[News] Guaidó Is Gone, but Media Dishonesty Is Here to Stay

[Anti-Imperialist News]

venezuelanalysis.com <https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/15685>
Guaidó Is Gone, but Media Dishonesty Is Here to Stay
By Ricardo Vaz - FAIR - January 17, 2023
------------------------------
[image: image.png]

The latest iteration of Washington’s regime-change efforts against the
democratically
elected
<https://fair.org/home/media-delegitimize-venezuelan-elections-amid-complete-unanimity-of-outlook/>
Venezuelan
government came to an end. On December 30
<https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-juan-guaido.html>,
an opposition-controlled parliament whose term ran out two years ago voted
to end the US-backed “interim government” headed by Juan Guaidó.

A few outlets recognized that the latest developments represented “a
blow” (*New
York Times*, 12/30/22
<https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-juan-guaido.html>)
or “a failure” (*Financial Times*, 1/8/23
<https://www.ft.com/content/30e166e3-bdcd-4c62-9a62-59154a722a20>) for the
United States, but for the most part the media’s goal seemed to be to
solidify the biased premises underlying the regime-change operation.
Corporate media remain as unwilling as ever to question US foreign policy,
regardless of its deadly consequences.

The Guaidó-led operation had earned the wholehearted support of the media
establishment from the get-go (*FAIR.org*, 1/19/19
<https://fair.org/extra/fair-study-elite-media-allowed-no-dissent-on-regime-change-for-venezuela/>
, 1/31/19
<https://fair.org/home/the-venezuelan-people-are-whoever-agrees-with-donald-trump/>).
However, its end did not lead to a reckoning or reevaluation of past
coverage. The loyal stenography from Western pundits is as reliable as ever
(*FAIR.org*, 6/13/22
<https://fair.org/home/calibrated-dishonesty-western-media-coverage-of-venezuela-sanctions/>
, 5/2/22 <https://fair.org/home/on-venezuela-only-hawkish-dissent-allowed/>
, 4/15/20
<https://fair.org/home/corporate-media-cover-for-us-mob-threats-against-venezuela/>
, 1/22/20
<https://fair.org/home/how-western-left-media-helped-legitimate-us-regime-change-in-venezuela/>
, 9/24/19
<https://fair.org/home/media-continue-to-push-misinformation-about-venezuela-and-drug-trafficking/>
).
*The Big Lie*

The coverage of Guaidó’s demise saw media pundits dust off some of their
Venezuela bias greatest hits. The *New York Times* (12/22/22
<https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/world/americas/venezuela-juan-guaido-removal.html>)
used the “authoritarian” label in reference to Venezuelan President Nicolás
Maduro three times in the teaser and the opening two paragraphs of an
article. Other favorites like “strongman” (*Wall Street Journal*, 1/5/23
<https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-wager-to-oust-maduro-with-parallel-government-ends-11672941309>)
and “autocratic” (*LA Times*, 1/5/23
<https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2023-01-05/guaido-ouster-venezuela-united-states-opportunities>)
were not far behind.

Likewise frequent were gushing tributes to the “hope” that Guaidó signified
(*AP*, 1/5/23
<https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-south-america-000642741a10bef98ba407b1a4c008c9>
; *New York Times*, 12/30/22
<https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-juan-guaido.html>),
as if the unelected US-backed pretender naturally represented the
aspirations of the Venezuelan people. Some sources made the even bolder
claim that “the failure to drive out Maduro frustrated Venezuelans” (*AP*,
12/30/22
<https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-juan-guaido-b05509954f848429a1774703eb6d076c>
; *Al Jazeera*, 12/31/22
<https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/12/31/venezuela-opposition-removes-interim-president-guaido>).
This is the common maneuver of presuming that all Venezuelans support the
opposition, while also ignoring the overwhelming popular rejection
<https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Study-80-of-Venezuelans-Oppose-Foreign-Intervention-20190212-0008.html>
of
foreign meddling.

The opening act of any Guaidó story is always the Goebbelsian claim that
Maduro’s 2018 electoral win was illegitimate (*FAIR.org*, 5/23/18
<https://fair.org/home/media-delegitimize-venezuelan-elections-amid-complete-unanimity-of-outlook/>),
despite the lack of evidence of irregularities and the presence of
international observation missions who vouched for the vote’s integrity (
*Venezuelanalysis*, 5/31/18 <https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/13849>).

