Page 56 - Anatomy-of-a-Fraud

The first to go back on its written pledge was Channel 2, barely a few weeks
after having signed the agreement. The station refused to broadcast commercials –paid
for in advance– for ADO and PDC legislative candidate Cochez. It should come as no
surprise that Channel 2 was the first station to play dirty pool. As previously noted, its
majority stockholders are members of the Defense Forces General Staff, and they can
hardly be said to be dauntless champions of justice and democratic principles.

On the other hand, Channels 13 and 4 refused to broadcast PDC paid political
announcements during the municipal campaign that followed the presidential race. One
of the offending commercials urged Panamanians to vote but the stations declined to
air it because it referred “to the damages the country has sustained following the events
of May 6”. Displaying an unsuspected concern for national peace and harmony, the
stations found this reference dangerous. The announcement did not mention the word
“fraud”, but they knew what the man in the street thought. His thoughts were harmful
and had to be repressed! 1984; elections in Orwell’s world!

Not surprisingly, almost twice as many people abstained from voting in the
municipal elections as in the presidential race. It was no surprise either that the PRD,
the party of the Guard, won most of the municipalities and representative seats.
Let us return now to the topic at hand, government control of TV during the
presidential campaign.

No TV channel agreed to sell airtime to the opposition. Their refusal
complemented the plastering of TV screens with shots of Barletta. This strategy sought
to manipulate public opinion in two ways; on the one hand, Barletta’s face and speeches
dominated newscasts; on the other, the opposition was prevented from presenting its
platform during paid time. The only way the opposition could voice its message was
through paid political announcements of no more than 60 and no less than 30 seconds
in length. And even these commercials were at one point refused.

It is also worth noticing that in addition to its biased coverage, Channel 2 aired
two programs during the campaign –one very day, the other twice a week– devoted
almost entirely to discrediting ADO candidates. As soon as the campaign ended, the
host of one of these shows was rewarded for his obedience with the New York
consulate. Only God knows what prize was given to the other.

Finally, both station’s editorials were one more tooth in Barletta’s cogwheel,
constantly attacking the opposition.
Before ending this section, it is fitting to relate an example of the dishonesty
practiced by all government-controlled media, a sort of collective false testimony
against Arias, who was accused of having murdered a group of European immigrants
in the Chiriquí highlands in 1941.

the agreement was working. In fact, Dr. E. emphasized, Dr. Arias had more commercials on Dr. E’s
station last week than Dr. Barletta”. (Press conference transcript).