INTRODUCTION President Ronald Reagan

“Whoever controls the media, the images, controls the culture.” - Allen Ginsberg

In 1983, President Ronald Reagan established a radio broadcast program

known as Radio Martí supported and funded by the United States, which airs

Spanish transmissions to Cuba. The original purpose of this 24-hour radiocast

was to be “a recommendation to the President by the Commission for Assistance

to a Free Cuba. Its mission was to carry out regular airborne transmissions in

order to break the Castro regime’s blockade of information to the people of the

island” (Mortman, 2004).

Since all of the official media outlets on the island of Cuba are controlled,

and almost exclusively funded, by the government, (Williams, 2006) the effects of

the airborne reports, that started broadcasting to Cuba in 1985 and 1990

respectively, have, “increased the availability of reliable and uncensored

information on events in Cuba and around the world, and were part of an

integrated approach to assist the Cuban people in bringing about rapid and

peaceful change to their nation,” according to mass communications scholar John

Lent (1999).

According to the Broadcasting Board of Governors website, Radio Martí

follows the “Voice of America” journalistic standards and guidelines for

presenting a variety of news and information in an accurate and objective

manner. According to the broadcasting station’s own statement, “Radio Martí is a

portal with a mission to promote the principles of freedom and democracy in the

Cuban society” (Martí Noticias, 2012, p. 1). Its mission is “to provide an

informative balance of diverse ideas, which are not offered by the media in Cuba

and provide information resources that allow people to break free from the

totalitarian censorship and join the ongoing democratization process” (Martí

Noticias, 2012, p. 1).

The station’s news programs are broadcasted through a medium wave

(AM) frequency, and are carried out by Miami's Spanish-language station, Radio

Mambí (WAQI-710AM) everyday (Mortman, 2004). Radio Mambí is one of the

highest-rated radio stations in South Florida and is known for its strong

antiCastro stance (Williams, 2006). Since Radio Martí’s inception, the Cuban

government has made considerable efforts to limit Martí’s broadcasting

capabilities and American influence. The Cuban government's program, called

Radio Rebelde, calculatedly transmits on the same frequency as Mambí, but

jamming the program with another frequency doesn’t block the signal in all

locations, or at all times (Mortman, 2004). Radio Martí counters by switching its

frequencies 10 times a day (Dale, Walser & Roach, 2010) and the public reception

to Radio Martí has been positive (Williams, 2006). In a survey conducted by the

BBG’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) in July 2007, 72 percent of respondents

reported that they have listened to Radio Martí’s news broadcasts (30 percent of

them said they listen daily) (Dale, Walser & Roach, 2010). Despite the setbacks,

Radio Martí has had considerable success in penetrating the barriers established

by the Castro regime.

On September 8, 2006, through a Freedom of Information request, it was

found that at least ten South Florida journalists received regular payments from

the U.S. government for programs on Radio Martí that “support an opening of

Cuban society and multi-party elections in Cuba” (Williams, 2006, p. 2). The U.S.

George W. Bush administration’s Office of Cuba Broadcasting, (OCB) oversaw

the operations of Radio Martí and initiated a plan in 2001 under which several

journalists were paid to provide commentary, transmitted to Cuba, that was

critical of the system of government established by Fidel Castro (Goodnough,

2006). For several years before this “the Cuban government contended that some

South Florida Spanish-language journalists were on the federal payroll,” and

cited this as its rationale for jamming the radio transmission into Cuba (Williams,

2006, p. 2).

The payments totaled thousands of dollars over several years. According

to the Miami Herald, the group of journalists included three individuals from El

Nuevo Herald, the Spanish-language corporate parent newspaper of The Miami

Herald, among several other free-lance writers and reporters.

Several of the highest paid reporters were employed through El Nuevo

Herald. Pablo Alfonso, who reported on Cuba for El Nuevo Herald, received the

first single payment, in the amount of almost $175,000 for broadcasts made

between 2001 and 2006 (Goodnough, 2006). In addition to Alfonso, other

journalists who received large payments include Wilfredo Cancio Isla, who

writes for El Nuevo Herald and received approximately $15,000 between 2001

and 2006; Olga Connor, a freelance reporter for the newspaper who accepted

about $71,000; and Juan Manuel Cao, a reporter who received $11,000 (Williams,

2006). Other individuals who also accepted money from the Bush administration

include Armstrong Williams, a commentator and talk-show host who received

$240,000 (Goodnough, 2006).

Pedro Roig, director of the Office of Cuba Broadcasting, told The Miami

Herald that hiring Cuban-American journalists was part of a broader mission to

improve the station’s quality. But other media professionals like Al Thompkins

of The Poynter Institute disagreed. “It’s all about credibility and independence. If

you consider yourself a journalist, then it seems there’s an obvious conflict of

interest to take government dollars” (Kumar, 2012, p. 49).

Today, Radio Martí, which operates under the Broadcasting Board of

Governors (BBG), no longer pays journalists to broadcast given information, but

rather discusses different interests and social issues relating to the Cuban people.

Using a qualitative content analysis, this study will expand on current

literature of the four theories of the press, propaganda, and content framing in

examining the frames and propaganda strategies used by Radio Martí

commentators through the evaluation of politically charged media broadcasts.

Results of this study will contribute to literature analyzing different propaganda

strategies, measuring types of frames in cases of conflict of interest, and

understanding the media-related disposition of Cuba.

By way of disclosure, the researcher is a second-generational

CubanAmerican, who has never personally visited Cuba. Many of the

perspectives that she has toward Cuba emanate from her grandparents on both

sides who fled the country in the wake of the 1956 revolution.

The study of propaganda and framing, in conjunction with the four

theories of the press, has not been addressed for the purpose of assisting the

cultural perspectives of a developing country with media outlets that are highly

censored. The literature review will explore the background of propaganda

followed by an overview of framing in political contexts. Chapter six of this

manuscript will outline the method used to collect the radio broadcast data and

analyze the results of propaganda strategies and framing techniques for this

study.

CHAPTER 2: FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

The preambles of the Cuban and U.S. Constitution both address their

citizens in a similar manner. The Cuban preamble states:

We, Cuban citizens heirs and continuators of the creative work

and the traditions of combativity, firmness, heroism and

sacrifice fostered by our ancestors; by the Indians who

preferred extermination to submission; by the slaves who

rebelled against their masters… (Cuban Constitution,

Preamble).

The 1976 Constitution of the Republic of Cuba, thus, addresses the values

held by the government, as well as those that relate to the Marxist and

MarxistLeninist teachings that the government ascribes to. The United States

Constitution states:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more

perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility,

provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare,

and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our

posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the

United States of America (U.S. Constitution Preamble).

Despite similarities in the preambles, which share many of the same

principles in the intention of their fulfillment, the freedoms accorded within the

constitutions are not always the same.

In terms of freedom of the press, the Cuban Constitution, provides at

Article 53:

Constitution citizens have freedom of speech and of the press

in keeping with the objectives of socialist society. Material

conditions for the exercise of that right are provided by the fact

that the press, radio, television, cinema, and other mass media

are state or social property and can never be private property.

This assures their use at exclusive service of the working

people and in the interests of society and of the Cuban people

(Cuban Constitution, Art. 53).

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of

religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of

speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to

petition the Government for a redress of grievances (U.S. Constitution, Amend.

I). Cuban press law is, thus, predicated on the socialist principle that the

rights of the collective take precedence over the rights of the individual because

“the people of Cuba view freedom and human dignity as a social and economic

right rather than a civil and political right” (Pollis, 1999, p. 1).

“When Fidel Castro and his guerilla army came down from their

mountain stronghold to take control of the Cuban government in 1959, one of

their earliest and most widely criticized acts was the swift takeover of the

country’s mass communication system” (Nichols, 2006, p. 260). Just a couple

years later, all forms of Cuban media were controlled by the Castro regime in

order to eliminate opposition to the revolution (Morgan, 1975).

Mass communication media were extremely prevalent in Cuba. “Most

homes outside of Havana lacked running water during these times (1960s), but

not a radio receiver” (Nichols, 2006, p. 259). This indicates Castro’s success in

promoting the mass media tool used by the government to diffuse propaganda

favorable to socialist governments (Perez, 1998). The government has always

relied heavily on its broadcasting system as a means of information transmission

and national integration. “For those within the Revolution, complete freedom; for

those against the Revolution, no freedom,” said Fidel Castro when he laid down

the dictum that was to govern the role of mass media in the new Cuban society in

1959 (Phillips, 2008, p. 59). Today, in comparison to the prerevolutionary times,

there are significantly less radio receivers, but the overall amount of

programming focused on governmental media policies has increased throughout

the island (Nichols, 2006). The reason for this is that the Communist party owns

all mass media in Cuba, and the media operate almost entirely on state funds

(Goodnough, 2006), which, in turn, means that “the press takes on the form and

coloration of the social and political structures within which it operates” (Siebert,

1952, p. 4).

The control of the information and ideas in the mass media, whether

articulated into law or not, involves a complex matrix of variables:

(1) who owns the mass media; (2) where or for what sector of

society the media are controlled; (3) what information is managed;

(4) how media management is done; and (5) at what point in the

production process information is controlled (Curry, 1982, p.

257).

This is determined by national, historical and cultural experiences; and the

leadership’s perception of its own legitimacy in penetrating the society and

making it loyal; the level of popular expectations and the ability of the system to

fulfill these expectations; and the goals of the dominant ideology (Curry, 1982, p.

259). And in Cuba the dominant ideology is socialist. “Cuban journalists share a

common sense of a continuing counter-revolutionary threat by

U.S. financed Cuban-Americans living in Miami” (Phillips, 2010, p. 1).

Cuba has five national radio channels centered in Havana that are

administered by the Cuban Institute of Radio and Television and “is by no means

open to foreign press” (Nichols, 2006, p. 58). In the 1970s and 1980s, the Cuban

external broadcasting system was saturated with shrill anti-American

propaganda, (Phillips, 2008) and the Voice of America, which broadcasts in 53

languages to virtually every country in the world (Herbert, 2001) countered with

the most concentrated propaganda campaign in its history (Nichols, 2006). This

was just the beginning of a large installation of U.S. transmission efforts to Cuba

through the International Broadcasting Bureau. “U.S. policy toward Cuba is

governed by America’s enduring concerns about the absence of democracy,

liberty, and respect for human rights during the 52-year reign of the Castro

dictatorship,” writes Goodnough (2006, p. 1). “Castro’s one-party state jailed

those who opposed him, ruined the economy and led hundreds of thousands of

Cubans to flee. This abuse of power has led to a government which controls

every Cuban newspaper, television channel and radio station and restricts

Internet access,” according to Pecar (2011, p. 4). The Cuban government attempts

to advocate fear in the Cuban population by warning them that freedom of the

press has been restrained, along with other freedoms, according to Tabache

(2011).

