RCTV has been one of the most consistent opponents of the Chavez government and in the 2002 coup attempt it was one of the main protaganists in terms of organising and executing aspects of the coup. RCTV reported (falsely) that Chavez supporters had fired at demonstrators which allowed disgruntled generals to walk away from the government.

I'm surprised it wasn't immediately shut down after the 2004 recall, not sure I would have had the same patience.

I don't necessarily condone the decision, but the situation is certainly more complex than forcing "...a television station critical of his leftist government off the air".

 That people here actually defend what Chavez has done is not surprising. If it was a right-wing government which shut down a broadcaster and claimed it was "saving  lives" or "improving" communications these same folks would be foaming at the mouth with outrage and no doubt hypothesizing that the CIA was behind it.

  It's this type of blind devotion to ideology with no respect for higher pronciples that is so frightening abiout much of what gets written here. The justification of naked repression when it is done by those with similar views is still the justification of naked repression.

  Too many people here ARE for repression-- we saw it last week with the diatribes against Christian schools and we see it again here. People who advocate or justify  repression of opposing views are the foot soldiers of authoritarianism and the enmeies of freedom.

  The topic here is Chavez's decision to shutdown a television outlet that he considers a dissenting voice.

  Opinions on THAT should be reached independcently of any views about our media and politics. We could have  a totalitarian government that rigidly controlled all expression or we could be a perfectly open society with absolute free expression and it should not change your view of Chavez's action.

  The attempt to argue that the "MSM" is not as vigilant in exposing government malfeasance as it should be justifies police-state tactics by a regime elsewhere is foolish.

  The argument that because the USA has exerted influence on foreign governments to undermine sovereignty and the expression of the popular will in other nations it is acceptable for their governments  to DO PRECISELY THAT if the government is not friendly to the USA is beyond foolish.

  Here's a thought. It's wrong for any side to do it-- AND-- when one regime is oppressive it makes it far more likely that the next will be repressive too. If one considers, the possibility that the NEXT regime might just be a "puppet" it probably won't be  helpful to the cause of freedom  for that government to inherit a society with a closed press and little existing outlet for dissent. Doing this today will make it easier for a right-wing regime to be oppressive in the future.

  Freedom is good. Enemeies of freedom are bad and they feed off of each other -- usually at the expense of those who want to be free. The elites change with some frequency but the tactics much less so.

Chavez:

"I'm going to warn them before the nation... I recommend they take a tranquilizer, that they slow down, because if not, I'm going to slow them down." ...

Chavez did not elaborate, but also warned that radio stations should not be inciting violence by "manipulating feelings" among the populace.

Perhaps RCTV broke the law, called for assassination. Who knows - the "facts" are slippery here. What's worrisome is the "I" - the rule of the man, the caudillo, not the rule of law.

About the rest, the question is By what right does RCTV or any other privately held entity hold its licence to broadcast over the natural public resource of the public airwaves? You'll note RCTV hasn't been silenced, they still are on cable, just their use of the public airwaves has been taken away.

Examples of utilities are:

-An electric utility, which in some instances can be electric power transmission or electricity distribution organizations.
-Drinking water purification and distribution
-Sewage treatment and disposal
-Other waste disposal
-Natural gas distribution
-District heat generation and distribution
-Public transport
-Telecomunications, such as cable television and telephone lines
-Roads, including tollways

RCTV's license was given to a state-sponsored station called TVes which now broadcasts on ch 2. TVes is not a public company, in the sense that Microsoft is a public company.

TVes is broadcasting using RCTV's privately-owned broadcast assets that had been seized by the gvt after the gvt refused to renew RCTV's license.

Ever hear of the (heartily supported by latter day Big Tenters) Espionage Act and HUAC?

A bit (translated):

Four are wounded by bullets after incidents in Venezuela.
...
The student march continued normally during the better part of the morning and the midday hours, but this afternoon, police officers on motorcyle began to disolve the protest with tear gas and rubber bullets.

Is the Venezuelan government shutting down the RCTV Station?

Contrary to some reports, the RCTV station is not being closed down. Rather, the Venezuelan government has chosen not to renew RCTV's licence to broadcast via Venezuela's Channel Two when this expires on 27 May. RCTV will continue to be able to operate freely in Venezuela on the public airwaves on cable and on satellite, as will the many TV and radio stations that RCTV owner Empresas 1BC runs across Venezuela.

Why has the government decided not to renew RCTV's licence?

