region and effectively cause trouble for the United States. " (Unbelievable. Even Forero can't go there and points out that Inskeep's position is the Bush viewpoint.)

The Real Thing

"Colombia has been one of the largest recipients of US military aid for well over a decade and the largest in the western hemisphere....Yet torture, massacres, 'disappearances' and killings of non-combatants are widespread and collusion between the armed forces and paramilitary groups continues to this day." - Amnesty International USA

"But once Plan Colombia was being fully implemented in 2002 and 2003, the situation in Colombia improved dramatically.....Plan Colombia did not magically save Colombia, but it did provide vital support to Bogota at a critical and lonely time in its war against narco-terrorists and drug traffickers....And all of this has been accomplished without sacrificing adherence to human rights principles, as happened at times during the Cold War." - Russell Crandall

This morning NPR had two stories on Colombia and neither dealt with the documented truth that the US policy in Colombia has created a human rights hell there. NPR's first piece featured the slippery Juan Forero telling us how Uribe, the current President of Colombia, "came into office in this country at a time when the government was teetering...buffeted by violence, drugs, by Marxist guerrillas..." He conveniently leaves out that the Colombian government itself was the major perpetrator of violence and that its paramilitaries were heavily involved in the drug trade.

The second story involves an interview with Russell Crandall, a scholar who is a participant for one of sides in the armed struggle in Colombia! Imagine if a university professor was a paid consultant for the FARC in Colombia and was brought on as a scholar and expert...and yet this tool of the Pentagon is trotted out for our edification.

Needless to say NPR doesn't even touch the ugly story of the US government support for drug trafficking, the irony of "anti-drug" Bush returning to the likely source of his alleged coke dabblings, or the sordid business of that other Coke in Colombia. That would be just a little to much of the real thing and we all know what happens to journalists who go down that road.

Wrong Juan Forero, Guajira Wrong Juan Forero

I could use one of those 20,000 Cuban doctors that were mentioned in Juan Forero's piece on Morning Edition yesterday - because NPR is killing me! The unsavory (spooky?) Forero spends his three minutes of reporting on the tiny minority of Cuban medical workers who have defected from their assignments in Venezuela in "recent years."

Guess what? I'm actually more interested in hearing from the 20,000 doctors who are not trying to get to the US. What are they doing? How is it affecting the health of the Venezuelans? Do they like their work? What do they think of Castro, Chavez, the US?

It's really amazing to live in this country where medical care is such an insurance racket and so devoid of wholistic attitudes--and then to hear Forero zero in on such an agenda-driven non-story as the one he produced. You've got to wonder what organization he's really working for...

*Apologies to fans of "Guantanamera," I just couldn't resist.

Of Pawns and Corn

Today Juan Forero is back talking about Chavez and Lourdes Garcia-Navarro discussing Felipe Calderon. The reporting is thin on substance and heavy on opinion. Forero says, that Chavez, "painted the opposition as pawns of the evil Bush administration and that has worked." It'd be great if we actually got some factual investigation into the the Bush/US backing of the coup and they way in which the opposition was used as pawns by the National Endowment for Democracy. Just so listeners don't miss the point, Debbie Elliott says, "Chavez has been trying to position himself as the heir to Fidel Castro..."

On to Mexico, Garcia-Navarro - talking to people complaining about tortilla prices - says, "They were all blaming the government; it's the easiest target. And the left which lost the presidential elections has been using this issue to great advantage...they say this wouldn't have happened if Mexico wasn't importing about a quarter of its corn from the United States. They blame...NAFTA for destroying the Mexican countryside. Under NAFTA, it has to be said, Mexico shed about 30% of its farm jobs." Navarro could have given these complaints even more context by noting that it's not just Mexican leftists who hold such opinions - much of the world (see these IRC, NYT, or CSM articles), including the respected organization Oxfam, have noted the ruin that Calderon type policies have brought to rural Mexico.

NPR does a great service to multinational corporations and US neoliberal foreign policy by presenting the critiques of such policy as nothing more than leftist complaint and opinion, instead of the reasonable, reality-based opposition to policies that are making a few very rich and many very poor.

