The Washington Post does it yet again, an article on Venezuela's influence in Latin America refers to the Bush administration's efforts to have a "free trade" agreement with the region. Of course one of the main components of such an agreement would be rules strengthening copyright and patent protection. This is increased protection, not free trade.
Is the Washington Post obligated to use the Bush administration's terminology when it discusses issues? Is there some reason that it can't just be called a "trade" agreement?
If you enjoyed this article, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. For over 30 years, The American Prospect has delivered independent reporting that exposes corporate power, investigates political corruption, and analyzes threats to our democracy. Unlike many media outlets, we’re not owned by billionaires or corporations—we’re powered by readers like you.
Today’s independent journalism faces unprecedented challenges. Your support makes our reporting possible and keeps our work free and accessible to all. Whether it’s $5 or $50, every contribution helps sustain our nonprofit newsroom.
Join our community of supporters and make a donation today to help keep independent journalism thriving.
Copyright 2025 | The American Prospect, Inc. | All Rights Reserved