The unsubstantiated claims about the contest go from “disputed” (*BBC*,
12/31/22 <https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-64133706>; *Reuters*
, 12/22/22
<https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-vote-remove-guaidos-interim-government-2022-12-22/>),
to “widely deemed” or “believed” or “seen as” or “considered” or “condemned
as” “fraudulent” (see *Bloomberg*, 12/30/22
<https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-21/venezuela-opposition-to-dump-juan-guaido-after-failing-to-unseat-maduro>
; *Miami Herald*, 12/23/22
<https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/venezuela/article270377167.html>
; *AFP*, 1/4/23
<https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20230103-us-says-venezuela-s-maduro-still-illegitimate-after-opposition-government-disbanded>
; *LA Times*, 1/5/23
<https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2023-01-05/guaido-ouster-venezuela-united-states-opportunities>
; *Washington Post*, 12/30/22
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/29/guaido-venezuela-opposition-ouster/>),
all the way to “a sham” (*Wall Street Journal*, 1/5/23
<https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-wager-to-oust-maduro-with-parallel-government-ends-11672941309>
; *New York Times*, 12/22/22
<https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/world/americas/venezuela-juan-guaido-removal.html>
; *Reuters*, 1/4/22
<https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/us-continues-recognize-venezuelas-2015-national-assembly-interim-president-white-2023-01-04/>
).

Once this false premise was established, another one followed: the alleged
“constitutional” grounds behind the self-proclaimed “interim government.”
Whether by allowing Guaidó and acolytes to repeat the claim (*Wall Street
Journal*, 12/30/22
<https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-u-s-backed-opposition-removes-juan-guaido-as-its-leader-11672441327>
; *Washington Post*, 12/30/22
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/29/guaido-venezuela-opposition-ouster/>),
or by casually stating it (*AP*, 1/9/23
<https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-south-america-000642741a10bef98ba407b1a4c008c9>
, 1/9/23
<https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-caribbean-fb916e9c9556bacf2baf4f6d8fcfd598>
; *Reuters*, 12/29/22
<https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/venezuela-foreign-assets-will-not-pass-maduro-opposition-2022-12-29/>
; *New York Times*, 12/22/22
<https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/world/americas/venezuela-juan-guaido-removal.html>),
Western outlets were eager to paint the US-backed presumption with a
varnish of legitimacy.

Nowhere to be found was the text or a link to the invoked constitutional
article. Because anyone who read Article 233 of the Venezuelan constitution
<https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Venezuela_2009?lang=en> would
immediately realize that: a) none of the conditions to declare the
presidency “vacant” were met, as Maduro had not died, resigned, been
removed by the Supreme Tribunal of Justice, become permanently physically
or mentally disabled, abandoned his position or been removed by a popular
vote; and b) even if one were, it would lead to nothing remotely resembling
this parallel government that lasted nearly four years. (Instead, the
constitution calls for new direct elections to be held within 30 days.)

Having taken their gaze off of Venezuela as regime-change efforts faltered,
corporate journalists needed some dishonest gymnastics to report Guaidó’s
demise. In particular, they had to explain why a National Assembly whose
term expired two years ago was still around. Their experience in discarding
elections boycotted by the opposition and won by Chavismo came in handy (
*FAIR.org*, 12/3/21
<https://fair.org/home/western-media-venezuelan-elections-must-be-undemocratic-because-chavismo-won/>
, 1/27/21
<https://fair.org/home/us-media-require-no-evidence-for-claims-of-electoral-fraud-in-venezuela/>
, 5/23/18
<https://fair.org/home/media-delegitimize-venezuelan-elections-amid-complete-unanimity-of-outlook/>
).

For example, *AFP* said the former parliament “was replaced by a
legislature loyal to Maduro” (12/31/22
<https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20221231-venezuelan-opposition-dissolves-guaido-s-interim-government>),
ignoring the fact that it was “replaced” through the regularly scheduled
elections. But the *Associated Press* (12/22/22
<https://apnews.com/article/politics-europe-venezuela-caribbean-d6ab25309c403544b5b3569b26ab885c>
, 1/9/23
<https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-south-america-000642741a10bef98ba407b1a4c008c9>
, 1/9/23
<https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-caribbean-fb916e9c9556bacf2baf4f6d8fcfd598>)
went a step further by calling the newly elected parliament “Maduro’s
rubber-stamping legislature/National Assembly,” as if there is something
sinister about a party with a legislative majority supporting a president
from the same party. It is not the government’s fault that the opposition,
with US encouragement, decided to boycott elections and pin its hopes on an
outright coup.
*Inconvenient truths*

With all the effort to double down on well-crafted narratives, it was hard
to expect any contrition from Western media that cheerfully endorsed
Guaidó’s baseless claims to power. Instead, his failure was attributed to
Maduro, currently serving his second constitutional six-year term, having a
“grip on power” (*Wall Street Journal*, 1/5/23
<https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-wager-to-oust-maduro-with-parallel-government-ends-11672941309>)
that was “maintained” (*Reuters*, 1/4/23
<https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/us-continues-recognize-venezuelas-2015-national-assembly-interim-president-white-2023-01-04/>),
“tightened” (*AFP*, 12/30/22
<https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-juan-guaido-b05509954f848429a1774703eb6d076c>)
or “proven durable” (*Washington Post*, 12/30/22
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/29/guaido-venezuela-opposition-ouster/>
).

