Media Criticism

I mentioned state-run media briefly in Monday’s post about Italian media and RAI. The same issue of Monocle where I learned about Milena Gabanelli runs an interview with Washington D.C. bureau chief Roselena Ramirez from Venezuela’s state-run TV station TeleSUR. Ramirez makes a valiant effort to defend her country’s media while showing journalist integrity but falls short for a fundamental reason.

Luke Crisell asked Ramirez whether Americans felt that Hugo Chavez was involved directly in operations at TeleSUR. Ramirez was understandably defensive in responding to this question by offering an anecdote. A panel of media veterans who were reviewing TeleSUR’s credentials asked a similar question. Ramirez responded by throwing back the question to reporters who work for ABC which is owned by multi-national company Disney. The notion of a billion-dollar company like Disney holding the same sway as a national leader may sound right in an impassioned defense of media integrity but I am not convinced.

State-run media outlets like RAI and TeleSUR are outlets for narcissism, egotism and corruption. There is no system in the world where a lack of competition is better than a profuse amount of competition. Journalism and reporting need to be exposed to competing viewpoints without interference from the figures being critiqued on a daily basis. Hugo Chavez uses the media as his bully pulpit to the world which means that he is receiving some benefits for being the head of state (the same state that is providing a large amount of funding for TeleSUR).

One problem that arises from an all-or-nothing approach to government funding of media outlets is the main alternative. We experience this alternative on a daily basis when we watch CNN, Fox News and MSNBC. These cable outlets are run by corporations which deluge the airwaves with advertisements to make something as unprofitable as journalism palatable for investors. Every nation needs a fusion approach to media funding which includes a substantial stake taken by the public. There can be a place for corporate media, public media and state media as long as each is present in a society. An imbalance in any direction (even toward public media) means that there is a tyranny of perspective.