In 2001, four journalists were serving prison terms for “insulting” the head

of state or for “dangerousness,” making Cuba the only country in the western

hemisphere where journalists were imprisoned at the time for exercising their

professions (Herbert, 2001).

“In 2003, 27 independent journalists were tried similarly and imprisoned

in a wide-ranging crackdown on political dissent, according to the Independent,

a newspaper first published in 1986 and which is still publishing today (The

Independent, 2007, p. 9). Others were imprisoned for being in communication

with international human rights organizations (The Independent, 2010, p.4). This

is part of the exemplification that provides Cary Roque with pull over those who

are “anti-Castro.”

“You cannot kill truth by murdering or imprisoning journalists,” said

Tubal Páez, president of the Journalist Union of Cuba (Phillips, 2010). This

sentiment expressed by Paez is relevant to Cary Roque’s experience. Cary Roque

was a Cuban journalist who was imprisoned for 16 years during the 1960s. She

currently resides in Miami, Florida and works with Radio Martí (Ferrera, 2012).

“Those who do not believe that U.S. rulers are consciously aware and

willing to work toward the propagation of capitalism should note how strongly

they press for free-market reforms. This helps everyone, but hurts everyone at

the same time” said Cary Roque. Nonetheless, Roque firmly believes that citizens

should have a right to know what is going on in other parts of the world, and

should have a fair amount of unbiased information about their own system of

government (Ferrera, 2012).

Cuba is a Unitary Socialist Republic with 14 provinces and one special

municipality -- Havana. It is currently a dictatorship, and has remained that way

since 1959, when Fidel’s forces entered the capital (Hamberg and Coyula, 2009).

The sole branch of government is the Executive branch which is currently headed

by Fidel Castro’s brother, Raul, since Fidel stepped down in 2007 (Hamberg and

Coyula, 2009). The sole political party on the island is the Cuban Communist

Party (Hamberg and Coyula, 2009).

The Constitution of 1976, which defined Cuba as a socialist republic, was

replaced by the Constitution of 1992, which is "guided by the ideas of José Martí

and the political and social ideas of Marx, Engels and Lenin" (Hamberg and

Coyula, 2009, p. 2).

CHAPTER 3: THEORY

Four Theories of the Press

Siebert et al. (1963) compare the differences between press systems in full

perspectives, to see the social systems in their true relationship to the press and

have identified four theories that govern press/state relationships in different

government systems – libertarian, authoritarian, social responsibility, and Soviet

(1963:2). The Libertarian theory does not regard the press as an instrument of

government; the press is financially independent, functioning to inform and

entertain the general public, to help discover truth, and to be the watchdog over

the workings of the government and, hence, democracy. Authoritarian theory, on

the opposite side, requires the press to be a ‘servant of the state’ (1963:3) and an

institution controlled by the government.

The Soviet Communist theory of the state developed of from the

Authoritarian model (Siebert et al., 1963, p. 3). The Soviet Communist theory

posits that the state instrumentally uses its mass media for various political

purposes, particularly as propaganda tools (Huang, 2003). Since the 1956

Revolution and the start of the Castro regime, the relationship between the state

and the press in Cuba has fallen in line with the description of government/press

relations described by the Soviet Communist theory (Zhang and Fleming, 2005).

Karl Marx, advocated that, “productive forces would always change faster than

productive relations, throwing society out of balance” (Siebert et al., 1963, p. 109).

Thus, as with Communist ideals, and the Authoritarian theory of the press, the

Soviet theory’s logic is that the collective is more important than the individual,

and therefore it is important to advance the working class in the Soviet world.

The Social Responsibility theory of press/government relations emerged

from the Libertarian theory in the 20th century (Siebert et al., 1963, p. 74). Social

Responsibility theorists advocate that, under the First Amendment, the press has

an obligation to carry out such functions as providing a forum for debates on

public affairs, informing the public and arousing citizens’ interests, and, in

essence, to “recognize its responsibilities and make them the basis of operational

policies”(1963: 74). It has this major premise: “Freedom carries concomitant

obligations; and the press, which enjoys a privileged position under our

government, is obliged to be responsible to society for carrying out certain

essential functions of mass communication in contemporary society” (Siebert,

1963, p. 74). Press/government relationship in the United States is most closely

akin to this model, which posits that the press should present all sides of a story

and allows the audience members to form their own ideas and perceptions based

upon the information provided in the free marketplace (Siebert, 1963)

Propaganda

With the growth of international communication tools, the flow of

messages has been dramatically accelerated. Citizens around the world can more

often participate in uncensored conversations about their collective future

(Kumar, 2012). However, this is not the case everywhere, especially in parts of

the world where the Authoritarian press/government relationship is prevalent.

The goal of utilizing propaganda strategies in the case of a mass medium

is to “systematically and consciously promote a set of ideas and actions developed

by those advocating such a doctrine and who would duly benefit from it”

(Gambrill and Reiman, 2011, p. 7). While propaganda from a group with

opposing ideas is perceived negatively and is easily identified as propaganda,

within one’s own group, its ideology is neither good nor bad (Kumar, 2012).

Propagandists encourage shortcuts by “agitating emotions, exploiting

insecurities, capitalizing on the ambiguity of language, and bending the rules of

logic” (Gambrill and Reiman, 2011, p. 8). A propaganda analysis of this nature

will expose the methods that the broadcasters used in this specific program, and

suggest ways of avoiding these techniques and pinpointing the facts of such

eugenic movements (Elliston, 1999).

The five propaganda strategies addressed for the purpose of this study are as

follows:

(1) Appeal to prejudice, which uses loaded or emotive terms in

a biased and/or misleading way, in order to attach value or moral

goodness to believing the proposition.

(2) Flag-waving, which attempts to justify an action on the

grounds that doing so will benefit a country, group or idea that the

targeted audience supports.

(3) Oversimplification, or favorable generalities that are used

to provide simple answers to complex social, political, economic, or

military problems.

(4) Testimonials and quotations that are in or out of context,

and are especially cited to support or reject a given policy, action,

program, or personality. The reputation or the role (expert, respected

public figure, etc.) of the individual giving the statement is exploited.

This is done in an effort to cause the target audience to identify itself

with the authority or to accept the authority's opinions and beliefs as

its

own;

(5) Third party technique works on the principle that people

are more willing to accept an argument from a seemingly

independent source of information than from someone with a stake in

the outcome. A possible intended purpose of the utilization of third

party technique could be to improve sentiments or alter existing ones

among the target audience towards a given nation, region or system

of government (Gambrill and Reiman, 2011, p. 4-5).

Framing

Factors, such as the way a message is delivered, noticing angles

addressed, confidence of the speaker, word choice, tone of voice, overall

delivery of the message, all have important effects on its interpretation.

“Communicators make conscious or unconscious framing judgments in

deciding what to say, guided by frames that organize their belief system”

(Entman, 1993, p. 53).

Scholars have provided several different definitions of framing. Hanggli

(2010) defines framing as “Selecting perceived reality and make them more

salient in a communicating text” (p. 145). Kaid (2009) describes frames as “The

information presented to an audience and how the selection of one method or

content of presentation over another affects how an audience perceives a

person, event, or issue” (p. 18). Zauderer’s (2007) definition is “The central

organizing idea for content that supplies context and suggests what the issue

is, using selection, emphasis, exclusion, and elaboration” (p.

66). However, for the purpose of this paper the most appropriate definition is:

“Analysis of frames illuminates the precise way in which influence over a

human consciousness is exerted by the transfer (or communication) of

information from one location – such as speech, utterance, news report, or

novel—to that consciousness” (Entman, 1993, p. 54). In this case, the analysis

falls under multiple aspects of the broadcasts.

By applying the definition above to this study, we can operate under the

assumption that “mass communications can be used by media personnel

to create, influence, and alter public attitudes” (Lecheller, 2011, p. 959). This is

usually the motive behind Voice of America broadcasts, as previously mentioned,

where the primary goal is to "to promote freedom and democracy and to

enhance understanding through multimedia communication about America and

the world to audiences overseas" (Nichols, 2006, p. 260).

In the case of this particular research the later part of the analysis will

focus on framing, as it entails an explanation of how the broadcasters from Radio

Martí delivered their message using propaganda strategies explicitly

mentioned/stated in the hour-long program, in order to fulfill the U.S. public

information agenda.

By incorporating framing into the study, we can narrow down the

variables to be measured utilizing a schematic model to understand the

methods used by a “socially responsible” society to encourage change in a

Soviet Communist system.

These strategies have been utilized by leaders throughout history in both

deceptive and authentic framing techniques in order to display controlled

passion and dignity in making a case, stating values and moral ideas,

attacking opponent’s viewpoints, and gathering groups of followers to

support their overall message. Designated progressive figures in our society

constantly utilize authentic framing “to convey genuine values and beliefs in

support of a course of action” (Zauderer, 2007, p. 66). “Authentic framing is an

additional tool for building support to generate meaningful change. A change

initiative can be framed in terms of enhancing citizen value, preserving

democracy, building organization capacity, and giving meaning to one’s

professional life” (Slothuus and Vreese, 2010, p. 630). This seems like the most

successful path, but the evaluation of deceptive framing in the media

environment can be just as effective.

Framing involves selecting aspects of perceived reality and identifying

ways to promote or treat a particular problem (Zauderer, 2007). And with the

theoretical application of framing, specific frames were introduced into an

argument. “Frames diagnose causes – identify the forces creating the problem;

make moral judgments – evaluate causal agents and their effects; and suggest

remedies – offer and justify treatments for the problems and predict their

likely effects” (Entman, 1993, p. 53).

Some illustrations of theoretical concepts of framing include:

(1) Audience autonomy or the dominant meaning consists of the problem,

causal, evaluative, and treatment interpretations with the highest

probability of being noticed, processed, and accepted by most people.

(2) Journalistic objectivity, where journalists might be better equipped to

construct news with two or more interpretations of a problem to the

average, inattentive, and marginally informed audience

(3) Content analysis would avoid treating all negative or positive

terms of utterances as equally salient and influential.

(4) Public opinion and normative democracy theory where framing is a central

power in the democratic process and can indicate and alter public opinion

(Entman, 1993, p. 56-57). This lends itself to “picturing” and

framing through visual representations. “Visual perception is an

extremely complex process. Everything we see is constructed by our

visual intelligence according to principles” (Slothuus and Vreese,

2010, p. 641). So, this concept of “picturing” encourages certain

mind-sets about the speaker, as well as the message, and operates as

a relatable visual representation for listeners. This visual framing is

especially effective, as it signifies that broadcasters have tangible

evidence to

elaborate upon.

