Newspaper editor turns himself in over Hugo Chávez slur

[Turborama]

Source: The Guardian

The editor of a Venezuelan weekly newspaper has turned himself in to police while under investigation over a front-page photomontage that angered allies of President Hugo Chávez.

The editor of the weekly 6to Poder, Leocenis García, surrendered at a military post in western Zulia state on Tuesday and was turned over to intelligence officials, defence lawyer Pedro Aranguren said.

Authorities had sought García while investigating him on charges of insulting public officials and instigating hatred. García insists he is innocent, Aranguren told the Venezuelan television channel Globovision.

The newspaper angered authorities when it published a photomontage referring to "Chávez's women in power". It depicted the supreme court president, the elections chief and four other prominent female officials as cabaret dancers in revealing skirts and high heels.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/31/newspaper-editor-hugo-chavez-6to

[99th_Monkey]

1. Is Hugo slipping? Or is this just a pack of RW lies? ~nt

[UnrepentantLiberal]

8. I'm gonna guess right wing lies. Give the Chavezistas time to

wake up and grind their coffee beans.

[99th_Monkey]

24. I tend to think that as well, that there's much more to the story

than the Venez RW media aren't saying.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4981298&mesg_id=4981810

It amazes me these daze, how one hardly ever knows what to believe anymore because all the media lenses
are so out of focus or distorted in some way or other. Whatever happened to "Facts, just the facts Mame"?

[rabs]

2. The montage

Little larger image, same photo
http://233grados.lainformacion.com/.a/6a00e552985c0d8833015434c73b2d970c-800wi

The Guardian headline is misleading. It is a slur not so much on Chavez, but more on the women who serve in high-ranking position in the Chavez government.

Imagine Hillary, Pelosi, Napolitano, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and others on a similar cover of a magazine in the United States.

Maybe then the outrage in Venezuela could be understood.

[Posteritatis]

4. I do find it offensive, but lese majeste charges offend me more. (nt)

[Nuclear Unicorn]

26. Indeed.

It's insulting and sexist but nothing to be handled at a military outpost and handed over to intelligence officials.

Imagine an MSNBC host handed over to the CIA for lampooning Bachmann, Palin & Co.

[Spider Jerusalem]

5. I'm imagining that in the US, and it's very hard to imagine a newspaper editor being arrested.

Nor can I really imagine anyone arguing that such an action would be justified. (Nor can I imagine it happening in the UK, or France, or Germany.) "Insulting public officials" is not a crime in democracies with some idea of free speech and a free press. Other countries that arrest journalists for "insulting public officials": Turkey and Egypt (neither of which is a shining beacon of democracy exactly) and Italy, which reintroduced it as a criminal offence in 2009 (and which under Silvio Berlusconi has been quasi-fascist in many respects; one imagines that this was brought in in Italy for the same reason Berlusconi was given immunity from prosecution).

[melm00se]

9. there are degrees in Freedom of the Press

Nor can I really imagine anyone arguing that such an action would be justified. (Nor can I imagine it happening in the UK, or France, or Germany.) "Insulting public officials" is not a crime in democracies with some idea of free speech and a free press

well, in Germany or France if you photoshopped a politican's onto a Nazi uniform you are probably going to visit the klink.

In the USA, you might be publicly excoriated but not risk jail time.

[trud]

16. UK

The UK is not a bastion of freedom of the press. The media can be prevented from reporting certain events, although which class has fallen out of my brain.

[Spider Jerusalem]

18. The media can be barred from reporting things on the grounds of national security

military operations and capabilities, nuclear and non-nuclear weapons and equipment, ciphers and secure communications, sensitive military installations and home addresses of personnel, and information relating to operations of security and intelligence services. This is known as a "D-Notice", for "Defence Notice".

And for comparison purposes here's the 2010 Press Freedom Index from Reporters Without Borders: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index#Table

Note that the UK is 19 in the list and the US is 20 (Venezuela? 135.)

