Trump imposes the rhetoric

The US attack on Venezuela altered the programming of public television channels. Both TV3 and La1 of TVE offered special, strictly news-focused programming. The difference in the approach to the main headline was significant. TV3 opted for "US captures Maduro," adhering to the verb that the US government itself used to announce its intervention. On La1, the headline was different:US attacks Venezuela", presupposing a war scenario. It refers to the use of force and conflict between two states. In the international television sphere, some slight differences were also perceived. While CNN, the BBC, and Al Jazeera maintained the capture which Donald Trump used, on the French channel France24 they translated the same verb but wrote it in quotation marks: "capture"A subtle graphic detail that, journalistically speaking, speaks volumes. It specifies that they are using the term verbatim, adhering to the official US version. It's a distancing from the facts. A way of indicating that the term isn't their own and that..." capture It is a verb that can be questioned. Capture It is not neutral. In its common usage, it is assumed to have legitimacy. We use it in the pursuit of criminals and in police operations. To use it out of habit, or at least to avoid critical evaluation, implies taking a position in the discourse. And it is surprising how easily many media outlets have bought into the narrative of Trump and the United States. It is the verb used by the official version and, therefore, fits into the mental framework that the US government wants to impose. "Capturing Maduro" personalizes the conflict and reduces it to a criminalized figure, erasing the fact that the action affects a sovereign state. It is a way of erasing the use of violence. "Attacking Venezuela," on the other hand, emphasizes political interference.

An hour before Trump's press conference, and breaking all protocols, the US president called into his preferred television network. He spoke for half an hour with the three anchors of Fox & Friends Weekendwhere he made it clear that he had called them himself because he didn't want to talk to anyone else. He congratulated them on the program and remarked that Charles Hurt, one of the presenters, has been a good friend of his for years: "He's been by my side even when this wasn't fashionable, and these are the kind of people I like." After admitting that watching the attacks live and having access to the internal audio communications was like watching a TV show, and that it had been an experiencereally amazing"How did you decide to do it this morning?" they asked him. And Trump, bewildered, replied after a pause: "Do you mean call you guys or go on the attack? Because I don't know which is worse..." he added ironically. Proof that the line between information, propaganda, and entertainment has dissolved and that Trump no longer sees the difference between political responsibility and a sense of spectacle.