Media transmissions, like the Radio Martí program that forms the basis

of this study, are key when studying international communication, specifically

when discussing propaganda appeals and framing, as they describe, “the

process whereby communicators, consciously or unconsciously, act to construct

a point of view that encourages the facts of a given situation to be interpreted

by others in a particular manner” (Kuypers, 2009, p. 190).

The theory of framing in the political environment is a topic of extensive

research in relation to media and politics, disseminated on a mass scale via

broadcast media like radio and television. By looking at research that focuses on

political rhetoric about freedom of the press, as well as studies that focus on

framing, we can determine the contributions that those platforms will provide for

the purpose of this paper.

CHAPTER 4: LITERATURE REVIEW

Social Movements

Like other socialist nations, Cuba has experienced its fair share of social

movements, revolts, guerilla activity, and censorship of different mediums of

communications like radio broadcasts (O’Grady, 2012), which makes the

following articles purposeful in incorporating research that focuses on radical

media, Internet revolution, restricted journalism, and freedom of the press in

Cuba.

Shaffer (2009) explored the role of the Havana-based weekly anarchist

newspaper ¡Tierra! between 1902 and 1915. ¡Tierra! was the most popular,

longest-lived and most widely distributed newspaper in Cuba and reported

news about repression and struggles (Poyo, 1985). It distributed news and

propaganda to workers in small towns and cities across Cuba and, according to

Shaffer, “ it became a means of communicating and sharing tales of repression,

compared conditions, and heightened complexities of the island-wide struggle”

(Shaffer, 2009, p. 3). In May 1902 the U.S. occupation of Cuba ended and this

newspaper became a hub, popular throughout the region, for discussions

relating to anarchy (Shaffer, 2009). The reason for the rise in anarchist literature

was the migration in the 1890s of several Spanish-born anarchists as workers to

Cuba, and later to other Caribbean countries, and Tampa, Florida. These

anarchists were given a cause at the time with the “spread of U.S. military and

economic influence throughout the Caribbean,” which fueled the development of

a network of anti-imperialist anarchists in the Caribbean (Shaffer, 2009, p. 48).

The development of a strong anarchist network of press and academia facilitated

this network (Shaffer, 2009).

The analytical focus of Shaffer’s (2009) study was to understand the

movement status that this newspaper created in Cuba by researching the idea

that it provided readers throughout the distribution areas with a means to

compare their situations and develop a larger international consciousness.

According to the results of this study, ¡Tierra!, like several other Cuban

newspapers, (Granma, Juventud Rebelde, and La Demajagua) exemplified what

theorists and scholars (eg. Al Thompkins, Dale, Walser & Roach, 2010) who

study modern social movements have explored, in that the role of radical media

provides a space for activists to report on their own actions while challenging

those opposing their beliefs, and to link groups into networks of people with

similar situations (Shaffer, 2009).

One of the more interesting revelations from this research is that a

newspaper that initially started as part of a local and national labor movement,

resulted in a social movement “designed to challenge a broad array of labor,

economic, social, cultural, and political conditions in the region” and counter the

elite (Poyo, 1985, p. 31). Further, by using anarchist journalism, activists were

able to generate national awareness among other people who were facing similar

realities, and, thereby, to frame interpretations to be consistent across the

country. The focus of the new research stemming from this study, Shaffer (2009)

suggests, should be to apply similar variables in today’s Cuba, only altering the

medium of communication from print to online, Florida Senator Marco Rubio

discussed the need for this in O’Grady’s (2012) research.

O’Grady in his 2012 research, examines the reasons why “the Cuban

government prohibits social media forms within Cuba” (p. 1). The primary focus

of this article was an interview with GOP Senator Marco Rubio. Born in Miami,

Florida, Rubio is the son of Cuban immigrants who migrated to the U.S. in 1956,

during the dictatorship of Batista and at the time that Fidel Castro was

commencing his stance for revolution (Rubio, 2013, p. 1). Rubio’s parents were

forced to leave Cuba as political refugees from the communist regime, and he

was born and grew up in the U.S. (Washington Post, 2011), hence his personal

and political views on Cuba and the Castro regime are westernized. Rubio

became interested in public service and human rights principles early on and he

currently holds one of Florida’s seats in the U.S. Senate (Rubio, 2013).

O’Grady’s (2012) research is focused around an interview with Rubio. In

the interview, Rubio addressed the idea that, although many efforts, like Radio

Martí, bring hope to the few Cubans who actually have access to the radio

frequency, the only way to truly create an opportunity for change in the Cuban

government is to allow widespread communication within the country. O’Grady

(2012) suggests that a solid medium of communication, such as the Internet, or an

uncensored nation-wide newspaper would initiate momentum among

citizens.

But, according to O’Grady, (2012) Rubio does not believe the Castro

regime is opposed to “communication with the external world, but rather the

communication amongst the Cuban people” (O’Grady, 2012, p. 2). Rubio said, “I

think Raul Castro is well aware that he won’t survive in a reality where they can

communicate in a liberal manner” (O’Grady, 2012, p. 1).

Even though some Cubans on the island are receiving messages

encouraging democratic change in their system of government from the outside

world, that technology is not openly available, and social means of

communication are limited (O’Grady, 2012). O’Grady (2012) compares Raul

Castro’s situation in Cuba to that of Hosni Mubarak’s in Egypt, where there was

a recent rising fueled by social media communications. He suggests that the only

solidified way to create a revolution would be to provoke change via social

media communication media. “If the Cuban people gained access to some sort of

Internet connection where they would have open means of unfiltered, or

unjammed communication, social media interchange would take care of the rest”

(O’Grady, 2012, p. 2). In spite of the efforts of the United States with Radio Martí

and other such initiatives, the people of Cuba must be able to communicate

openly before change can arise, O’Grady (2012) suggests.

However, in a 2008 study, Phillips found that Cuban journalists did not

believe that the government inhibited their freedom of expression. Phillips (2008)

conducted an ethnographic study while living in Cuba in an attempt to

determine the state of media freedom in 2008 and to build a better understanding

between media democracy activists in the U.S. and those in Cuba. Through

interviews Phillips was able to gather meaningful information about Cuban

journalists’ perceptions about freedom of the press and U.S. corporate media

issues (Phillips, 2008).

The general consensus among Cuban journalists was that they strongly

value freedom of the press, and don’t believe that there is any evidence of overt

restriction of government control in Cuba (Phillips, 2008). From the interviews

conducted, it became clear that journalists on the island feel they have complete

freedom to write or broadcast any stories they choose, which is the opposite of

the picture of Cuba so often depicted in the U.S. Interestingly, Cuban journalists

actually complained that U.S. mass communication efforts are “biased and they

refuse to cover the positive aspect of socialism in Cuba” (Phillips, 2008, p. 29).

Phillips’ article provides an “inside look” at the perceptions of journalists

in Cuba, and their defensive attitude toward the regime begins to paint a

different image of Cubans, who may not be interested in the “Social

Responsibility” that American-Cuban journalists have been pressing for through

Radio Martí broadcasts. More research needs to be done to elicit the views

modern day Cubans have on their government system and perceptions of

freedom. This, however, is not the aim of the current research.

Censorship and Four Theories of the Press

Zhang and Fleming (2005) examined the characteristics of censorship in

communist print media in China, incorporating the four theories of the press and

Shoemaker and Reese’s hierarchy model of influences on media content. Zhang

and Fleming (2005) identified three ways in which the Soviet Communist Party

and the government of China controlled the media:

(1) its departments of propaganda at various levels appointed

editors; (2) the Party, through propaganda departments, issued directives for media

content; and (3) the Party reviewed and criticized the press (Zhang and Fleming,

2005, p. 326-327). The article also suggests that the Chinese Party-government

influenced the newspaper content and, therefore, assumed control over the

media. This was evident in three ways (Zhang and Fleming, 2005):

(1) the appointment of newspapers’ editors-in-chief by the

propaganda department at various levels;

(2) the issue of directives or circulars by the propaganda department

at various levels; and

(3) the provision of direct instructions from Party-government top

leaders via their talks or speeches at meetings (Zhang and

Fleming, 2005, p. 327).

Radio Martí, a broadcast frequency that operates in conjunction with Voice

of America, allows Cubans to receive information outside of what is censored by

Castro’s regime (Shaffer, 2009).

By bracketing Cuba’s government and press relationships as closely

following the Soviet model we can see tangible ideas about how the Cuban

government controls and owns all media outlets in the same way that Chinese

media doubles as a Party-government instrument, and the profit-maker for the

government’s economic survival.

Zhang and Fleming (2005) studied the process by which circulars or

directives are issued within China about what material is to appear in the press,

and indicate that, under the system in place, the government controls

newspapers’ coverage of certain topics.

Ostini and Fung (2002) addressed the categorization of national press

systems using the Four Theories of the Press to contextualize press structure and

state policies in the United States. The authors stressed that journalists should be

able to negotiate between their own professionalism and state control. There is a

significant amount of pressure placed on journalists to incorporate the autonomy

of individual reporter-like practices and political/social factors (Ostini and Fung,

2002).

Developing a new model to account for the global media system through

multinational news coverage of specific events is the best explanatory power

applicable to the Four Theories of the Press. Every theoretical press system

operates in accordance with the system of government encompassing the country

in which it is based. Therefore, the normative focus of each cultural model is

appropriate for each structural-functionalist perspective (Zhang and Fleming,

2005).

Ostini and Fung, (2002) argue that the press’ purpose is to provide an

avenue for the expression of public views and to “fuel the political and social

debates necessary for the continued development of democratic governance” (p.

47). This point reflects the Libertarian perspective, including Western idealism,

which makes this Westernized idea a primary source for research in looking at

the Cuban system of government and Voice of America’s agenda for media

plurality.

Further, Adams-Bloom and Cleary (2009) also suggested that stipulations

of the social responsibility theory in relation to the economic model for the media

were based in the United States. The purpose of this study was to understand the

economic realities of today’s corporate environment in relation to the social

responsibility theories of traditional media, i.e. print and broadcast outlets. They

note that newer phenomena like bloggers, social networking, and other

technologies are not included in the understanding because they didn’t exist at

the time. The theory maintains that, in American society, everyone who has

something significant to say should have the opportunity to express it in the

media (Adams-Bloom and Cleary, 2009). Therefore, “corporations, communities,

consumers, practitioners, and professional organizations all ensure that access

remains open to a diverse group of people” (Adams-Bloom and Cleary, 2009, p.

5).

A search of five broadcast and cable morning news programs, located a

total of 96 morning news programs from ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and FOX were

coded during a 1-month period in November 2004 (Adams-Bloom and Cleary,

2009). Two types of stories were examined; entertainment and news. Each

entertainment story was examined and studied for content that promoted a

product or event and each news story was defined as those stories that didn’t

promote an item or event (Adams-Bloom and Cleary, 2009).

