It is not the intention of this report to pass final, or even interim, judgment on the 14-year presidency of Hugo Chávez. Instead, we are interested in exploring what the movement that bears his name—Chavismo—was all about.
Over a dozen experts on Latin America and media studies have signed a petition encouraging New York Times public editor Margaret Sullivan to probe the paper's double standards in covering Honduras, a U.S. ally, and Venezuela, an official enemy.
In the wake of a close electoral race launched hastily after Hugo Chavez’s death in March, Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro finds himself facing a nation taut from the reactionary smoke-and-mirrors conflict surrounding the legitimacy of his 1.8% margin victory.
As a result of many dozens—possibly hundreds—of messages from readers over the past few weeks that criticized The New Yorker’s inaccurate coverage of Venezuela, reporter Jon Lee Anderson issued a response in an April 23 online post. This marks the first time the magazine has publicly addressed its controversial and erroneous labeling of Venezuela as one of the world’s most “socially unequal” countries.
If the goal is for democracy to run its course in Venezuela, it is incredibly important that anti-democratic means do not become the tools of choice in order to bring about a change in government more favorable to U.S. interests. As the events in Venezuela unfold, it is becoming increasingly clear that this is wishful thinking.
While issuing a correction to reporter Jon Lee Anderson’s third Venezuela article over the past year would have been embarrassing for The New Yorker magazine, the continued silence and inaction of the elite intellectual journal is perhaps a greater indictment.
President Hugo Chávez was larger than life, stirring hope and controversy while helping to change the political trajectory of Venezuela and Latin America. His death raises pressing and difficult questions: what will become of his political project at home? What are the prospects for regional integration in his wake? How will the United States respond to a post-Chávez landscape?
President Hugo Chávez was larger than life, stirring hope and controversy while helping to change the political trajectory of Venezuela and Latin America. His death raises pressing and difficult questions: what will become of his political project at home? What are the prospects for regional integration in his wake? How will the United States respond to a post-Chávez landscape?
The New Yorker Magazine's Jon Lee Anderson has provided coverage on Hugo Chávez and Venezuela that is rife with errors and distortions, some of which are exposed through simple arithmetic.