As with other democracies, Venezuelan law allows the government the right to grant broadcast licences, renew them or let them expire. The government has made the decision not to renew because of RCTV's violation of numerous laws - most notably the active support it gave to a military coup in April 2002 to overthrow the democratically-elected Chávez government.
In addition to its violation of laws that prohibit the incitement of political violence, RCTV has not co-operated with tax laws and has failed to pay fines issued by the Telecommunications Commission.

RCTV's involvement in the 2002 coup

...RCTV's specific involvement included running adverts encouraging the public to take to the streets and to overthrow the democratically elected president. As www.venezuelanalysis.com highlighted, RCTV was the first to broadcast the false claim that Chávez's supporters were shooting at opposition demonstrators, which then served as a justification for high level military generals to declare their disobedience to the government and RCTV also showed exclusive interviews with coup plotters.

RCTV's involvement was publicly highlighted on a television chat show the day after the coup, where journalists and military plotters boasted of their collaboration in creating a violent confrontation that could be used to justify the overthrow of the government. In this exchange, one conspirator says: "I must thank Venevision and RCTV" for the role it played[v]...

In addition to direct misrepresentation of events, RCTV also censored news reporting to try to stop the public from finding out what was really happening. RCTV's owner Marcel Granier ordered on the day of the coup and the following day that there was to be "No information on Chávez, his followers, his ministers, and all others" on the station. A managing producer of one of the station's news programmes affirmed this when testifying to the Venezuelan National Assembly. Instead, in the days of the coup, when hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets to demand the return of President Chavez, RCTV showed only cartoons. This is in clear violation of regulations contained in Article 58 of the Venezuelan Constitution that guarantee Venezuelan citizens a right to "true and accurate information".

In no country would it be the case that media outlets which have not only called for, but also played a key role in organising the violent overthrow of a democratic government, would have their licence to broadcast renewed....

Is the non-renewal of the licence legal and have other governments made similar decisions?

Most countries regard the TV and radio airwaves as a public space that has to be regulated through laws and codes of conduct. Governments or delegated bodies are empowered to take action against any broadcaster that fails in its legally prescribed responsibilities.

Across the world, decisions not to renew licences to those who have violated these requirements are not unusual. A report by J. David Carracedo published in the magazine Diagonal on 21 countries, including the US and in Europe, found that there have been at least 236 closures, revocations, and non-renewals of radio and TV licences. In addition research conducted by the Venezuelan Ministry of Telecommunications shows that over 600 TV broadcasting licences have not been renewed all around the world.

In Venezuela, the regulations are based on Article 156 of the Venezuelan Constitution, the Organic Law of Telecommunications (2000) and the Law of Social Responsibility in Radio and Television (2004) Similarly, there are requirements on broadcasters in the US and Britain....

Will alternative views still be able to be expressed in Venezuela?

Much of the reporting of the non-renewal of the RCTV licence has implied that this station is a lone critical voice of the Chavez government. This could not be further from the truth.

It is estimated that 95 percent of the Venezuelan media is in opposition to President Chávez, and on a daily basis produces vitriolic 'news pieces' as well as editorials against the government. The private Venezuelan media includes five major television channels -Venevisión, RCTV, Globovisión, Televen and CMT - which control at least 90 percent of the TV market, with smaller private stations controlling another five percent. In addition all of the country's 118 newspaper companies, both regional and national, are held in private hands, as are 99 percent of radio stations.

Venezuela's media enjoys the freedom to report and express opinions without government interference. Despite the clear violations of laws and active support for the overthrowing of a democratic government, not a single TV or radio station has been closed by the government since President Chávez was elected in 1998....

In fact, since the election of the President Chávez, the diversity of media has expanded. Venezuela's Telecommunications Minister, Jesse Chacón, recently pointed out that during the Chávez presidency the number of TV channels have increased from 30 to 78 and the number of FM radio broadcasters from 368 to 617 since 1999....

What will replace RCTV on Channel Two?

A new television station TEVES (Venezuelan Social Television) will begin airing on Channel Two once RCTV's licence expires. Government Minister Jesse Chacon has said that TEVES will be similar in concept to that of European public service broadcasting, with the aim of creating space for diverse programming. He explained that the new channel will "break the editorial line that exists in the TV business, where the owner of the medium is the owner of the message" with independent TV producers creating the programmes for the new channel.[xvii] The Venezuelan Director of Public Policy of the Ministry of Communication and Information, Luisana Colomine, added that "Any person can participate in its production and no one will be excluded for belonging to one political party or another... That's part of the idea of public service".