The U.S. Actively Opposes Communism....Is Anyone Surprised By This?

Submitted by Todd Watson on September 10, 2006 - 3:29pm.

The headline of a September 9th New York Times article declares, "U.S. Paid (my italics) 10 Journalists For Anti-Castro Reports". Paid? My God! Do you mean to tell me that journalists don't work for free?

Does the Times believe this to be a shocking revelation? Are we supposed to see this as proof of the conspiratorial nature of the Bush Administration?

Apparently the Office of Cuba Broadcasting, a division of the U.S. Government-funded International Broadcasting Bureau, has for several years been hiring Cuban-American journalists in Miami to produce documentaries that are critical of Fidel Castro's communist government. These documentaries are then, through a variety of means, surreptitiously broadcast onto Cuban public television and radio.

Much like the communist government of China, Castro's Cuba has long been imprisoning dissidents. No media coverage is allowed except the pro-Castro state-run media.

Just across the waves, Miami is home to a large anti-Castro Cuban community. Therefore it seems that it would not be difficult to find willing journalists to take part in these documentaries, and yes, they would be paid.

The Times quoted one of the Cuban-American journalists in question, Ninoska Perez-Castellon, saying, "Being Cuban, there's nothing wrong with working on programs that are on a mission to inform the people of Cuba. It's no secret that we do that. My face has always been on the shows."

The American government has long been supplying alternative media to the people of countries that it has determined oppressive. In the 1980's, Radio Free Europe was lauded for its heroic efforts to provide alternative news reports to the captive audiences of the Soviet Bloc. Somewhat more problematic is the Voice of America, which is currently providing pro-Western news to the Middle East. All of these radio stations have been funded by the International Broadcasting Bureau, and all of their reporters were compensated for their efforts.

Its a shame that some of these journalists in Miami have lost their jobs over this. I would like to know why.

Gillian Reagan @ September 11, 2006 - 12:30pm

From the original Miami Herald article:

Ethicists say that it's common for journalists to be compensated by other media outlets but not by the government, built on principles that espouse an independent press.

''This is such an obvious textbook case,'' said University of Florida journalism professor Jon Roosenraad. "This is exactly like a business reporter during the day going out and moonlighting as a PR [public relations] person for a local company at night and then going back to the paper the next day and writing about `his' company.''

Total payouts since 2001 range from $1,550 to Radio Mambi commentator Ninoska Perez-Castellón to $174,753 for El Nuevo Herald's Alfonso, the government payment records show. The payments -- which range from $75 to $100 per appearance -- are to host or appear on the government-produced shows.

The Miami Herald's review of dozens of articles by the El Nuevo Herald journalists -- including several about TV Martí or Radio Martí -- found no instance in which the reporters or columnists disclosed that they had received payment.

It's one thing to receive payments for commenting on a show. It's quite another to be paid for it and not disclose it. Especially when you're also reporting on similar issues in a paper that is supposed to be neutral.

Nobody is saying the journalists would comment or report much differently. Who isn't against Castro? It's a matter of disclosure and transparency.

»

Todd Watson @ September 11, 2006 - 3:35pm

Thankyou for your comment. I understand your point. But I think several of the journalists in question are claiming that their employers were aware of their activities, if not publicly at least privately. If this is the truth, it makes me wonder if they were fired so that their employers could save face and not because they were guilty of any shady dealings with the government.

In the last paragraph of the article you posted, there is the implication that some of these reporters were guilty of promoting TV Marti and Radio Marti without disclosing that they worked for these networks. If this is true, it is indeed objectionable, but this is not the subject of the NY Times article that I was criticizing.

»

Recent comments

Navigation

Syndicate

Syndicate content