[provis99]

41. filming a cop in Illinois could get a reporter 75 years in prison.

You can get that much even if you flatter the cop the whole time. Notice how the reporter cut the sound when filming a cop, upon the advice of the news agency's lawyers.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/illinois-man-faces-75-years-in-jail-for-filming-police/

the press ain't free in America.

[melm00se]

61. 2 things

1) the accused is not a reporter

2) if convicted, he'll probably get it overturned on appeal on 1st amendment grounds.

[NYC Liberal]

6. If anyone made a similar cover with those figures (Hillary et al) on it,

I would be 100% opposed to arresting them and to any legal penalties.

Tell me who was arrested for this cover, or who should have been:

[chrisa]

20. Nobody would face military arrest over it, much less even police arrest.

This is because we are not totalitarian.

[Hosnon]

30. Outrage over sexism is warranted. Arresting the editor is not. nt.

[joshcryer]

49. If I were Venezuelan I'd be more outraged by Fonden's missing $29 billion.

[DerBeppo]

56. Say that was on a magazine in the U.S.

Would/Should the editor face arrest and need to turn him/herself in at a military outpost? That's the issue.

[Judi Lynn]

58. Should the Venezuelan government subsidize anti-US government newspapers, tv, etc.?

So many Americans learned long LONG ago, by knowing what the Democratic Senator Frank Church learned through his committee's investigations, that our own CIA has been totally involved at all levels in US news media production since before the 1970's when the investigations were held.

So many of us learned, as well, the CIA was deeply, completely involved in Chilean newspapers, radio, tv news well BEFORE socialist President Salvador Allende was elected, directing and molding public perception as much as possible against him, throughout the election, througout his destroyed Presidency, and completely into the long nightmare of the butcher puppet General Pinochet's reign of torture, murder, atrocities, extra-territorial executions of leftists, outside Chile, etc.

Some of us even have bothered to stir ourselves well enough to know the US also funds Venezuelan anti-Chavez news media, tv, radio, and most clearly newspapers.

We are fully aware of US government manipulation of our own media, as well as foreign media.

Now why would you imagine we give a flying #### what an editor in the US would do as to be the model for what a US-supported Venezuelan "journalist" should do?

[dipsydoodle]

3. Rec'd

Rabs makes a valid point above.

[digitaln3rd]

7. So much for freedom of speech.

I guess that's too much for Fuhrer Chavez.

[SkyDaddy7]

12. +1...

I understand people on DU liking some of the things Chavez has done to help the poor but those good works have been erased by all the other disgusting things he has done as well...But his supporters willfully ignore the negatives!

[harmonicon]

39. People really need to stop using the word "supporters".

If people are not politically - with their votes - or monetarily supporting Hugo Chavez, they are not supporters. How that word gets bandied about on DU boggles my mind.

[FLPanhandle]

10. "Authorities had sought García while investigating him on charges of insulting public officials"

If DU was in Venezuela, I guess everyone here would be under investigation.

How some people can be hypocrites and support this behavior just because it is done by Chavez is mind blowing.

[cali]

11. it is a curious thing indeed.

I've seen some very totalitarian supporting folks in the threads about Chavez.

[joshcryer]

46. Excellent point. We know that the largest opposition website there is monitored frequently...

...and that in fact they got notices when some people (possibly psyops) signed up and posted derogatory things.

Indeed, I suspect a good deal of DUers would be behind bars if they were in Venezuela and as equally critical of Chavez as they are of Obama.

[totodeinhere]

13. If "insulting public officials" were a crime in the USA there would be very few journalists left who

are not in jail. Myself, I think this is ridiculous. Totalitarianism of the left is just as insidious as that from the right.

[Freddie Stubbs]

14. Venezuelan are obviously not civilized enough to enjoy freedom of speech like we do

[EFerrari]

28. Provincial much? The law in Venezuela is different

just as it is in the UK and in other countries that have similar laws.

