Deadline: Populism and the Press in Venezuela by Robert Samet

Abstract

Reviewed by: Deadline: Populism and the Press in Venezuela by Robert Samet Iselin Åsedotter Strønen Robert Samet. Deadline: Populism and the Press in Venezuela. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2019. 224 pp. Robert Samet. Deadline: Populism and the Press in Venezuela. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2019. 224 pp. Reading Robert Samet's Deadline: Populism and the Press in Venezuela awoke remnants of the chilling angst that occasionally crept upon me while reading the crime section of Últimas Noticias, the most circulated newspaper in Venezuela. Although I was never a victim of violent crime during almost two years of living and doing fieldwork in Caracas' infamously insecure urban shantytowns (barrios), the anxiety of becoming one clinged to my consciousness like a numbed, but always present second skin. Often, while being out and about and feeling relatively safe, I wondered if this fear was justified or not. But the daily flow of news stories reporting on hideous crimes and displaying close-up photos of desperately grieving family members magnified the sensation that danger lurked nearly everywhere. This is a feeling I shared with many people, at least in urban Venezuela, a country which for years has had sky-rocketing homicide rates combined with a dysfunctional judicial system. For nearly three years (mostly between 2007 and 2014), Robert Samet observed up-close this steady trail of dead bodies and mourning relatives as he tagged along the daily work of crime reporters from the morning brief and coffee-gathering in downtown Caracas, to the infamous Bello Monte morgue, to government press conferences, and to crime scenes across the city. But the central analytical foci in this theoretically sophisticated and eloquently written monograph is not on crime reporting per se, but on how crime reporting played a central role in shaping populist mobilization across the political spectrum during the Chávez era. His account [End Page 837] draws together three theoretical and empirical objects of analysis; firstly, crime-reporting in the form of the Latin American journalistic genre denuncias—denouncements/accusations/complaints—that allow for making poignantly emotive and accusatory claims towards authorities as the ultimate culprit for wrongdoings suffered; secondly, insecurity and crime as an increasing point of convergence for criticism of the Chávez government, both among its supporters and opponents; and thirdly, populism as a defining characteristic of Venezuelan politics, left and right. Through a historically reflexive and empirically grounded analysis of how crime reporters contributed to shaping the body politic as collective victims of the state's negligence and wrongdoings, Samet contends that "close attention to the journalistic art of denunciation allows us to observe how media create the conditions of possibility for populist mobilization" (3). Samet unpacks the historical roots of the Latin American journalistic ethos of denuncias; a form of journalistic practice governed by different logics than (the illusion of) objectivity as espoused in North American and Northern European journalism. Denuncias is not part of an Habermasian liberal-democratic dialogue, Samet argues, it is conceived of as a democratic exercise of free speech aimed at speaking truth to power, to raise consciousness and, if needed, to mobilize for revolution (9–10). Denouncias played a central role in de-legitimizing the corrupt and inept politicians of the pre-Chávez era and thereby paved the way for Chávez' promise of popular sovereignty. However, shortly after his first electoral victory in 1998, the private media became fiercely opposed to the government. Contrary to common belief, the private media dominated the Venezuelan media spectrum, although some major outlets toward the end entered into tacit peace agreements with the government. Not only opinion journalism, but also news reporting had an explicit anti-government stance. Journalists would ask their interviewees leading questions that were evidently intended to provoke anti-government outbursts, whether the subject in question was garbage collection, crime, or public transport. The state media, however, dedicated their reporting to demonstrate the government's victories and showcase their plans, provide platforms for "constructive criticism" of the government, and broadcast pro-Chávez voices eager to counter the private media's narratives. Just as government supporters and government opponents interpreted the world from within radically different worldviews, the media also seemed...