<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail-top-anchor"></div>
<div id="gmail-toolbar" class="gmail-toolbar-container">
</div><div class="gmail-container" dir="ltr" lang="en">
<div class="gmail-header gmail-reader-header gmail-reader-show-element">
<a class="gmail-domain gmail-reader-domain" href="https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/15685">venezuelanalysis.com</a>
<div class="gmail-domain-border"></div>
<h1 class="gmail-reader-title">Guaidó Is Gone, but Media Dishonesty Is Here to Stay</h1>
<div class="gmail-credits gmail-reader-credits">By Ricardo Vaz - FAIR - January 17, 2023<br></div>
</div>
<hr>
<div class="gmail-content">
<div class="gmail-moz-reader-content gmail-reader-show-element"><div id="gmail-readability-page-1" class="gmail-page"><div><img src="cid:ii_ld0ys6ni1" alt="image.png" width="392" height="221"><br><p>The latest iteration of Washington’s regime-change efforts against the <a href="https://fair.org/home/media-delegitimize-venezuelan-elections-amid-complete-unanimity-of-outlook/">democratically elected</a> Venezuelan government came to an end. On <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-juan-guaido.html">December 30</a>,
an opposition-controlled parliament whose term ran out two years ago
voted to end the US-backed “interim government” headed by Juan Guaidó.</p>
<p>A few outlets recognized that the latest developments represented “a blow” (<strong>New York Times</strong>, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-juan-guaido.html">12/30/22</a>) or “a failure” (<strong>Financial Times</strong>, <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/30e166e3-bdcd-4c62-9a62-59154a722a20">1/8/23</a>)
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.</p>
<p>The Guaidó-led operation had earned the wholehearted support of the media establishment from the get-go (<strong>FAIR.org</strong>, <a href="https://fair.org/extra/fair-study-elite-media-allowed-no-dissent-on-regime-change-for-venezuela/">1/19/19</a>, <a href="https://fair.org/home/the-venezuelan-people-are-whoever-agrees-with-donald-trump/">1/31/19</a>).
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 (<strong>FAIR.org</strong>, <a href="https://fair.org/home/calibrated-dishonesty-western-media-coverage-of-venezuela-sanctions/">6/13/22</a>, <a href="https://fair.org/home/on-venezuela-only-hawkish-dissent-allowed/">5/2/22</a>, <a href="https://fair.org/home/corporate-media-cover-for-us-mob-threats-against-venezuela/">4/15/20</a>, <a href="https://fair.org/home/how-western-left-media-helped-legitimate-us-regime-change-in-venezuela/">1/22/20</a>, <a href="https://fair.org/home/media-continue-to-push-misinformation-about-venezuela-and-drug-trafficking/">9/24/19</a>).</p>
<h3><strong>The Big Lie</strong></h3>
<p>The coverage of Guaidó’s demise saw media pundits dust off some of their Venezuela bias greatest hits. The <strong>New York Times</strong> (<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/world/americas/venezuela-juan-guaido-removal.html">12/22/22</a>)
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” (<strong>Wall Street Journal</strong>, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-wager-to-oust-maduro-with-parallel-government-ends-11672941309">1/5/23</a>) and “autocratic” (<strong>LA Times</strong>, <a href="https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2023-01-05/guaido-ouster-venezuela-united-states-opportunities">1/5/23</a>) were not far behind.</p>
<p>Likewise frequent were gushing tributes to the “hope” that Guaidó signified (<strong>AP</strong>, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-south-america-000642741a10bef98ba407b1a4c008c9">1/5/23</a>; <strong>New York Times</strong>, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-juan-guaido.html">12/30/22</a>),
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” (<strong>AP</strong>, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-juan-guaido-b05509954f848429a1774703eb6d076c">12/30/22</a>; <strong>Al Jazeera</strong>, <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/12/31/venezuela-opposition-removes-interim-president-guaido">12/31/22</a>).
