|
The United States, Telesur, and the battle for freedom of information.
As I'm sure many of you know, Venezuela (a country increasingly rich from oil reserves) has begun broadcasting a state-sponsored television channel called Telesur. This channel will be based loosely on CNN, focus on Central and South America news, show regional documentaries, and will receive funding from Argentina, Uruguay and Cuba, among others. In response to the inception of this channel, the United States House voted to broadcast alternative content to the South American nation to ensure that it's citizens rceive "accurate news". These restrictions are to kick in if the US deems Venezuelan messages on the channel "anti-american".
Without commenting too much, I think the U.S. is stepping onto dangerous ground, but perhaps justifiably. Venezuela is a hot spot for anti-US sentiment right now, and considering their increasing voice in OPEC, we don't economically need for them to hate our country. However, you might imagine that broadcasting an alternative news channel to rival the state run one would piss them off equally then years of mind control might. Governments have seen the power of television, and some are worried while others hope to exploit it. This may be a case of that, and such a case could likely be argued for either side.
What do you think about these recent developments? Is state-run television good or bad? Does the United States use state-run television with a facade of corporation and choice? Does Venezuela have the right and/or duty to block US transmissions and does the new channel have a right to exist? Should the US allow reception of this channel by Amrican media outlets?
|