[trud]

15. I wouldn't mind throwing Fox et al in jail, if they got sprung promptly

Freedom of the press is crucial. Too bad it is so often matched by complete lack of responsibility and venal self interest.

How does censorship compare to Obama condoning torture? And yet you continue to support him.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[chrisa]

19. Venezuela - A right winger's dream

No freedom of the press, the military arresting people, scapegoat baiting, and a government that pretends to want to help but actually steals the shirt off of your back.

[99th_Monkey]

23. If that's true, if RWers love such conditions so much,

then why does Venezuela RW want to assassinate or remove Chavez?

They'd love nothing better than to assassinate Chavez, either literally or to assassinate his character
... kill him with a thousand little bogus propagandistic cuts.

[chrisa]

32. Because they want to be the ones in charge and ripping their own country off.

'It's only bad when somebody else does it.'

[Judi Lynn]

33. Spend some time trying to learn something about Venezuela FIRST.

You're not making a great deal of sense, unfortunately, as it is.

[99th_Monkey]

36. +100 nt

[joshcryer]

45. The "Venezuelan right wing" is left of our moderates.

Just for some perspective here. MUD is composed of all stripes, it's not just right wingers.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

27. You're calling EFerrari a RWer?

LOL

[fascisthunter]

40. lol... you wouldn't be saying shit if it really was

fail

[rabs]

21. In Latin American countries ...

... there is something that is enshrined in their constitutions called

"libertad de prensa." (freedom of the press)

In their laws, there is something called "libertinaje de prensa." (licentiousness of the press)

licen·tious
adj.
1. Lacking moral discipline or ignoring legal restraint, especially in sexual conduct.
2. Having no regard for accepted rules or standards.

"Libertinaje de prensa" is akin to libel/difamation laws in the United States, and I assume in Europe and elsewhere. (I seem to have heard of movie and rock stars, politicians and other public people suing sensational-type magazines, and even more serious publications.)

Once again, it is in the laws of LatAm countries and it is up to their judicial system to determine if these laws have been violated.

Some on DU are quick to jump to conclusions about events in Venezuela (but not over similar events in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia etc) without their not knowing how situations like this are legally handled in those nations, or in Venezuela's case, probably without even knowing an arepa from a zuliano (a to z).

[Judi Lynn]

25. Thanks for pointing out the truth of the matter.It makes far more sense to look for the real info.,

but our managed media can't allow that to happen when their crapaganda only serves right-wing purposes.

Thanks for pointing out the facts for those of us who'd like to know the truth.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

29. There are laws and there there is what's right

Once upon a time segregation, male-only voting and no legal abortions were the law.

That didn't make them right.

[Judi Lynn]

31. "What's right?" You will determine that Latin America is wrong? Really?

There's simply no connection whatsoever between the subject and your comment.

Try to find out more about the subject you're trying to discuss first.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

34. Do you believe in human rights even if those human live in far away countries?

You will determine what people are or are not entitled to? Really?

Is freedom of conscience so primitive the Latin Americans have evolved beyond such quaint notions or are they too primitive to keep up with white European culture?

Help me understand which way you're pushing this.

[Judi Lynn]

35. You need to collect yourself and try to grasp the elements of the story.

Take the time needed to understand what you're trying to say.

You were attempting to call out someone who has studied, lived, and worked repeatedly in Venezuela when you attempted to imply the poster was posting crappola in Post #22. He most certainly DOES know of which he speaks.

Do develope the steadiness of character and cosncience needed to address the subject appropriately. Knee-jerk outbursts and accusations can't ever be respected.

"Which way you're pushing this?" I encourage you to start learning about the facts first, something only you can do, as the rest of us must, if we hope to understand it.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

37. Re-read it. Still reads the same to me

I understand the concept of legal frameworks, processes of law etc.

The concept of human rights, however, by its very construction as a concept says that there is something higher than local law and custom. What some law in any country, be it the US or Asia or Latin America or wherever, says about how the press is to be viewed and/or held liable pales when held up to the notion that humans are free only if they have freedom of conscience and the freedom to express it without fear of reprisal.