Propaganda Index and Strategies

Socolow (2007) analyzed former President Roosevelt’s request to initiate a

program in the context of domestic radio propaganda planning at the start of the

Second World War. The article elaborated on the plan to inaugurate a domestic

government radio network on behalf of the United States that was ultimately

unsuccessful. Journalists from commercial networks had already broadcasted

government-sanctioned war-related information over airwaves before initiating

the U.S. plan. However, America’s existing commercial radio show on NBC

bypassed this, and began a government-operated network plan after Germany

and Italy declared war (Socolow, 2007, p. 112).

The article also mentions the Radio Bureau of the Office of Facts and

Figures (OFF) and the Office of War Information (OWI), which postulate that

radio networks could more effectively disseminate propaganda than any

governmental operation (Socolow, 2007). However, what happens when the two

combine, as in the case with the United States and Radio Martí?

Thus, interestingly, it is clear that even in countries that subscribe to

“socially responsible” media systems such as the U.S., there has been the

proliferation of government censored and closely monitored news broadcasts.

Not only would most of the same propaganda strategies, such as appeal to

prejudice, testimonials, and third-party technique be evident in Radio Martí

broadcasts in Cuba, and, therefore, usable for purposes of this study, but they

also help make distinctions between what may appear from the point of view of

someone steeped in the U.S. culture of democratic government to be a less

evident method of disseminating misleading information, and material that is

heavily centralized on framing tactics.

The commercial network’s success in fending off an attempt by the U.S.

government to establish a national, government-operated, domestic broadcasting

network was one of the most effective strategies in broadcast history (Socolow,

2007). However, today, as a result of this effort, the U.S. has the ability to

broadcast messages internationally through paid transmissions. Interestingly,

when those identical transmissions, through Voice of America, are heard within

the U.S., they are classified as propaganda (Socolow, 2007).

Rabe (2007) researched a radio station that opposed a government-owned

broadcast network. The Radio Corporation of America (RCA) was formed as a

privately-owned effort encompassing all the information being broadcast in Latin

American countries. As previously mentioned, the frequency (WAQI710AM) is

often times jammed by the Cuban government because the short wave might not

allow for a connection which the Cuban regime is able to block (Mortman, 2004).

A key point in the study is the perception of one-sided broadcasting

media that transmit internationally. “At least one representative of RCA in

Argentina recognized that Latin Americans could easily resent one-sided

programming, and warned NBC to be careful, they resent having anything

forced on them, especially with an attitude of superiority” (Rabe, 2007, p. 131).

This could be applicable in the case of Cuba and Radio Martí, in that, although the

broadcasts might transmit information to “promote freedom,” some Cubans

might experience a sense of resentment toward the U.S. In Cuba, itself, however,

there is a large level of censorship and propaganda messages sent from the

Cuban government in its own mediums of mass communications (Socolow,

2007).

Political Media Frames

Hanggli (2010) analyzed how frames used by political actors influenced

the media’s framing of issues. This study focused on the theory from a political

aspect, as well as a media standpoint, finding that, by actively constructing the

meaning of the reality in question, the idea of a “strategic action” or a frame can

be established. The study focuses on three issues in order to achieve an

“emphasis effect” where the audience is led to concentrate on certain aspects of

the proposed topic, in this case, the proposed topic was the tightening of the

asylum law. The issues are: First, the researchers chose a single frame capable of

capturing the attention of the audience being addressed, as well as the media.

Second, the researchers decided the extent of the political actor’s consideration of

the opponents’ frames. Third, the researchers analyzed the emphasis placed on

the frames presented by the political actors in the scheme of the campaign.

By placing the proposed study in a controlled environment, Hanggli

(2010) was able to focus less on external variables like voter characteristics and

more on substantive framing, which allowed the “political figures” to assess the

merits of alternative ways of framing the issue. This setting is especially

significant in this study, as one of the main arguments addressed in the article is

that, “There is little knowledge about what determines the strength of a frame. It

depends on credibility of the source and its congruence with central cultural

themes” (Hanggli, 2010).

The researchers proposed several research questions for the experiment,

but the main question was, “To what extent can one generalize the findings of

substantive frames with individual beliefs about a given topic” (Hanggli, 2010, p.

5). This question goes hand-in-hand with the idea of schema in analyzing how

prior experiences affect an individual’s interpretation of the message presented.

In relation to U.S. government propaganda messages being broadcasted into

Cuba, this research can facilitate the evaluation of the substantial frames from the

Radio Martí broadcasts. The study consisted of five categories of framed topics,

such as humanitarian issues, rule-of-law traditions, media abuse, democracy, and

other defensive frames that can also be used for the purpose of this analysis.

Visual Frames

Frosh (2011) studied how visual metaphors and representations

“systematically encourage certain kinds of thinking about communication – and

the kinds of power relationships that communication seemingly entails – while

discouraging others” (p. 2). Frosh (2011) looks at framing and picturing in the

conceptual idea of a metaphor. There is a significant relationship between a

metaphor and broadcast media, and there are distinct political characteristics

addressing the visual aspect of key concepts in propaganda communication

research. The purpose of Frosh’s (2011) study is to examine the semantic

associations of a frame that “paints a picture” along with graphic material that

simultaneously underpins the image that the frame makes possible.

Mass communication professionals often use “picturing” in speeches,

radio broadcasts, and other public speaking instances to attain reliability from

the audience (Frosh, 2011).

These descriptive and prescriptive enterprise references, result in “a

commitment to improving and enhancing democratic politics through an

understanding of those communication modes that are most appropriate” (Frosh,

2011, p. 3). Pictures and images are, thus, core concepts in radio transmissions

when considering the degree to which such aspects shape the consciousness of

citizens.

Frame Strength

Aaroe (2011) focused on why some frames are more influential than

others, the factors that influence the strength of a frame, and the capacity of each

frame to influence citizen’s opinions. The study sought to understand the degree

of impact that thematic and episodic frames had on the intensity of subjects’

responses by researching emotional reactions.

It consisted of an experimental study of opinions on the “24-year rule,” in

Denmark under which only foreigners over the age of 24, who marry Danes over

the age of 24 can qualify for citizenship. Anti-immigration activists have

criticized the law enacted in 2012. While it is meant to diminish forced marriages

and “family reunification immigration” (Aaroe, 2011, p. 209), it also includes

several other limitations on applications including age and residence

requirements that have drawn criticism from human rights organizations (Aaroe,

2011). Students from Danish high schools and business schools were surveyed

using a 7-point scale and asked: “Do you think that the 24-year rule should be

abolished or preserved” (Aaroe, 2011, p. 213).

Based on the responses, more sensitive questions were asked, in such a

way that each one was more emotionally charged than the previous. The findings

supported the idea that the relative strength of the thematic and episodic frames

had a direct correlation with the intensity of the emotional reactions elicited in

their audience. “It demonstrates that we may extend out knowledge of frame

strength by clarifying the underlying psychological processes, and taking a look

at the frame’s capacity to trigger and direct emotional reactions into support for

the argued policy position” (Aaroe, 2011, p. 221).

For the purpose of this study, the commentators’ word choice and tone of

voice could very well trigger emotional reactions in their listeners. This aspect of

the experiment would directly fall under framing effects in conjunction with

international propaganda message strategies, which is very much relevant to the

idea of this paper.

“Effect studies have shown that frames influence citizens’ attributions of

responsibility, their policy views, and the intensity of their emotional reactions”

(Aaroe, 2011, p. 212). This is key when interpreting the measureable findings in

the content broadcasted to Cuba, as the intensity of the audience’s reactions

based on evident actions, moderates the extent to which episodic and thematic

frames influence opinions. While the researcher will focus on the transcript of the

broadcast, and not tone of voice, choice of words will serve as an index of the

intentions of the broadcaster.

Frame Duration

Lecheler and Vreese (2011) analyzed the duration of framing effects. The

study focused on determining the point at which a person no longer had an

experience with the presented example of framing, and whether or not a

disparity existed between those with high levels of political knowledge and those

with low levels.

Ultimately, traces of framing effects were measured immediately after

exposure to the message at three points in time - after one day, after one week,

and after two weeks. The experimental procedure consisted of an online survey,

followed by a questionnaire on a given topic, and lastly, a follow-up

questionnaire utilizing the same questions as in the previous one. The general

design of the experiment addressed all possible impacting variables and did

effectively conduct the procedure in the interim period. Findings suggested that

there was a direct relationship between the duration of framing effects on those

individuals with high levels of political knowledge. While the Cuban

government has broadcasted to Cuba for years, the Cuban government has

established such increased censorship rules that many citizens of Cuba don’t

have access to political knowledge outside of the Castro regime. Therefore, even

though “Voice of America” has been broadcasting since 1970 to Cuba, the

duration effects of the frames presented from Radio Martí could be relatively low.

Another factor that might militate against the effectiveness of the duration effects

of the broadcast among Cubans is the level of access to the station by most

Cubans.

The framing effects theory was heavily studied in this article to stress how

much previous research has been done on the topic in accordance with the

relevancy of this experiment. “The goal when analyzing the conjectural existence

of framing effects, is to describe the psychological processes that underlie

framing effects and, thus, enable them, and taking a look at how framing also

functions by adding new beliefs to an individual’s belief content” (Lecheler and

Vreese, 2011). Both frameworks can be researched in radio transmissions as they

discuss a more in-depth angle when explaining the causes of the theory, and why

it’s so prevalent in some cases, but not in others.

Slothuus and Vreese (2010) explored frames sponsored by political parties

and argued; “Citizens are more likely to follow a frame if it is promoted by ‘their’

party” (p. 2). This is another framing effect piece that builds upon previous

empirical research on the potential of alternative frames to sway public opinion.

This research addressed the source of a frame and how it moderates its effects.

The study examined three hypotheses all dealing with party framing,

party sponsors, and partisan conflict issues. The main idea, however, was the

level of inclination on the part of a citizen toward a party-sponsored

communication when the citizen feels “attached” to the party itself, versus when

the citizen feels no attachment to the party. The researchers found that citizens

who were more politically aware had a higher “attachment” rate to both the

party and the party sponsor, versus those who were less politically aware,

regardless of party attachment (Slothuus and Vreese, 2010, p. 637).

Valkenburg and Vreese (1999), investigated whether journalistic news

frames affect readers’ stated thoughts through a quantitative study of two

newspaper stories of a social and political issue in Europe. Each story had

identical core components to assure its sole varying factor was in fact the topics

addressed, and the media frames used. Frames were found to play an important

role in the reader’s “thought-listing responses” and human-interest news frames

had negative consequences for recall (Valkenburg and Vreese, 1999).

The researchers define media frames as “ways in which journalists

compose a news story to optimize audience accessibility,” (Valkenburg and

Vreese, 1999, p. 553) ways in which Radio Martí reporters broadcast stories in the

Cuba Al Dia (Daily Cuba) segment of the show can be examined to determine

whether media frames are evident.