This is the common maneuver of presuming that all Venezuelans support
the opposition, while also ignoring the overwhelming popular <a href="https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Study-80-of-Venezuelans-Oppose-Foreign-Intervention-20190212-0008.html">rejection</a> of foreign meddling.</p>
<p>The opening act of any Guaidó story is always the Goebbelsian claim that Maduro’s 2018 electoral win was illegitimate (<strong>FAIR.org</strong>, <a href="https://fair.org/home/media-delegitimize-venezuelan-elections-amid-complete-unanimity-of-outlook/">5/23/18</a>),
despite the lack of evidence of irregularities and the presence of
international observation missions who vouched for the vote’s integrity (<strong>Venezuelanalysis</strong>, <a href="https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/13849">5/31/18</a>).</p>
<p>The unsubstantiated claims about the contest go from “disputed” (<strong>BBC</strong>, <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-64133706">12/31/22</a>; <strong>Reuters</strong>, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-vote-remove-guaidos-interim-government-2022-12-22/">12/22/22</a>), to “widely deemed” or “believed” or “seen as” or “considered” or “condemned as” “fraudulent” (see <strong>Bloomberg</strong>, <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-21/venezuela-opposition-to-dump-juan-guaido-after-failing-to-unseat-maduro">12/30/22</a>; <strong>Miami Herald</strong>, <a href="https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/venezuela/article270377167.html">12/23/22</a>; <strong>AFP</strong>, <a href="https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20230103-us-says-venezuela-s-maduro-still-illegitimate-after-opposition-government-disbanded">1/4/23</a>; <strong>LA Times</strong>, <a href="https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2023-01-05/guaido-ouster-venezuela-united-states-opportunities">1/5/23</a>; <strong>Washington Post</strong>, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/29/guaido-venezuela-opposition-ouster/">12/30/22</a>), all the way to “a sham” (<strong>Wall Street Journal</strong>, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-wager-to-oust-maduro-with-parallel-government-ends-11672941309">1/5/23</a>; <strong>New York Times</strong>, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/world/americas/venezuela-juan-guaido-removal.html">12/22/22</a>; <strong>Reuters</strong>, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/us-continues-recognize-venezuelas-2015-national-assembly-interim-president-white-2023-01-04/">1/4/22</a>).</p>
<p>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
(<strong>Wall Street Journal</strong>, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-u-s-backed-opposition-removes-juan-guaido-as-its-leader-11672441327">12/30/22</a>; <strong>Washington Post</strong>, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/29/guaido-venezuela-opposition-ouster/">12/30/22</a>), or by casually stating it (<strong>AP</strong>, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-south-america-000642741a10bef98ba407b1a4c008c9">1/9/23</a>, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-caribbean-fb916e9c9556bacf2baf4f6d8fcfd598">1/9/23</a>; <strong>Reuters</strong>, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/venezuela-foreign-assets-will-not-pass-maduro-opposition-2022-12-29/">12/29/22</a>; <strong>New York Times</strong>, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/world/americas/venezuela-juan-guaido-removal.html">12/22/22</a>), Western outlets were eager to paint the US-backed presumption with a varnish of legitimacy.</p>
<p>Nowhere to be found was the text or a link to the invoked constitutional article. Because anyone who read Article 233 of the <a href="https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Venezuela_2009?lang=en">Venezuelan constitution</a> 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.)</p>
<p>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 (<strong>FAIR.org</strong>, <a href="https://fair.org/home/western-media-venezuelan-elections-must-be-undemocratic-because-chavismo-won/">12/3/21</a>, <a href="https://fair.org/home/us-media-require-no-evidence-for-claims-of-electoral-fraud-in-venezuela/">1/27/21</a>, <a href="https://fair.org/home/media-delegitimize-venezuelan-elections-amid-complete-unanimity-of-outlook/">5/23/18</a>).</p>
<p>For example, <strong>AFP</strong> said the former parliament “was replaced by a legislature loyal to Maduro” (<a href="https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20221231-venezuelan-opposition-dissolves-guaido-s-interim-government">12/31/22</a>), ignoring the fact that it was “replaced” through the regularly scheduled elections. But the <strong>Associated Press</strong> (<a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-europe-venezuela-caribbean-d6ab25309c403544b5b3569b26ab885c">12/22/22</a>, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-south-america-000642741a10bef98ba407b1a4c008c9">1/9/23</a>, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-caribbean-fb916e9c9556bacf2baf4f6d8fcfd598">1/9/23</a>)