But hey, if Pinochet had a law that turned dissidents over to his internal security intelligence aparatus then that is Latin American law and we should accept it as such because our concepts are not their conepts.

I suppose next you will suggest I'm too benighted to merit further discourse.

[joshcryer]

48. Ahh, you miss the overall concept. Basically populist Latin American countries...

...are immune from any and all criticism because that's "how they do things."

Meanwhile similar behaviors in social democratic or even right wing Latin American countries is fair game (see: the oppression of media in Honduras or Haiti).

I don't know why we can't all agree that media should not be suppressed regardless.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

54. I suppose some would suggest these nations are populist

but one can never tell with only a single voice being heard.

I hear Saddam used to be re-elected with 90-plus percent margins. Populism indeed.

[Posteritatis]

38. In this case, wielding laws that criminalize insulting the government? Yes, they're wrong. (nt)

[joshcryer]

47. Abortion is illegal in many Latin American countries, I suppose we can't be critical of that...

...either under the guise of it is "up to their judicial system to determine if these laws have been violated"?

Hilarious.

[UTUSN]

22. KR8 now he's turned self in, he'll soon stop "insists he's innocent"!1 n/t

[Justina For Justice]

42. Headline Here False, Editor Defamed, Salaciously, VE Women Officials.

The headline to this post should be changed as it is not accurate. Those who rush to criticize President Chavez should stop and consider the facts. The newspaper in question, which has a record of posting erroneous and gross attacks on the Chavez government in this instance managed to enrage millions of Venezuelan woman by painting the top women officials, including the head of the Venezuelan Supreme Court , the Electoral Commission, the Public Prosecutor, the Chief Public Defender and several others as prostitutes. (Yes, they are many women in the highest governmental positions here, much more than in the U.S.)

As an American women, living in Venezuela, I can attest that hundreds of thousands of women took to the streets in protest against this defamation, which reflects on all women. It demeaned us all.

The law here against such defamation has been on the books long before President Chavez was elected and this newspaper's actions also violated the ethics of the Journalist Code, which is written by journalists, not politicos.

I really wonder at the glee with which some members of Democratic Underground attack President Chavez, who has committed no war crimes, countenanced no torture or extra-judicial assassinations, and who has not allowed war criminals to compound their crimes by escaping prosecution.

Our U.S. media even invite officials from our government who have admitted to war crimes to appear on their talk shows in order to sell their fraudulent versions of history. Where is the rush to condemn our own media and government for protecting, even celebrating, war criminals? Why haven't members of the U.S. media and our current government officials been arrested for complicity with war criminals.

Many Americans seem to think that we in the U.S. have a "free" press. Just five or six big corporations own 90% of our media and those corporations determine exactly what Americans will be allowed to see and read. As long as Americans permit this control over their news by a few Republican corporations, what right do we have to judge any other country's duly passed laws and the enforcement of those laws?

[Judi Lynn]

43. What a difference the TRUTH makes, Justina For Justice. Such a little detail,

the fact the law has been on the books in Venezuela LONG BEFORE Hugo Chavez was elected, and the fact the Journalists Code in Venezuela is actually written by JOURNALISTS.

It makes for a far more wholesome conversation when everyone is actually dealing with the truth of the matter, rather than insisting distortions are more valid than reality.

It's odd our corporate managed dose of hard-spun news on Venezuela also opted to NOT inform us there was an enormous demonstsration AGAINST this crappola flung by the "journalist." <gag>

Thank you for the honesty, and the effort made to clear up and away the lies.

[rabs]

50. Excellent post

Noticed that the one-liner Chavez detractors have been rendered mute by your observations.

Was reading just now that Patricia Poleo will replace Leocenis García as editor of Sexto Poder. She just announced on Twitter that she will run the publication FROM HER EXILE IN MIAMI (caps mine for emphasis). Had forgotten she is a fugitive in the car-bomb assassination in 2004 of state prosecutor Danilo Anderson. But that is another story.