Using four ways to identify whether or not a story has been framed,

researchers were able to determine the influence of recall and the simultaneous

results of audience interpretation. The four frames used were:

(1) emphasizing conflict between parties or individuals (conflict

frame); (2) by focusing on an individual as an example or by

emphasizing emotions (human interest frame); (3) by attributing

responsibility, crediting or blaming certain political institutions or

individuals (responsibility frame); and (4) by focusing on the

economic consequences for the audience (economic consequences

frame) (Valkenburg and Vreese, 1999).

Persuasive and Framing Appeals

English (2011) researched the extent to which political videos, specifically

via YouTube, influenced viewer’s understanding and perception of health care

between 2005 (the year YouTube launched its website) and 2008 (the year of the

first presidential election that followed the launch of YouTube). This article

sought to analyze how different persuasive appeals and framing affected

viewer’s opinions of political activities.

English (2011) focused on three categories of persuasive appeals; the

characteristics of the source, of the message, and of the audience. By using these

categories, researchers were able to measure the impact of viewer’s logical

arguments, emotional, and factual information on political videos/broadcasts.

The author used a research question, rather than a hypothesis because this study

was exploratory and descriptive in its purpose. The question posed was, “which

credibility factors influence the viewers’ perception of broadcasted information”

(p. 4).

The question was tested through online surveys, on which participants

were instructed to indicate how often they used a list of particular media sources

for political information using a 5-point Likert-type scale, followed by questions

regarding source credibility of the transmissions using a Semantic scale.

Although persuasion was the focal theory, framing was prevalent

throughout the article. The authors note that, “Format is said to influence the

reception of messages, the degree of expertise, or the extent to which the speaker

is perceived as being qualified, and trustworthiness, or the extent to which the

speaker’s statements are perceived as valid” (English, 2011, p. 3).

By taking a look at persuasion appeals, it is noticeable that the

commentators on Radio Martí could have utilized these as well in their programs.

This also refers back to Aaroe’s (2011) study on emotion and the degree of impact

that thematic and episodic frames had on individuals exposed to the message.

Previous research has focused on the use of propaganda and framing

techniques by governmental bodies in internal campaigns in the U.S. and even

largely Soviet countries like China (Rabe, 2007). This research will explore

propaganda techniques used by the U.S. government in framing messages being

broadcasted in Cuba. This research is important because of the complex

relationship between Cuba and the U.S. after 1957, and because of the state

contract between media and government relations in Cuba, which has been

identified as falling within the Soviet bracket. This elaborate system of

government contrasts significantly with the Social Responsibility framework that

the U.S. generally embraces as indicated earlier. The effect is that there has been a

disconnect in understanding how government/press relations operate between

these two countries, and the U.S. broadcasts have been aimed at promoting

change within cultural relationships that it has not always fully understood.

CHAPTER 5: PURPOSE AND RESEARCH QUESTION

For the purpose of this study, the segment researched and analyzed from

the Radio Martí broadcast is called, Cuba Al Dia (Daily Cuba); a program that

looks at Cuban news from the standpoint of anti-Castro democratic activists. The

main hosts of the news segment are Tomas Cardoso and Cary Roque, who are

both journalists who report on Cuban affairs, along with human rights and civil

society expert Omar Lopez Montenegro.

The object of propaganda strategies in relation to frames used in the Radio

Martí program is a subject of systematic research that has not been addressed.

The purpose of this research is to evaluate the use of propaganda strategies in

conjunction with framing techniques in a particular hour-long Radio Martí

program.

This study will examine the current level of framing by American

journalists through Radio Martí almost seven years after the 2006 revelation of the

financial conflict of interest between journalists and the U.S. government to

determine whether the frames used continue to reflect western political values.

The analyzed results can provide answers to the question whether international

programs like Radio Martí and Voice of America are using propaganda strategies

to frame news stories in a manner consistent with western ideals, and if so, what

propaganda strategies are best used, and whether or not the information

transmitted through this medium is unbiased, followed by a discussion about the

ethics of this broadcast and those similar to it.

Based on the literature review and theory a research question was

developed to guide data collection and analysis:

RQ 1: Do Radio Martí broadcasts to Cuba utilize propaganda strategies in their

message to frame Westernized ideals of Social Responsibility as positive and

Soviet Communist ideals as negative?

CHAPTER 6: METHOD

“It’s important to first understand the aspects of a given society and social system

in order to analyze the systematics of a particular press. Learning the culture-group’s

beliefs and ideas is necessary prior to interpreting the population’s philosophical and

political rationales. In order to do this we look “at the nature of man, the nature of society

and the state, the relation of man to the state, and the nature of knowledge and truth”

(Siebert et. al, 1952, p. 1).

In order to address the research question, this study employs a qualitative

content analysis of one program segment from the Radio Martí broadcasts called

Cuba al Dia, (Daily Cuba) which analyzes the daily news in terms of civil issues,

human rights, and government information (Mortman, 2004).

According to Neuendorf (2002), “content analysis may be conducted on

written text, transcribed speech, verbal interactions, visual images,

characterizations, nonverbal behaviors, sound events, or any other type of

message” (p. 24).

It is necessary to study the communication formats that “refer to the

selection, organization, and presentation of information” (Atheide, 1996, p. 29).

In this case this meant closely analyzing each quote extracted from the

transcribed program and recognizing the theme, context, and discourse. For the

purpose of this paper, the focus is on the content of the information, rather than

the structure of the broadcast.

Voice of America, Radio Martí, and the International Broadcasting Bureau

websites only provided a few aired, 3-4-minute segments of each broadcast to the

public divided by topics addressed on their website. The 10 available broadcasts

begin on May 3, 2012 and end on September 27, 2012, averaging one

topic/segment every couple weeks.

Because of this, the researcher contacted the Marti Noticías Broadcasting

Station (the parent station of Radio Martí) in Miami and spoke to the Director of

Radio Martí. The researcher had to be clear in defining which of the hour-long

programs had been chosen because permission had to be granted from its

Washington D.C. office. Because the Director was only able to grant access to one

program, the researcher had to decide which single broadcast to study. The

Broadcasters Board of Governors in Washington D.C. did not grant permission

for the researcher to have a transcribed copy of the broadcast, however, the

researcher was granted permission to visit the Radio Martí facility in Miami, listen

to the program and transcribe/translate it herself.

The researcher decided to analyze a one-hour long political program

called, Día Mundial de la Prensa Libre (World Day of the Free Press) broadcasted

on the station known as, Cuba al Día that aired on May 3, 2012 because of its

focus on freedom of the press.

In an effort to be as apropos as possible, the researcher sought a program

that spoke about a political issue related to freedom of the press in Cuba and the

United States. Not only does this topic of freedom of expression lend itself to the

primary idea of the dissimilarity between the two countries, as identified under

the Four Theories of the Press, but it is also relevant to the argument being

evaluated in the context of the broadcast. The focus is on the coverage angle of

the perspectives addressed from multiple professionals, as well as topics

addressed by the broadcast journalists from a propaganda and framing

perspective.

After listening to the program, the researcher proceeded to transcribe the

show in Spanish, and then translate it into English. To eliminate any possibility

of a wrong translation, the researcher employed a Spanish-speaking person who

is also fluent in English, to review and assist in the accurate transcription and

translation of the broadcast. See Appendix A for a complete Spanish transcript of

the Día Mundial de la Prensa Libre, May 3, 2012 program. See Appendix B for a

complete English translation of the Día Mundial de la Prensa Libre program.

In carrying out the content analysis, the researcher reviewed the program

searching for multiple propaganda strategies to determine whether or not the

journalists from the broadcast imposed certain liberal political ideals of their own

onto an audience that didn’t share the same cultural and political context. The

strategies listed are general propaganda methods, but the researcher will be open

in analysis to all propaganda and framing strategies. Through this approach, it is

possible to identify whether or not the overall message of the program was

framed to foment a particular directive to the Cuban people in reference to the

journalists understanding of freedom of the press.

CHAPTER 7: RESULTS/DISCUSSION

May 3, 2012 was World Press Freedom Day. On that day the hour-long

broadcast featured Tomas Cardoso, journalist on Cuban affairs and moderator

for Radio Martí. Among his guests were: Cary Roque, a Cuban journalist who was

imprisoned by the Castro regime for 16 years, and is currently a political activist

in Miami, Florida, as well as a broadcaster for Radio Martí programming; and

Omar Lopez Montenegro, one of the broadcasters for the program, Daily Cuba

that airs on Radio Martí. Montenegro is the leader of the largest organization of

Cuban exiles. Another participant on the program was Viviana Giacaman,

Director for Latin American programs at Freedom House. Giacaman has worked

with human rights issues for more than 15 years. Based on their backgrounds, all

these speakers are likely to be opposed to Castro and the ideas behind the Cuban

Revolution. This bias became evident in the discussion that ensued and their

choice of language.

Simultaneously, while the world was celebrating World Press Freedom

Day, another important event making news in Cuba included a meeting to

discuss human rights issues between Cuban and Mexican officials and

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’s convalescence in the country. All these

topics formed the discussion on the program, which covered human rights issues

as well as the main focus- freedom of expression.

Another speaker in the program was a Cuban political agitator who had

just been released from prison, Jose Daniel Ferrer. Ferrer’s discussion focused on

his personal experience as a prisoner in Cuba under the Batista regime. Thus, this

was not included in the propaganda analysis.

The researcher also did not analyze the topic addressed on the program

regarding the Swedish furniture store known as IKEA and the allegations

associated with the corporation using/forcing Cuban prisoners to provide cheap

labor in the 1980s. After much investigation, IKEA’s statement noted that “the

company conducts more than 1,000 audits per year to confirm compliance by its

suppliers with its “explicit” policy against the use of forced labor,” resulting in

an inconclusive answer as to whether or not this accusation was true (Tamayo,

2012, p. 2). However, in several interviews by The Miami Herald and Latino Fox

News, IKEA officials did clarify that “the company has not done business with

Cuba” (Tamayo, 2012, p. 1). Therefore, this topic could not accurately be

evaluated for propaganda between a Socially Responsible and a Soviet society.

During the researcher’s analysis, it was evident that several other

strategies, in addition to those already introduced, surfaced that were not

originally discussed, such as glittering generality and false analogy. When

analyzing Radio Martí’s multiple levels of propaganda strategies, the researcher

found the most relevant examples originally focused around the five techniques

previously discussed, but after further in-depth analysis, it became apparent that

other instances of propaganda usage are worthy of mention.

The study of media frames is also relevant to the main focus of researching

the use of propaganda strategies and the degree of framing used by

the commentators on Radio Martí in recent times.

Multiple examples of propaganda messages were discovered that utilized

frames that reflected the ideals behind the Four Theories of the Press. The data

evidently reflected that this particular broadcast configures Social Responsibility

ideals as an imposed consciousness onto its direct audience; the citizens of Cuba.

