The Impact Of The Media On Intra-State Conflict Vis-À-Vis International Politics: The Case Of Venezuela (2002)

The intra-state violence of the post-Cold War era, continues to demonstrate the perilous effects of the mass media on the social cohesion of states. This study therefore examines the impact of the media on intra-state conflict vis-à-vis international politics, the case of Venezuela (2002). Specifically, the study aimed at ascertaining the underlying conditions that precipitated the 2002 Venezuelan political crisis, the media’s role in shaping the events leading to the said crisis, and the factors that compromised the media’s role in managing the conflict. Drawing on qualitative analysis of secondary sources, the study identified two major underlying conditions that precipitated the political crisis, categorised as domestic conditions and foreign conditions. The domestic conditions include years of marginalisation of largely Amerindian, Afro-Venezuelan and Mulatto-Mestizo ethnic groups; enforcement of the constitutional requirement for a first-time direct election in the nation’s main labour union (CTV); implementation of Mission Zamora (the land redistribution programme); and introduction of the hydrocarbons law which required that the State Oil Company (PDVSA) holds not less than fifty-one percent stake in any new joint venture with foreign oil companies and an increase in the minimum royalty rate of 1% to 30%. The foreign conditions were Chavez’s role in OPEC’s reduction in oil supply and the corresponding rise in oil prices; his alliance and supply of oil to U.S. isolated Cuba; refusal to allow US use its airspace for operations in Colombia; visit to Saddam Hussain’s Iraq, Gaddafi’s Libya, anti-neoliberal policies and public criticism of U.S.’s ‘war on terror’ in Afghanistan. The findings further suggest that the media employed white propaganda and mainly assumed a collaborative role in connivance with the elite and their foreign affiliates, which played a significant role in escalating the political crisis. The media’s role in managing the conflict was also compromised by lack of institutional autonomy, undue influence by media moguls, and poor journalism ethics and standards. The study concludes that the media landscape was characterised by journalistic interventionism which negatively impacted the intra-state crisis. As much as the private media is largely to blame for the escalation of the crisis, it then again took all but the private media to defuse the political tension. Grassroot participation in the political process, attachment to the government’s political programmes, word-of-mouth communication and military loyalists moderated and eventually neutralised the adverse effect of the media campaign to oust Chavez. Also, President Chavez’s timely call for restraint upon his reinstatement, helped to deescalate the political crisis which could have degenerated into a civil war. The promotion of participatory democracy; and multi-stakeholder partnership at both the development and implementation phases of a policy change or reform, may help to mitigate potential resistance and media campaigns that may be aimed at destabilising the state.

Source: UG