For all the talk of Guaidó’s commitment to “restore democracy” (*AP*, 1/9/23
<https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-south-america-000642741a10bef98ba407b1a4c008c9>
;* LA Times*, 1/5/23
<https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2023-01-05/guaido-ouster-venezuela-united-states-opportunities>
; *New York Times*, 12/30/22
<https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-juan-guaido.html>),
there was little detail as to how he actually tried to accomplish it.

The opposition frontman’s most serious initiative to overthrow Maduro was a
military putsch on April 19, 2019. Yet only a few outlets explicitly
mentioned this episode (*Wall Street Journal, *12/30/22
<https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-u-s-backed-opposition-removes-juan-guaido-as-its-leader-11672441327>
; *New York Times, *12/30/22
<https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-juan-guaido.html>).
Most included only vague references to a failure “to win over” (*AP*,
12/30/22
<https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-juan-guaido-b05509954f848429a1774703eb6d076c>)
or “recruit” (*Bloomberg*, 12/30/22
<https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-30/venezuela-s-opposition-ends-guaido-s-leadership-in-final-vote>)
the military. The *Associated Press* (1/5/23
<https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-south-america-000642741a10bef98ba407b1a4c008c9>)
went so far as to falsely describe the Venezuelan armed forces as the
country’s “traditional arbiter of political disputes.” It seems that the
preferred means to “restore democracy” in the South American nation was a
good old-fashioned military coup.

Not mentioned at all by the establishment outlets was the hardline
opposition’s calls for a foreign invasion (*Venezuelanalysis*, 5/13/19
<https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/14486>) and, more damningly, Guaidó
actually hiring a mercenary company to topple Maduro and put himself in
power (*Venezuelanalysis*, 5/17/20 <https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/14876>).
The best hope was always that US economic sanctions would generate enough
suffering to force the government out.

While the “interim government” made no inroads to take power, it was handed
control of a number of foreign-held assets worth billions by Washington and
allies, among them US-based refiner Citgo
<https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-05/creditors-close-in-on-citgo-the-last-asset-guaido-has-left#xj4y7vzkg>
.

Corporate outlets reported that these assets need to be “protect[ed]” (*AP*
, 12/30/22
<https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-juan-guaido-b05509954f848429a1774703eb6d076c>)
or “shield[ed]” (*AP*, 1/9/23
<https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-south-america-000642741a10bef98ba407b1a4c008c9>)
from creditors, and that the opposition’s control might be jeopardized by
Guaidó’s ouster. Spain’s *El País* (12/30/22
<https://english.elpais.com/international/2022-12-30/venezuelas-juan-guaido-is-on-the-verge-of-losing-his-interim-government.html>)
baselessly claimed these resources would be “embezzled” by the Maduro
government.

Out of sight is the string of corruption allegations
<https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/15350> pertaining to opposition
(mis)management of foreign assets (*Venezuelanalysis*, 10/14/21
<https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/15350>), which came from the
anti-government camp itself. The most publicized case was Colombia-based
agrochemical producer Monómeros. Humberto Calderón Bertí, who served as
opposition “ambassador” in Colombia, accused
<https://www.eluniversal.com/politica/132922/calderon-berti-leopoldo-lopez-convirtio-monomeros-en-una-pinata-del-g4>
the
different factions of treating the company like a “piñata.”

Likewise unmentioned is a series of actions by Guaidó’s camp that have
endangered Citgo, from not showing up in court to striking under-the-table
deals with creditors to suspicions of conflicts of interest (
*Venezuelanalysis*, 9/25/21 <https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/15332>,
10/4/21 <https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/15340>, 10/23/21
<https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/15358>).
[image: image.png]

Left: Guaidó “declared Venezuela’s authoritarian president an illegitimate
ruler,” making himself “the most serious threat to President Nicolás
Maduro’s authoritarian government,” this New York Times story (12/30/22)
reported in its first two paragraphs; Right: The LA Times (1/5/23)
described the US recognizing a lawmaker with no constitutional claim to
power as the actual government of Venezuela as an “audacious gamble.”
*‘Regardless of what form’*

The heightened regime-change attempts by Washington in recent years were
cheered at every step by the Western media establishment. By falsely
trumpeting Guaidó’s credentials and whitewashing his anti-democratic
actions, corporate journalists were free to endorse any and all efforts to
place him in power, especially deadly economic sanctions.