In this way, the results will be provided in a thematic manner, grouping similar

topics presented by different persons during the broadcast. This will also

maintain the structure of the broadcast, in relation to the subjects discussed,

throughout the analysis portion.

The results are listed according to propaganda themes from the coded

hour-long program with emphasis on the general message delivered on behalf of

the broadcasters; the strategy that most accurately depicts the framework; the

back story of each case in point; and lastly, the relevance of each example to the

current situation in Cuba. The researcher describes each strategy that surfaced

during the broadcast below.

Use of Propaganda Strategies

Cary Roque, the first guest on the program, is a Cuban journalist who was

incarcerated in 1961 for producing and disseminating information that was not

“in line” with the Cuban government’s philosophy. At the time of her

imprisonment, the Cuban government was continuing an official clampdown on

journalists working outside the state media, arresting, detaining, harassing and

threatening dozens of independent journalists (Phillips, 2010).

Based on her internal experience with Cuban imprisonment, she has

personal knowledge of the structure of government and press relationships in

Cuba. In a 2012 interview with a Spanish newspaper, El Economista (The

Economist), Mrs. Roque, who was arrested at the age of 19, detailed her

experience while in the Cuban prison system for 16 years, as well as her

perspective about the current situation in Cuba under the present Castro regime

(Ferrera, 2012).

According to Roque, any Cuban citizen can be incarcerated for what the

Castro regime coined as, “social dangerousness,” even where there is no physical

crime or offense (Ferrera, 2012). Roque, a writer for a local newspaper in Cuba in

1961, decided to voice her opinion about multiple economic and social issues

facing the country at the time. When she started to distribute written information

that contradicted the stance of the Castro regime to locals, she was imprisoned

(Medrano, 2008).

Because of her background, Roque, now a political activist in Miami since

1984, is a respected public figure among the anti-Castro people of Cuba and an

expert in the field of journalism in Cuba and in Miami (Medrano, 2008). In a 2012

interview, Roque said her main quest during her time as a political activist has

been, “to restore democracy on the island” (Ferrera, 2012). Not surprisingly, her

discussion in the 2012 broadcast was not positive toward the Castro regime.

She framed her discussion around the theme that the Castro regime had

failed in meeting its promises to the people of Cuba.

According to Pratkanis, one form of propaganda is image manipulation,

which is “to produce a fake or staged visual interpretation” (Pratkanis, 2011, p.1).

While image manipulation is generally used to reference a physically altered

photograph, images that we conclude from words can be much more vivid.

Roque uses emotive images, and strong verbs to help conjure these

images. Roque says, “Almost all the people of Cuba are living in slums or in

hostels of houses that are completely dismantled.” She, thus, paints an image of

wreckage and squalor across the nation.

“Today most slum units [in Cuba] are concentrated in the inner city

municipalities of Old Havana (La Habana Vieja) and Center Havana (Centro

Habana), as well as other neighborhoods,” according to Coyula and Hamberg

(2009). This indicates that Roque’s image of wide scale squalor may not be the

entire story.

Similarly she notes, “Cubans searching for Castro’s promises and better

lives for themselves in the Capital or large cities” are “crashed with the reality of

the parasitic government that’s in place.” Thus, through the use of strong verbs,

she juxtaposes two images, one of which is a desperate search on the part of the

people who, then, become strongly aware of a government that, instead of

realizing its promise, is a parasite, living off others. Accepting without question

the thought of a parasite gives us a predisposition toward the image of a vicious

creature that lives off the people. Roque crafted this statement to paint this

picture in the audience’s mind.

According to Castro, history would not repeat itself and these horrid

conditions would not continue, but Roque indicates that to the contrary; slums,

run down homes, and poorly maintained structures riddle the Cuban population.

Through the use of this highly emotive language, Roque contrasts Cuba in

1957 with the Cuba in 2012 and finds “There has not been a single chapter, not a

single solitary chapter of the government program that he [Castro] spoke about

when he first stepped into the country that was really implemented with the

positive well-being of the country of the people of Cuba.” Thus, she paints an

image of total failure by Castro’s regime to provide good housing and

opportunities for the Cuban people in 53 years.

This image markedly relates to Fidel Castro’s regime, as well as Raul

Castro’s current government system. Recent years have seen a trend toward

more private sector employment and Castro has taken limited free

marketoriented measures to alleviate shortages (Romero, 2013). Cuba’s imports

and exports, such as oil, medical products, and nickel have increased

significantly since 1957 (Romero, 2103). Whether in light of these developments it

can be said that the Castro government has failed.

Another propaganda device used by Roque is an appeal to prejudice.

Through the use of loaded terms she strongly makes the point of her soliloquy

that the Castro regime has failed. Interestingly, she does not try to insinuate any

better or more appropriate government systems, but simply points to the failure

of the government to keep its promises and to corrupt officials, the only one

named being Fidel Castro.

Despite a U.S. embargo of several decades and the end of Cuba’s steady

trade with the Soviet Union, the Cuban economy with its mainstay in agriculture,

mainly sugar and tobacco, has been able to remain afloat (Third World Planet,

2013). Nonetheless, despite a healthy agricultural background, much of the food

in Cuba is imported, drawing on resources. Attempts at diversifying its

manufacture has included nickel production and there is the potential for Cuba

to become a major oil producer. Additionally, the Cuban health care system is

good and cheap, making the island a good medical tourist destination. The

Cuban education system is also very good and the country exports its doctors

and teachers to other Latin American countries (Third World Planet, 2013). Thus,

Roque’s overly negative assessment of the Cuban

governments’ prowess since 1959 is exaggerated.

Mrs. Roque’s one-sided opinion, influenced no doubt by her personal

experience in Cuba, is perhaps best categorized as a testimonial.

The general message of her testimonial on the program is that under Fidel

Castro’s regime there was an overpromising and an under-delivering of

expectations. As a result of this, today, there is a false sense of security in Cuba

because citizens held onto an ideology about Castro that did not come to fruition.

By publicizing Roque’s words on-air, Radio Martí provided her with the

podium to shout out that Castro has failed in delivering any of his promises, and

used minimal efforts when fulfilling the hopes of the nation, thus confirming that

he is a “teacher of lies.” The program exploits her statement to the Cuban

population in hopes that they will adopt these sentiments.

Roque also said “This government has only lived to collect funds from the

outside for their own profit and particularly for Fidel’s own benefit” Her

statements here produce a vision of Castro as one who improperly uses

development funds from other countries for his own purposes. Her rants and

accusations against Castro are not supported with concrete examples of greed

and parasitic motive, and in a debate, unsupported by facts, the person who

shouts the loudest is often perceived as the winner, which can be contrasted with

assertion, another form of propaganda, where “a simple statement “is asserted”

something as fact, usually with enthusiasm and without regard for whether it is

true or not” (Pratkanis, 2011, p.1). In fact, Pike (2013) suggests that far from being

a parasitic government “The socialist peso economy provides Cubans with

benefits and necessities such as food and housing at a very low cost” (p. 2).

By saying “this government has only lived” Roque solidifies that Castro’s

government’s sole purpose was to maim the economy, thus lining his pockets by

turning the people’s tragedies into his own triumphs. The qualifying word

“only” casually dismisses every benefit provided by the Castro government to

the people of Cuba as being self-serving. The quotation also lends itself to

glittering generalities, which Pratkanis (2011) defines as, “emotionally appealing

words applied to connect with the audience’s beliefs, but that present no concrete

argument or analysis” (p. 4). Roque provides no basis for this very strong

statement that infers government corruption. It follows upon her earlier assertion

that the government is “parasitic.”

Roque’s soliloquy is followed by a report quoting the director of Freedom

House for the Latin American Program Vivianna Giacaman. Freedom House

works to establish democratic communities and strengthen civil societies

(Freedom House, 2013). The quote used from Giacaman describes Cuba as

“Among the worst nations in respect to freedom of the press” and, more

particularly, amongst the top eight of “those countries with the least amount of

freedom of expression and freedom of the press” (Freedom House, 2013, p. 1).

Reporter, Michelle Sagar, quoted Viviana Giacaman saying, “It is the

worst of the worst, as we call it in the world. In Cuba there is an absence of

anything free that has to do with expression, such as unions, detentions for

journalists, and so much more.” She also compared Cuba to China, and

categorized it alongside other countries that fall amongst the top eight countries

that do not have freedom of expression including Venezuela, Honduras, and

Mexico.

Freedom House, the organization to which Giacaman is affiliated,

“supports democratic change, monitors freedom, and advocates for democracy

and human rights around the world, supports nonviolent civic initiatives in

societies where freedom is denied or under threat and stand in opposition to

ideas and forces that challenge the right of all people to be free” (Field, 2006, p.

2). This organization consists of reformers who work with advocates for

democracy and civil issues, and journalists. In its 2012 Annual Report, Freedom

House pressed the United States and international institutions to adopt

consistent policies that advance human rights and democracy around the world

(Field, 2006).

By quoting from the director of Freedom House, the Radio Martí program

uses Third Party technique of propaganda referenced above, citing a seemingly

independent source, to make the point that Cuba does not enjoy freedom of

speech or of the press.

While Freedom House is an independent organization, its agenda is

democratic and liberal in nature because it represents the press system from a

“Socially Responsible” perspective. In its 2012 ranking, Cuba ties with

Equatorial Guinea in the sixth category of countries with no freedom of press. On

a scale of 100 to 1, with 100 indicating less freedom of speech, Cuba earned 91

points and, regionally, Cuba was ranked as having the least amount of freedom

of the press followed by three other countries, Venezuela (76), Mexico (67), and

Honduras (62). The U.S. with a ranking of 18 points was ranked number 22,

along with Estonia and Jamaica for freedom of speech in the world, and ranked

number three regionally, along with Jamaica, behind St. Lucia (15) and St.

Vincent and the Grenadines (17), (Freedom House, Ranking).

However, to understand the agenda of Freedom House it is important to

look at the methodology that the organization uses to determine the level of

freedom of the press that all the countries in the world enjoy. In analyzing this,

Freedom House uses 23 methodology questions to measure the legal, political

and economic environments in which press operates in each country. The

countries are evaluated on a scale of 0-100. Countries scored as having 0-30

points are counted as enjoying full freedom of the press; those scoring 31-60 are

considered to enjoy partial free press; and countries that scored between 61-100

are considered to have a press that is not free.

In assessing the legal environment, Freedom House looks at “both the

laws and regulations that could influence media content and the government’s

inclination to use these laws and legal institutions to restrict the media’s ability to

operate,” along with “the impact of constitutional guarantees for freedom of

expression” and “security legislation, [the existence of a] penal code, and other

criminal statutes; penalties for libel and defamation;” the effectiveness and

existence of access laws, “the independence of the judiciary and of official media

regulatory bodies; registration requirements” and “the ability of journalists’

groups to operate freely” (Freedom House, Methodology).

