Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latin America
In reply to the discussion: Globovision sanctioned for ... citing the Venezuelan constitution. [View all]Bacchus4.0
(6,837 posts)15. (Reporters Without Borders) Globovisión faces sanctions for its interpretation of the constitution
http://en.rsf.org/venezuela-globovision-faces-sanctions-for-11-01-2013,43899.html
Venezuelas National Telecommunications Commission (Conatel) launched proceedings on 9 January against the terrestrial television station Globovisión over its broadcast of four clips about the postponement of the inauguration of President Hugo Chavez for a new six-year term, originally scheduled for the following day.
The videos are based on a specific interpretation of Article 231 of Venezuelas Bolivarian constitution. The station was banned from rebroadcasting them and from expressing any opinion on the countrys Basic Law.
------------
Reporters Without Borders believes the charges against the organization to be excessive and once again based on an elastic interpretation of Article 27 of the Social Responsibility in Radio, TV and Electronic Media Law (Resortemec Law), which bans all content that might incite hate or panic, or disturb public order.
However debatable Globovisións interpretation of Article 231 may be, how could the constitution be read in such a biased fashion as to mean it might incite panic among the population? the organization asked. Are citizens so immature that they would be incapable forming their own opinions? Is debate not allowed? Once again a poorly-written law is applied selectively, based on ideological considerations.
These proceedings are disproportionate and absurd, as well as untimely, since the Supreme Court has just started to consider the issue raised by the Globovisión clips.
Venezuelas National Telecommunications Commission (Conatel) launched proceedings on 9 January against the terrestrial television station Globovisión over its broadcast of four clips about the postponement of the inauguration of President Hugo Chavez for a new six-year term, originally scheduled for the following day.
The videos are based on a specific interpretation of Article 231 of Venezuelas Bolivarian constitution. The station was banned from rebroadcasting them and from expressing any opinion on the countrys Basic Law.
------------
Reporters Without Borders believes the charges against the organization to be excessive and once again based on an elastic interpretation of Article 27 of the Social Responsibility in Radio, TV and Electronic Media Law (Resortemec Law), which bans all content that might incite hate or panic, or disturb public order.
However debatable Globovisións interpretation of Article 231 may be, how could the constitution be read in such a biased fashion as to mean it might incite panic among the population? the organization asked. Are citizens so immature that they would be incapable forming their own opinions? Is debate not allowed? Once again a poorly-written law is applied selectively, based on ideological considerations.
These proceedings are disproportionate and absurd, as well as untimely, since the Supreme Court has just started to consider the issue raised by the Globovisión clips.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
34 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I'm sure the CIA is "letting the Venezuelans sort all this out" on their own.
99th_Monkey
Jan 2013
#5
That was an award winning documentary. I remember back then when it happened, the
sabrina 1
Jan 2013
#13
the Ven ambassador to the US was kicked out after Ven refused the US ambassador
Bacchus4.0
Jan 2013
#33
here are the "micros" that the gov alleges incites hatred, panic, and public disorder
Bacchus4.0
Jan 2013
#7