Human rights experts estimate these measures have killed
<https://www.blackagendareport.com/former-un-rapporteur-human-rights-us-sanctions-have-killed-more-100-thousand-venezuelans>
over
100,000 people over the past five years. But some pieces managed to not
mention them at all (*AP*, 12/30/22
<https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-juan-guaido-b05509954f848429a1774703eb6d076c>
; *Bloomberg*, 12/30/22
<https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-30/venezuela-s-opposition-ends-guaido-s-leadership-in-final-vote>
; *El País*, 12/30/22
<https://english.elpais.com/international/2022-12-30/venezuelas-juan-guaido-is-on-the-verge-of-losing-his-interim-government.html>).
The *New York Times *(12/22/22
<https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/world/americas/venezuela-juan-guaido-removal.html>
, 12/30/22
<https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-juan-guaido.html>)
euphemistically wrote that sanctions were “designed to assist” Guaidó, but
as it happened ended up “forc[ing] Venezuelans to focus on daily survival,
not political mobilization.”

Washington imposed, among many other measures, heavy sanctions
<https://venezuelanalysis.com/images/15301> on the oil sector of a country
that depended on oil sales for over 90% of its export revenue. And the
resulting widespread suffering is somehow an unforeseen consequence for the
*Times*! Moreover, not only are the unilateral measures a form of collective
punishment <https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/14446> against civilians,
they actually preceded <https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/13330> Guaidó.

Other media only brought up sanctions to echo US officials saying they can
be used “to pressure Caracas” (*Wall Street Journal*, 1/5/23
<https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-wager-to-oust-maduro-with-parallel-government-ends-11672941309>),
since the US “hold[s] all the cards” (*Washington Post*, 12/30/22
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/29/guaido-venezuela-opposition-ouster/>).
State Department spokesperson Ned Price was quoted as saying sanctions will
“remain in place,” and could even be expanded should the Venezuelan
opposition say so (*AFP*, 1/4/23
<https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20230103-us-says-venezuela-s-maduro-still-illegitimate-after-opposition-government-disbanded>
).

As usual, the *New York Times* (12/22/22
<https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/world/americas/venezuela-juan-guaido-removal.html>
, 12/30/22
<https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-juan-guaido.html>)
outdid all others in covering for US economic blackmail. The Biden
administration recently released
<https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/15657> around
$3 billion in frozen Venezuelan funds, to be used in social programs via UN
agencies, after the Venezuelan government restarted talks with the hardline
opposition. The *Times* (12/22/22
<https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/world/americas/venezuela-juan-guaido-removal.html>)
outrageously described it as Maduro “agree[ing] to” allow these funds to be
used for aid. Caracas has repeatedly demanded that its assets be released,
and even suggested this kind of arrangement. During the pandemic, the
government asked that the frozen gold
<https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/14929> in the UK be sold to buy food and
medicine through the UN. The Venezuelan opposition and its foreign backers
refused.

The latest coverage was just another demonstration that Western media will
unflinchingly back Washington’s Venezuela policies no matter what. Even
when anonymous officials callously say that the US will continue to
recognize the opposition’s “interim government,” “regardless of what form
it takes” (*AFP*, 12/31/22
<https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20221231-venezuelan-opposition-dissolves-guaido-s-interim-government>
; *Al Jazeera*, 12/31/22
<https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/12/31/venezuela-opposition-removes-interim-president-guaido>
; *Washington Post*, 12/30/22
<https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-u-s-backed-opposition-removes-juan-guaido-as-its-leader-11672441327>),
loyal stenographers will not hesitate in presenting it as democracy
promotion.

It is worth recapping: The media establishment followed Washington’s lead
in declaring the 2018 elections fraudulent with no evidence, echoing
Guaidó’s “constitutional” claim, backing all sorts of coup attempts, as
well as supporting and whitewashing murderous sanctions and the theft of
Venezuelan assets. The US’s surrogates can come up with whatever scheme
they can think of, and the imperial regime-change arsenal is at their
service. And that includes media coverage as dishonest as necessary.

The corporate media pretend to defend the truth and hold those in power
accountable. Their claim is just as legitimate as Guaidó’s self-proclaimed
“interim presidency.”
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20230117/ba313d34/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 374651 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20230117/ba313d34/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1082652 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20230117/ba313d34/attachment-0001.png>