The political environment is measured by the “degree of political control

over the content of news media,” as well as the “editorial independence of both

state-owned and privately owned media; access to information and sources;

official censorship and self-censorship; the vibrancy of the media and the

diversity of news available within each country.” Freedom House also looks at

the access, “without harassment,” enjoyed by foreign and local reporters in

collecting news, and “the intimidation of journalists by the state or other actors,

including arbitrary detention and imprisonment, violent assaults, and other

threats” (Freedom House, Methodology).

The economic environment relates to “the structure of media ownership;

transparency and concentration of ownership; the costs of establishing media as

well as of production and distribution; the selective withholding of advertising

or subsidies by the state or other actors; the impact of corruption and bribery on

content; and the extent to which the economic situation in a country impacts the

development and sustainability of the media.” (Freedom House, Methodology).

As indicated earlier, the media in countries that fall within the Socialist

press/government relationship structure are generally owned by the

government, which harnesses these resources as an arm for distributing

messages from the government to the masses. The Cuban constitutional

protection for freedom of expression reflects this, as does the media content, and

structure of media ownership. Siebert (1952) suggests that, “The press takes on

the form and coloration of the social and political structures within which it

operates” (p. 4). The values that are being used by Freedom House to judge the

media definitely come from the perspective of a social responsibility

press/government relationship. The questions asked are also biased toward this

perspective.

Similarly, upon investigating the mission statements from both Freedom

House and Radio Martí, there is an evident similarity in their functions and

prospects. At the very least the perspective of Freedom House’s chief officer

would be biased, making judgments based on Social Responsibility model of free

expression and, therefore, with little relevance in a Soviet economy. Thus, while

passing as an independent observer to people who are steeped in an objective

reality that embraces democracy and social responsibility, the perspective is

biased.

The fact that Giacaman was a guest speaker invited by Radio Martí to

provide feedback on freedom of expression in Cuba is crucial to understanding

the statement as forming part of the general propaganda being delivered to

Radio Marti’s listeners. Her interview on the Radio Martí program is essential

because it lines up with the perspective of the broadcasting station.

“In Cuba there is an absence of anything free, such as unions, detentions

for journalists, and so much more. You can very well compare it to China” says

Giacaman.

China is, interestingly, evaluated as having more freedom of the press

than Cuba, with an overall score of 87 (Freedom House, Rankings). Cuba is

simply described in the report as having “one of the most repressive media

environments in the world because Fidel Castro turned his back on democratic

ideals, embraced a totalitarian brand of communism and allied the island with

the Soviet Union”(Freedom House, 2013). China’s poor ranking was due to

curbing of coverage of popular risings blocking foreign social media platforms

such as twitter and tightening “controls on investigative reports and

entertainment programs in advance of a sensitive leadership change scheduled in

2012” (Freedom House, 2012, p. 1). Party directors also “restricted coverage

related to public health, environmental accidents, deaths in police custody, and

foreign policy” (Freedom House, 2012, p. 1).

Neither of these rationales or characterizations of the two countries are

explored in the broadcast. Rather than pinpointing specific examples that might

explain why she compares China to Cuba, Giacaman generalizes through facts

and ideologies. Delving more into the reference by Giacaman above,

“Oversimplification uses favorable generalities to provide simple answers to

complex

social, political, economic, or military problems” (Pratkanis, 2013, p. 7).

The People’s Republic of China is one the last four remaining Communist

countries (World Press Freedom Index, 2012) and has a significant trade surplus

with the United States and Cuba. There is a strong bilateral trade relationship

between Cuba and China, and Cuba imports items from China (The

Independent, 2010).

“Chinese technocrats and academics are working on projects to remake

the Cuban economy into that like China’s. It will take Cuba a long time to

accomplish what China did,” a Cuban expert at the Chinese Academy of Social

Sciences reports (Davis, 2012, p. 2). Based on all of this, the comparison between

the two nations made by Giacaman might ring a bell in a very relevant

correlation.

The systems of government are similar and presumably, they also both fall

in line with the Soviet press/government relations theory, yet other aspects of

the countries differ.

While China is ranked number 136 worldwide, and number 29 out of 41

countries in the Asia-Pacific region on the Freedom of Index of 2012, (Press

Freedom Index, 2012) the country has a reputation in the U.S. for being highly

“un-free” and regulated by the state (Press Freedom Index, 2012). Cuba is ranked

167 worldwide and the United States is ranked 47, according to the Press

Freedom Index (2012).

While we do not know the perspective of Giacaman's audience, we can

infer that they are Cubans who are opposed to the Castro regime and searching

for alternate news sources. With her words, reveling in the assertion earlier

defined, the listeners could have a preconceived notion about China, so by

comparing this country with Cuba, she is essentially fortifying her point in

adhering to an appeal to prejudice on behalf of Cuban citizens.

As stated by Giacaman, “Cuba has the worst case of freedom of the press,”

and supported in the Freedom Index of 2012. According to the Independent, “In

2004 Cuba passed a law forbidding private citizens to access the Internet. It is

illegal to buy a computer without government approval, which is rarely granted

to ordinary Cubans. Similar restrictions apply to the ownership of mobile

phones” (The Independent, 2007).

Comparisons are a natural tactic to use when trying to separate super

powers, and categorize how countries determine their status. While it is

important to compare and contrast the slings, hardships, civil liberties, and

flourishing accolades of each country, it is more important to have a solid grasp

of reality.

A False Analogy “is a way to facilitate explanation,” by portraying “a

complex issue” as being “similar to a simple issue that everyone can understand.

The misleading simpler model will misdirect thought about the issue “

(Pratkanis, 2013, p. 5). Comparing hastily one nation to the other can be

characterized as a false analogy. Similar characteristics or political forms don’t

mean that two otherwise dissimilar countries can be accurately compared.

Freedom of expression and free speech is a complex issue. Giacaman merely

takes the easy way out and falsely over reaches in a possibly unjust comparison.

Omar Montenegro was the moderator of part of the program, and a

member of the Cuban Civic National Union, which is an anti-Castro group. On

multiple occasions he had declared his support of any political action that would

return freedom to the island of Cuba (Tabache, 2011). During the broadcast he

touched upon the meeting agendas of the Cuban and Mexican Parliament. Cuban

and Mexican officials meet semi-annually to discuss Parliamentary reforms.

Cuban Parliament President Ricardo Alarcon was scheduled to meet with

Mexican party leaders on May 4, the day following the broadcast, which would

conclude the Thirteenth Inter-Parliamentary meeting (Radio Cadena Agramonte,

2012).

On the May 3 broadcast, Montenegro was dismissive of the meeting.

“What’s more with the Cuban parliament is that it’s useless,” he said. Pratkanis

(2013) describes Over-simplicity as, “favorable generalities used to provide

simple answers to complex social, political, economic, or military problems” (p.

6).

Rather than discussing the actual details about the parliament, he follows

up by quoting the President of the National Assembly, who characterizes the

meeting as “a gathering of friends.”

Not only does Montenegro use the visual of friends hanging out,

accomplishing nothing, but, he does so by using the actual words spoken by

Ricardo Alarcon, who served as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, as well as the

Representative to the United Nations on Cuba’s behalf.

Alarcon is “the third highest ranked in the cabinet, behind Fidel and Raul”

(The Independent, 2007, p. 11). He is currently the President of the National

Assembly of the People’s Power and an important member of the Communist

Party of Cuba (Sanchez, 2012).

By regressing these thoughts, evidently taken outside their original

context, into the basic ideas of minimal efforts, the complexities of Parliament

structure and procedure are easily dismissed, as are the general procedures and

language used in relation to international meetings of this nature.

Montenegro is also dismissive of the planned theme of the conference.

“The theme of human rights is not relevant because there is no theme in the

inter-parliamentary meetings,” Montenegro continues, furthering his

characterization of the meeting as being a non-productive one. This can show an

innate contradiction of the lack of attention to strategic thought in the Cuban

Legislature. A Soviet society, such as Cuba, defines Freedom of the Press as

follows: “Citizens have freedom of speech and of the press in keeping with the

objectives of socialist society” (Cuban Constitution, Art. 53). Comparing the two

definitions of Freedom of the Press is crucial in the development of the data

uncovered during the analysis of the broadcast. Furthermore, by focusing on an

individual as an example and by emphasizing emotions, Montenegro developed

a human-interest frame from the propaganda delivered in his comment about the

theme of human rights.

Entman (1953) suggests that beliefs can be opinions generated on general

logic, historical facts, and relevant data, yet propaganda strategies influence

emotions, manipulate basic judgments, and omit simple truths, leaving a blank

expression to a complex thought process.

In Montenegro’s statements, he is channeling the idea that the Cuban

Parliament is useless, “There is no agenda, and they have no intention of

working toward a positive or productive goal.“

Montenegro, however, has missed the point of Alarcon’s comment. The

Cuban Ambassador said, as related by Montenegro himself, “[the meeting was] a

gathering of friends to enjoy, and there is no political agenda behind this

meeting”. There is a distinct difference between asserting that there is “no

political agenda” and that there is “no agenda” when dealing with a meeting

between two nations. The first connotes friendliness in context between two

countries that wish to cooperate with each other, with no underlying “political

agenda.” Such a meeting would definitely yield some positive commercial or

political effects between the countries. In fact, going into the meeting on May 4,

which some 25 representatives from each country were slated to attend, there

were plans to talk about bi-lateral trade relations and issues affecting Latin

America (Radio Relój, 2012). After the meeting, it was revealed “they debated

issues such as relations of cooperation and friendship, energy resources and the

update of Cuba’s economic model” (Radio Relój, 2012). Evidently, Montenegro’s

casual dismissal of the meeting as having no agenda related to a deliberate

misuse of a quote outside of its context, for the purpose of generalizing and

affirming a point. “Communicators make conscious or unconscious framing

judgments in deciding what to say, guided by frames that organize their belief

system” (Entman, 1993, p. 53).

Montenegro goes on to state, “By it convening two times a year, the work

of the Cuban Parliament is worse off than others.” The twice a year

CubanMexican Parliament meeting is actually indicative of very close

relationship ties, since a regular two-country parliamentary meeting is unusual.

Rather than a negative this should be seen as positive for the relationship

between the two countries. Perhaps, however, Montenegro is critical of the time

that these meetings that he has characterized as being “useless” take away from

regular parliamentary meetings in Cuba. In Cuba the National Assembly of

People’s Power, the only body in Cuba that has “constituent and legislative

power” (Cuban Constitution, Art. 70), consists of elected members “elected by

free, direct and secret vote, in the proportion and according to the procedure

established by law” (Art. 71), who serve five year terms (Art. 72). The legislative

body is constitutionally required to hold “two regular sessions a year and a

special session when requested by one third of the membership or when called

by the Council of State” (Art. 78). These provisions are not unlike the U.S.

constitutional requirement that Congress meet once a year in December (U.S.

