I wrote on June 14 about Reuters burying (for over a month) a study (CEPR, 4/25/19) by prominent economists Jeffrey Sachs and Mark Weisbrot that links economic sanctions President Donald Trump imposed on Venezuela in August 2017 to an estimated 40,000 deaths by the end of 2018. As of January 2019, Trump made the sanctions even more severe.
The study is the clearest evidence of the devastating impact US policy is having on the people of Venezuela. Below is a list of English-language outlets that, according to the Nexis news database, mentioned the study as of June 17. They are overwhelmingly non-US outlets:
- CE Noticias Financieras (English) (4 mentions)
- Sputnik News Service (Russia) (3)
- Iran Daily (2)
- Bangladesh Government News
- China Daily
- China Daily (US Edition)
- Crikey (Australia)
- Edmonton Sun (Canada)
- Eurasia Review (US)
- Kashmir Times (India)
- Newsbank (Washington news sources)
- PM News (Nigeria)
- Press TV (Iran)
- Pressenza International Press Agency (Ecuador)
- States News Service (US)
- The Nation (US)
To be fair, Nexis doesn’t seem to catch Reuters articles or reprints in other outlets. Reuters did finally mention the study at the end of an article (6/9/19). Telesur English reported on the study, but is not on the list above.
The Independent (4/26/19) had one of the few reports in corporate media that focused on the CEPR study.
Also missing above is an excellent news article that Andrew Buncombe wrote for the UK Independent (4/26/19) the day after the study was released. Having followed Buncombe’s reporting (as well as his Twitter timeline) for many years, I wasn’t surprised. Aside from monitoring non-US outlets to catch important facts that are “missed” by the US media about Washington’s role in the word, readers would be well-advised to watch for individual journalists who, even within corporate media, are willing to break from the herd.
Alternative outlets that covered the study (VenezuelAnalysis.com, The Canary, FAIR.org and Media Lens, for example) are obviously key to what Chomsky once called “intellectual self-defense.”
And let’s not forget two of the big outlets from which we all need “intellectual self-defense”: The New York Times and the Washington Post. As I write this, a direct search on their sites turns up no mention of the study.
A reprint of a lengthy Reuters article appeared on the New York Times website (6/16/19) with the headline “As Peru Tightens Its Border, Desperate Venezuelans Cling to Asylum Lifeline.” At one point, the article states:
The crisis has deepened since the United States imposed tough sanctions on the OPEC nation’s oil industry in January in an effort to oust leftist president Maduro in favor of opposition leader Juan Guaidó.
I guess they forgot to mention that Trump’s sanctions had already been linked to tens of thousands of deaths before he decided to make them more savage in January.
Featured image: Photo of protest march from a Venezuelanalysis report (4/26/19) on the CEPR study. (photo: @ChuckModi1/Twitter)
The Real News Network, Consortium News both covered it.
What I learned from this article is that the Lexis/Nexis news database is inadequate as a basis for media studies because it leaves out a lot of sources. The article mentions Reuters, which is part of Thomson Reuters, the single biggest competitor of Lexis/Nexis.
Although I’m also inclined to think that “burying” all work (including this study) by “Dr. Shock and Mr. Aid” Jeffrey Sachs is a good thing for the world.
Ignoring inconvenient fatalities
Please, please, look at the BBC Newshour coverage of anything Venezuelan. It goes so far beyond bias… outright lies, outright propaganda. Pointed, directed, you can hear the anguish in the “reporter’s” voice when another coup attempt has failed. Makes you wonder who owns shares of what.
I wonder how many American kids will die, as Trump did have the food support help for the unemployed last for just 3 months. Of course, we also missed out on the number of dead children in Yemen, and with food support and medical cuts in Venezuela too—–how many –how many there? I am wondering if this is the Trump version of “Shock and Awe?”
The very point of the sanctions is to make life hell in Venezuela. So, the paper points to a policy success. I can imagine that Trump, Bolton and Pompeo are all slapping each other on the back in celebration.
Missing from this is any discussion of the sanctions and why they were made. unFAIR
No – the article mentions that the US has been trying to overthrow the government since 2002
Sorry – actually the June 14 article (which is linked to in the piece) that this follow up article was based on mentions that.
Well, why in your witless opinion were illegal acts if war-the sanctions- imposed on a sovereign nation neither at war with nor threatening the US?
Even GE’s and Archer Daniels Midland’s National Privatized Radio is conspicuously absent.
The implication is that the Nexis news database is not reliable.
Hi Joe two Canadians did it in Lancet
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(19)31397-2/fulltext
Just try finding a mention of the Cucutazo reported on originally by the PanAm Post. Guaidó is corrupt and the American media doesn’t want to report on that.
I am hoping some friends of mine do one on that soon.