I would venture to say that none of the people posting anti-Chavez one-liners have even the vaguest notion of what the montage article implicated:

-- That the women in high posts in the government are prostitutes.
-- That the "cabaret" where they dance is a giant whorehouse named Venezuela.
-- That the pimp who runs the whorehouse is President Chavez.

That was the aim of the publication, which exists only to slander Chavez and his government, ignoring all ethics of responsible journalism. It is a strategy by the rightwing opposition to provoke the government in the sensitive area of freedom of the press and force it to take legal measures. The ultimate aim is to create confusion in the run-up to the 2012 general elections.

Someone should look into where Sexto Poder gets its funding. Might begin with U.S. taxpayer financed USAID.

[DerBeppo]

57. Even if those three bullet points are 100% true,

it still does NOT (caps mine for emphasis) warrant arrest. Freedom of expression is a human right as is a person's freedom to express how horrible, offensive and sexist those same opinions are, but the criminalization of ideas is an untenable position for those who truly value freedom rather than control.

[Judi Lynn]

59. You would not be allowed to publish your claim the President is a pimp and his female employees

are whores here.

Spin your ### off, it just isn't going to move anyone sensible.

[christx30]

63. You might not

be able to say that on this site. The post would get deleted. But you would not face arrest or jail time for saying that.
Violating the rules of a website and facing banning is totally different from losing your freedom and risking death in prison.

[Hosnon]

64. Yes you would.

Especially if it were satire and not a factual statement.

[msanthrope]

67. You would be able to publish that in America. Without governmental reprisal.

Unlike in Venezuela, where the government apparently can't take satire.

[Turborama]

51. You need to read LBN's rule #4, if you haven't already

The link is at the top of the 1st page of LBN, but for your convenience: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x87249

As for your broadbrush attack against DUers, meh.

[EFerrari]

52. It's true, though. People just see the name and they start salivating.

They don't read the article, they have no interest in Venezuela or in Latin America. They reply to these threads with the same slams over and over to the point that I could write it from memory. It's bizarre.

[joshcryer]

55. lol, says the "Juan Cole is CIA" believer

:rofl:

[msanthrope]

66. Juab Cole is CIA? Who knew?

Jeebus....

[Judi Lynn]

53. That would be one of the lightest "broadbrush attacks" I've ever seen.

Don't make claims against the post which don't hold up.

That was a tremendously valuable post which brought a hell of a lot more light to the issue than the crap we all too frequently see thrown at this subject.

The truth IS going to get through, one way or another, no matter how long it takes to break through the crapaganda.

[Turborama]

60. It is not a "claim against the post which doesn't hold up"...

This was a broad-brush attack against DUers >>>

"I really wonder at the glee with which some members of Democratic Underground attack President Chavez"

Regardless of how 'light' you think it was, broad-brush attacks aimed at DUers is against the rules. If their argument was strong enough then why add the argumentum ad hominem?


And at the beginning of the very next paragraph...


"Our U.S. media even invite officials from our government who have admitted to war crimes to appear on their talk shows in order to sell their fraudulent versions of history. Where is the rush to condemn our own media and government for protecting, even celebrating, war criminals? "

ALL OVER DU, ALL THE TIME!

Tremendous false equivalence fail.

[EFerrari]

65. Not broad but limited and observation, not attack.

And not a false equivalence fail because no equivalence was posed. The comparison is spot on because the same DU that attacks Chavez and sides with the Venezuelan teabag media takes the reverse position here, as you yourself point out.

[alphafemale]

68. And...a low post count Chavez bullet-pointer shows up...as expected

:rofl:

[unkachuck]

44. also, maybe....

....unfounded or unsubstantiated claims of corruption may also have something to do with the charges....

"An accompanying article suggested that various top officials who hold independent offices have become subordinates of Chavez."

....we need to see the 'accompanying article'....

[Bacchus39]

62. here is the "illegal" cover the the news mag