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.</p>
<h3><strong>Inconvenient truths</strong></h3>
<p>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” (<strong>Wall Street Journal</strong>, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-wager-to-oust-maduro-with-parallel-government-ends-11672941309">1/5/23</a>) that was “maintained” (<strong>Reuters</strong>, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/us-continues-recognize-venezuelas-2015-national-assembly-interim-president-white-2023-01-04/">1/4/23</a>), “tightened” (<strong>AFP</strong>, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-juan-guaido-b05509954f848429a1774703eb6d076c">12/30/22</a>) or “proven durable” (<strong>Washington Post</strong>, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/29/guaido-venezuela-opposition-ouster/">12/30/22</a>).</p>
<p>For all the talk of Guaidó’s commitment to “restore democracy” (<strong>AP</strong>, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-south-america-000642741a10bef98ba407b1a4c008c9">1/9/23</a>;<strong> LA Times</strong>, <a href="https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2023-01-05/guaido-ouster-venezuela-united-states-opportunities">1/5/23</a>; <strong>New York Times</strong>, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-juan-guaido.html">12/30/22</a>), there was little detail as to how he actually tried to accomplish it.</p>
<p>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 (<strong>Wall Street Journal, </strong><a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-u-s-backed-opposition-removes-juan-guaido-as-its-leader-11672441327">12/30/22</a>; <strong>New York Times, </strong><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-juan-guaido.html">12/30/22</a>). Most included only vague references to a failure “to win over” (<strong>AP</strong>, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-juan-guaido-b05509954f848429a1774703eb6d076c">12/30/22</a>) or “recruit” (<strong>Bloomberg</strong>, <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-30/venezuela-s-opposition-ends-guaido-s-leadership-in-final-vote">12/30/22</a>) the military. The <strong>Associated Press</strong> (<a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-south-america-000642741a10bef98ba407b1a4c008c9">1/5/23</a>)
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.</p>
<p>Not mentioned at all by the establishment outlets was the hardline opposition’s calls for a foreign invasion (<strong>Venezuelanalysis</strong>, <a href="https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/14486">5/13/19</a>) and, more damningly, Guaidó actually hiring a mercenary company to topple Maduro and put himself in power (<strong>Venezuelanalysis</strong>, <a href="https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/14876">5/17/20</a>). The best hope was always that US economic sanctions would generate enough suffering to force the government out.</p>
<p>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 <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-05/creditors-close-in-on-citgo-the-last-asset-guaido-has-left#xj4y7vzkg">Citgo</a>.</p>
<p>Corporate outlets reported that these assets need to be “protect[ed]” (<strong>AP</strong>, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-juan-guaido-b05509954f848429a1774703eb6d076c">12/30/22</a>) or “shield[ed]” (<strong>AP</strong>, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-nicolas-maduro-south-america-000642741a10bef98ba407b1a4c008c9">1/9/23</a>) from creditors, and that the opposition’s control might be jeopardized by Guaidó’s ouster. Spain’s <strong>El País</strong> (<a href="https://english.elpais.com/international/2022-12-30/venezuelas-juan-guaido-is-on-the-verge-of-losing-his-interim-government.html">12/30/22</a>) baselessly claimed these resources would be “embezzled” by the Maduro government.</p>
<p>Out of sight is the string of corruption <a href="https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/15350">allegations</a> pertaining to opposition (mis)management of foreign assets (<strong>Venezuelanalysis</strong>, <a href="https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/15350">10/14/21</a>),
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, <a href="https://www.eluniversal.com/politica/132922/calderon-berti-leopoldo-lopez-convirtio-monomeros-en-una-pinata-del-g4">accused</a> the different factions of treating the company like a “piñata.”</p>
