Page 52 - Anatomy-of-a-Fraud

During the campaign, the ERSA papers did not accept paid political
announcements from ADO. Instead, they adopted a policy of vicious attacks against it
and of fulsome adulation of Barletta. Some days they seemed to drop all pretenses of
journalistic independence and revealed themselves as UNADE organs, which is indeed
what they were. They backed Barletta as strongly as the General Staff. Their pages
published the most slanderous diatribes against the opposition and its leaders the
Panamanian press had seen in many years. There can be no doubt that the Panamanian
bishops had ERSA in mind when they drew up their celebrated letter.

On the other hand, praise for Barletta was not limited only to news items but
showed up prominently in their op-ed pages. At times they got carried away and ended
up looking silly. Moreover, in flagrant violation of Article 168 of the Electoral Code,
forbidding “massive government propaganda and advertising during the electoral
campaign”, official entities such as IDAAN, INTEL and the Ministry of Public Works
published hundreds of full-page ads underscoring the regime’s achievements over the
past 16 years. This was obviously government financed pro-UNADE advertising and
as such was explicitly prohibited by law. (See exhibit 11).

A “news item” published in Crítica front page on May 5, one day before the
elections typifies the disinformation and complete lack of ethics of the ERSA
newspapers. The report in question included a photograph of a United States passport,
allegedly belonging to ADO vice presidential candidate Rodríguez, who was accused
of being a U.S. citizen. It was a barefaced lie, and the United States Embassy
immediately denied the report. Crítica however, failed to publish the Embassy’s
denial. Its dirty trick must have caused some damage to Arias’s ticket. (See exhibit 12).

Under the Electoral Code, political advertising was strictly prohibited on May
5, the eve of the elections. But, at the same time, the law grants equal time and space
to anyone alluded to in a media report. Crítica, of course, violated the Code and the
Law, for it answers only to those who consider themselves above both.

And Barletta would later say that he won fair and square!

Exhibit 13 includes reproductions of some pages published by these
newspapers during the campaign. The intention to do harm, to disinform, to manipulate
public opinion is patent. And, to rub salt into the wound, this was being done by
newspapers stolen from their rightful owners, existing thanks to government subsidies
paid for with taxpayer money.

In closing this section on the printed press, a few remarks about Ya, the sixth
national newspaper in Panama.

+ Ya has been an opposition newspaper, but its limited circulation kept it from
having a major impact on public opinion. And while La Prensa was still denouncing