Selective Justice

In the run-up to the war in Iraq, a conservative coworker handed me the part of the British Dossier on Iraq that focused on human rights abuses under Saddam Hussein - a report that relied heavily on Amnesty International [AI] and Human Rights Watch [HRW] reports. I read it out of respect for the friendly but serious disagreements we were having about the coming war. I recall thinking to myself, "Yes, you'll use AI and HRW reports now, but I bet you're not so keen on them when they challenge allies of the US or the US itself."

I had a similar reaction this morning as NPR took up the cause of press freedom. The focus was on - guess what country? - Venezuela...what a surprise! The shadowy Juan Forero was reporting on Chavez government's plans to shut down a major opposition television channel, RCTV. I have to agree that I strongly oppose such a move - it seems dangerously arbitrary (see this report from Reporters without Borders).

In Forero's report he talked to Carlos Lauria, an Argentine journalist and representative of the respected organization, the Committee to Protect Journalists that has criticized the moves of the Chavez government. And this is where my concerns with NPR's coverage come in. Why focus on Venezuela? Is is just because it is the enemy de jour of the Bush administration? Will NPR give as much coverage to other serious press issues that the Committe to Protect Journalists has raised such as US actions in Afghanistan and Iraq, or the actions of US allies such as Pakistan or Israel? I'm not holding my breath, besides covering those stories wouldn't allow Forero the chance to air such a "substantive" quote as this one from Chavez opponent, Americo Martin:

• "We can’t say that Chavez is a Hitler, that would be an exaggeration, but we’re headed that way....this regime…it’s on the way to becoming a totalitarian system."

Couldn't make this up if I tried!

Just What is it?

Which Juan Forero do we believe? The one on November 27, 2006 who broadcast an economist in Venezuela complaining that the Chavez government would be "better off spending its gasoline subsidies to promote mass transit" or yesterday's Forero who noted "all the money the [Chavez] government is spending at home. Venezuela’s government is building subway lines..." Hmm...sounds like mass transit to me!

In yesterday's piece, we hear how "the economic growth has been astounding here since 2003," BUT "many economists and businessmen here say the economy is far from healthy and in fact what it is is schizophrenic – it is one of the world’s fastest growing but it produces few jobs, consumerism is rampant, but few want to invest."

The main thrust of yesterday's piece is to claim that Venezuela's economy is only doing all right because of the "oil boom" -- even though economist Mark Weisbrot has noted "the government has budgeted conservatively to create a cushion against any decline in oil prices. It has based its 2007 budget on an average oil price of $29 a barrel — far below this year's average of $58 a barrel." Forero uses telling phrases that reveal his anti-Chavez bias:

• schizophrenic: describing the economy as such is both offensive to people with schizophrenia and a way of writing off the economic achievements of Venezuela under the Chavez government.
• The Bolivarian bourgeoisie: How Forero describes those profiting from "lucrative" government contracts. The implication is that there is at best hypocrisy in the claims of socialism of the government and perhaps even corruption.
• A fine veneer: how Forero describes the effects of Venezuelan government spending on infrastructure projects. Frankly, I'd be happy for a little veneer of social spending on schools, transportation, and health care here in the USA!

As I've noted before, Forero has a less than shining history as a journalist. His low point came when he parroted the US Government line about the coup against Chavez back in 2002. Forero's track record really has to make you wonder who he works for besides NPR and the NY Times.

Truth Buried Again

NPR has an odd story about Colombia this morning. The report deals with victims' of the atrocities committed by Colombia'a rightwing paramilitaries. There are some really unsettling (dare one say "spooky") aspects to NPR's report. The first thing that struck me was the NPR reporter -- Juan Forero. His name was new to me and I noticed that he's not listed as one of the NPR voices even though Inskeep introduced him as "NPR's Juan Forero." So I did a little poking around and found Forero has a less than savory history in journalism (see this report from FAIR and look over this angry, but informative website).

Perhaps the most amazing aspect of the "report" was the omission of one key player in the four decades long Colombia tragedy--THE UNITED STATES! To discuss the torture and death squad paramilitaries without mentioning the kindess shown them by the US does show an abundance of chutzpah. But since NPR won't dig up these ugly tidbits I'll do it for them: take a look at the history of the paramilitaries from ZNet, the benevolent attitude of the US noticed by CNN in 2000, and the continuing help shown the paramilitaries in the "Drug War" in 2001. Finally for some of the latest human rights news on Colombia take a look at Human Rights Watch or Amnesty International's excellent report.