<p>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 (<strong>Venezuelanalysis</strong>, <a href="https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/15332">9/25/21</a>, <a href="https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/15340">10/4/21</a>, <a href="https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/15358">10/23/21</a>).</p>
<div id="gmail-file-15533--6">
<div>
<img src="cid:ii_ld0yq8zx0" alt="image.png" width="392" height="218"><br><div>
<p><font size="1">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.”</font></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<h3><strong>‘Regardless of what form’</strong></h3>
<p>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.</p>
<p>Human rights experts estimate these measures have <a href="https://www.blackagendareport.com/former-un-rapporteur-human-rights-us-sanctions-have-killed-more-100-thousand-venezuelans">killed</a> over 100,000 people over the past five years. But some pieces managed to not mention them at all (<strong>AP</strong>, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-venezuela-government-juan-guaido-b05509954f848429a1774703eb6d076c">12/30/22</a>; <strong>Bloomberg</strong>, <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-30/venezuela-s-opposition-ends-guaido-s-leadership-in-final-vote">12/30/22</a>; <strong>El País</strong>, <a href="https://english.elpais.com/international/2022-12-30/venezuelas-juan-guaido-is-on-the-verge-of-losing-his-interim-government.html">12/30/22</a>). The <strong>New York Times </strong>(<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/world/americas/venezuela-juan-guaido-removal.html">12/22/22</a>, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-juan-guaido.html">12/30/22</a>)
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.”</p>
<p>Washington imposed, among many other measures, <a href="https://venezuelanalysis.com/images/15301">heavy sanctions</a> 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 <strong>Times</strong>! Moreover, not only are the unilateral measures a form of <a href="https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/14446">collective punishment</a> against civilians, they actually <a href="https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/13330">preceded</a> Guaidó.</p>
<p>Other media only brought up sanctions to echo US officials saying they can be used “to pressure Caracas” (<strong>Wall Street Journal</strong>, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-wager-to-oust-maduro-with-parallel-government-ends-11672941309">1/5/23</a>), since the US “hold[s] all the cards” (<strong>Washington Post</strong>, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/29/guaido-venezuela-opposition-ouster/">12/30/22</a>).
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 (<strong>AFP</strong>, <a href="https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20230103-us-says-venezuela-s-maduro-still-illegitimate-after-opposition-government-disbanded">1/4/23</a>).</p>
<p>As usual, the <strong>New York Times</strong> (<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/world/americas/venezuela-juan-guaido-removal.html">12/22/22</a>, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-juan-guaido.html">12/30/22</a>) outdid all others in covering for US economic blackmail. The Biden administration recently <a href="https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/15657">released</a> 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 <strong>Times</strong> (<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/world/americas/venezuela-juan-guaido-removal.html">12/22/22</a>)
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 <a href="https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/14929">frozen gold</a> in the UK be sold to buy food and medicine through the UN. The Venezuelan opposition and its foreign backers refused.</p>
<p>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” (<strong>AFP</strong>, <a href="https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20221231-venezuelan-opposition-dissolves-guaido-s-interim-government">12/31/22</a>; <strong>Al Jazeera</strong>, <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/12/31/venezuela-opposition-removes-interim-president-guaido">12/31/22</a>; <strong>Washington Post</strong>, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-u-s-backed-opposition-removes-juan-guaido-as-its-leader-11672441327">12/30/22</a>), loyal stenographers will not hesitate in presenting it as democracy promotion.</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>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.”</p>
<table><tbody><tr><td><br></td>
</tr><tr><td><br></td>
</tr></tbody></table></div></div></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div></div>
</div>
</div>