Const. § 4).

It is unclear whether Montenegro’s discussion relates to the Cuban

parliamentary twice-yearly required meetings or (more likely) to the

CubanMexican Parliament’s meetings held twice a year. Either way, Montenegro,

again, does not contextualize and qualify his statement in a manner that could be

interpreted positively (or even neutrally) toward the Castro regime. His

assessment is, thus, one-sided.

This is not surprising since Montenegro is not an “independent source of

information.” He is technically employed to the Radio Martí headquarters in

Miami, Florida where information has the potential to be biased or skewed in

favor of beliefs held by members of the media in the United States, and more

generally, by Cuban American journalists.

As previously introduced for the purpose of this analysis, “flag waiving

attempts to justify an action on the grounds that doing so will benefit a country

or idea that the targeted audience supports” (Pratkanis, 2013, p. 4). The image

created by Montenegro is intended to create a natural prejudice against the

bilateral parliament creating an image that its legislature doesn’t care that

citizens are not being serviced, which can be attributed to glittering generalities.

Montenegro does the job of intertwining the simplification of the Parliament,

adhering to the common man, and thus inferring that the Cuban Mexican

Parliament is a place to relax rather than a symposium at which important bi-

lateral relationships are being cemented.

Another important speaker on the program is Luis Felipe, a Cuban writer

and poet, who currently resides in Miami, Florida working as an independent

journalist.

Felipe focuses most of his discussion on the absence of freedom of

expression in Cuba, noting that the day of free press does not mean anything in

Cuba. He notes “when you want to more or less and see something that has been

compromised there’s this phrase that says, ‘read between the lines’, but today, us

Cubans can’t even attempt to read between any lines with this regime because

there is not even a single reference commemorating this day in any way.”

After noting several examples where the government has not marked

freedom of expression, Felipe zeroes in on the incorrect information being

reported in Cuba about Venezualan President Hugo Chavez’s health. On March

5, 2013 Chavez died in Caracas after battling with cancer for nearly two years

(Ruth, 2013). He was the socialist leader of the country of Venezuela and a great

ally of Fidel and Raul Castro (Ruth, 2013).

In the May broadcast, Felipe said that news sources in Cuba report that

Chavez’s health was recovering, and they continually broadcast this in Cuban

media. At the time of the broadcast, Chavez was in Cuba being treated by Cuban

doctors, but his health had taken a turn for the worst (Romero, 2013) and, as

mentioned by Felipe, Chavez’s health was a factor in determining what was to

happen in Cuba at the time. “There may be the possibility of radical things

changing; there is something real about Chavez’s health,” says Felipe. This

prompted Tomas Cardoso to note that Cubans are not being given access to

world news from an objective perspective. He notes, “I think it's a record,

another world record. The only place in the world where I believe that speaks

every day regarding Chavez’s health improvement is in the Cuban news because,

not even in Venezuela do they dare to say it.” Montenegro responded to this by

casting Cuba as “the land of fantasy because the country has no clue of the truth

in the world because they can’t.”

This regard for the aftermath of Chavez’s death is an appropriate state of

awareness by the broadcast commentators because Chavez’s regime at the time

was providing Cuba with several imports, including thousands of gallons of oil

monthly (Romero, 2012). Now, close to a year after the broadcast aired,

Venezuela’s Vice President, Maduro has temporarily taken over. However, it will

be crucial to see the turn of Cuba and Venezuela’s relations once a new president

is elected in April of 2013 (Romero, 2013).

CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSION

“It’s important to first understand the aspects of a given society and social system

in order to analyze the systematics of a particular press. Learning the culture-group’s

beliefs and ideas is necessary prior to interpreting the population’s philosophical and

political rationales. In order to do this we look “at the nature of man, the nature of society

and the state, the relation of man to the state, and the nature of knowledge and truth”

(Siebert, 1963, p. 2).

Political communication, whether defined as studying politics in the

media, analyzing debates or speeches from politicians, and/or disseminating

information to the public in relation to politics will continue to be a topic of great

research. And determining whether news frames can exert a significant effect on

readers’ thoughts and recall in the news can provide answers to program

producers as to how to avoid biased, questionable reporting.

The job of the media is to inform, but when an outlet that refers to itself as

a news source diffuses information from a biased angle, then the source has

disregarded the practical limitations on news media and become more of an

opinionated group and less of a news source. The same can be said when the

source is allowing governmental influence into its dissemination of information,

as did Radio Martí with the U.S government in the 2006 conflict of interest

scandal (Goodnough, 2006).

As a news media source, Radio Marti is at variance with being an

informative balance of diverse ideas and a resource that allows citizens to divide

from authoritarian rule. It can be argued that there is a clear discourse with Radio

Marti referring to itself as a “news source” because the information being

broadcasted is in line with the opinions held by those reporting it.

This can be explained by looking at the coverage style of a “news source”

utilized by Radio Marti. The sources used are often biased or the information is

presented “in a way where they are either in support of a particular view, or in

opposition of a viewpoint.” Un-biased coverage would require “facts and figures

[to be presented] in a matter-of-fact manner instead of taking any particular

stance on the issue” (Manohar, 2010, p. 1).

The bias in the coverage by Radio Martí is reflected not only in the

propaganda tools that it uses, but also in its choice of guests and commentators.

In most of the instances, the delivery of the messages were just as important as

the actual context because the conveyer as well as the reliability and independent

stake all construct the extent of Radio Martí’s agenda. As captured in this study,

under Social Responsibility theory, the press performs a vital role in presenting

information to the public. However, the press’ first loyalty is to the state in the

Soviet theory of press/state relations. Through analysis utilizing propaganda

strategies, the researcher was able to point out dominant ideas that played a vital

role in the constant balancing act between the press in a Socially Responsible

society and a Soviet society. The major propaganda strategies addressed in the

coverage of the broadcast reflect the overall message that was conveyed to the

Cuban people. This study uncovered different propaganda strategies, including

testimonials, flag-waving, glittering generalities, appeal to prejudice, image

manipulation, over-simplicity, assertion, and third party technique, that were

utilized in an effort to present nuanced perspectives on the broadcasts

transmitted from the United States to Cuba.

The use of these propaganda strategies reflect the commentators’ own

biases. The commentators included journalists who had been imprisoned by the

Castro Regime, leaders in the anti-Castro movement, and high-profile Cuban

American journalists, known for their anti-Castro bias.

While research indicates that in Cuba there is heavy censorship and

propaganda messages are often sent from the Cuban government (Socolow,

2007), and there is a definite need for Cubans to have access to more unbiased

external news (O’Grady, 2012), it is questionable whether the heavily biased

perspective of Radio Martí commentators is the best means of providing this

missing news, along with important context. The same factors that cause Rabe

(2007) to speculate that Argentinians might resent one-sided U.S. coverage of

them, could cause Cubans to resent this limited coverage.

While never explicitly saying that the measures they used, in terms of

defining human rights and freedom of expression, came from their westernized

perspectives, the bias of Radio Martí broadcasters is clear in the discussion that

defines freedom of expression as independent media with no state input. Judged

by these standards, essentially appropriate in a country modeled under social

responsibility, countries that are Socialist are doomed to fail.

Siebert et al. (1963) have indicated “It’s important to first understand the

aspects of a given society and social system in order to analyze the systematics of

a particular press. Learning the culture-group’s beliefs and ideas is necessary

prior to interpreting the population’s philosophical and political rationales. In

order to do this we look “at the nature of man, the nature of society and the state,

the relation of man to the state, and the nature of knowledge and truth” (Siebert,

1963, p. 2).

Perhaps the most important criticism to be made of the Radio Martí

broadcasts is that the broadcasters make their plea for change from a system in

which government and press are closely related, to one where the two are

distinct, without taking the time to fully understand the existing culture in 21st

Century Cuba. While human rights and freedom of expression are important

concepts in any society, these issues are no more important than issues such as

equal access to health (Cuban Const., Art. 50) and education (Art. 51) that are

specifically protected under the Cuban Constitution and lie at the base of

Marxist/Communist thought. The burning question that, perhaps should be

addressed in later research, is whether the larger community of ordinary people

in Cuba care enough about the one to sacrifice the other. If they are willing, then

propaganda could yield a change in the government system, if not, it may have

no effect except to alienate the people and cast the U.S., once more, in the

unfavorable light of an imperial power trying to superimpose unwelcome and

foreign ideals on the unwilling. Without this context, there is no way forward.

In this regard, the term freedom of the press is generally defined from a

socially responsible perspective. According to Phillips (2008) research

interviewed Cuban journalists believe that they enjoy freedom of the press,

notwithstanding the system of media ownership in Cuba, and further see U.S.

journalists as aggressors in trying to impose concepts of freedom of the press that

bear no relationship to their cultural understanding of freedom of press. This

indicates that there is, in fact, more than a single understanding of the term,

“freedom” and other nomenclature associated with it.

Perhaps for purposes of countries that are based on a non-social

responsibility model, a new/different set of variables should be implemented in

order to determine whether the press is truly “free.”

Maybe at some point a global perspective of what freedom of expression

entails should be identified that could collapse principles that are appropriate in

socialist systems with those appropriate in “socially responsible” systems,

leading to a happy medium that can accurately evaluate freedom of the press in

both systems, based on an unbiased set of criteria, unlike the criteria used by

Freedom House, Freedom Index and bodies that are slanted toward one

government style.

The limitations of this study are that the findings, themselves, cannot be

generalized because of the limited sample size of the broadcasts utilized and the

fact that the study uses qualitative methods.

Had there been a greater number of programs accessible to be analyzed

based on very similar topics of discussion, length, and availability, then the

variables would have allowed for more generalizable results of propaganda

strategies. Access to multiple Voice of America broadcasts from the Broadcasting

Board of Governors would allow for further research on the effectiveness of the

program to countries such as China, Korea, Turkey, and other countries to in

promoting democracy.

Perhaps the topic choice itself, freedom of expression, comes with its

biases that can never be rationalized. Future scholars may wish to look at other

broadcasts that lend themselves less readily to the very distinction between the

press/government relations in socially responsible communities and social or

communist communities.

The focus of the next research aspect, stemming from this study, should be

to apply similar variables in today’s Cuba, only altering the medium of

communication from broadcasts to online, as Florida Senator Marco Rubio

discusses in his interview with O’Grady (2012). Learning whether or not nations

listening to Voice of America and other transmissions delivered through facilities

like the International Broadcasting Bureau are able to receive similar messages

via Internet would make for interesting comparative research between radio and

Web effectiveness.

Students also viewed