Dear Editor,
I risk writing this letter unsure of its publication but cannot continue to silently watch the strategy utilised to influence the PPP government to change its position of withholding advertisements from Stabroek News (Guyana). I am beginning to sense that while Stabroek News is justified in its publicity on the government’s unwarranted withdrawal of advertisements from the newspapers, the PNC, particularly Mr Burnham’s government, is being made the unwarranted target of comparisons.
Trinidad Express (Monday 5th February, 2007) editorial referred to the PNC administrations as repressive, apparently believed by Stabroek News, but is conveniently not reporting that Mr Burnham gave advertisements to every newspaper, including the Mirror which is closely aligned to the PPP government. Those who respect the truth and served during Mr Burnham’s leadership would recall in his official travels around Guyana provisions were made for the involvement of the entire media corp, including the Mirror newspaper. The Burnham government also made news and supplementary pictures available to all media houses, including the Mirror.
It should be mentioned that notable names writing for the Mirror newspapers that attended Mr Burnham’s media engagements are Messrs Clinton Collymore and Reepu Daman Persaud of Demerara, Messrs. Balram (Bally) Persaud and Phillip Kumar of Essequibo and Mr Suhul of Berbice, among others.
Further, it becomes very evident that these newspapers which are distorting aspects of Mr Burnham’s stewardship are doing themselves a disservice. Their action is apparently negatively influenced by Mr Rickey Singh, who writes for them and hates the PNC, whom he accused of forcing him to leave Guyana in 1974.
Since the Jamaica Gleaner, Trinidad Express, Barbados Nation and Guyana Stabroek News share a common partnership/ ownership their dedication to positively influence the PPP government advertisement policy can be understood. But this understanding should not be at the expense of unjustifiably destroying another. These papers which are now loud in condemnation of the “PNC repressive regime” continue to fail to acknowledge that it was under the PNC that media were expanded. It was during Mr. Burnham’s government that VCT 28, WRHM and GTV 11 television came on the airwaves. It was under Mr. Hoyte, that Stabroek News, CNS 6 and so many private independent and politically aligned media houses emerged. This fact is hardly testimony to a government with a repressed media culture. It was under the PPP, during Presidents Cheddi Jagan and later Bharrat Jagdeo, that media have been consistently attacked, accused of destabalising the government, top media workers jobs threatened and axed, workers representatives marginalised, media expansion stifled, access to state owned media denied and journalist Ronald Waddell assassinated. This reality does not speak of a free media culture under the PPP.
Mr Wesley Kirton, a media professional of international repute, who worked during Presidents Burnham and Hoyte’s periods cited personal instances where opposing views were never silenced. From Mr Kirton’s account healthy criticisms were encouraged (SN Thursday January 18 2007 “I’m shocked by the Government’s decision to withdraw advertising”).
It was under Mr Burnham’s leadership that the state owned Chronicle newspapers carried columns by Messrs. Nicholson, Courtney Gibson, Mohamed Hamaludin, and Rudy Luck. These columnists were at times critical of Mr Burnham’s policies and actions. Under the PPP leadership any level of tolerance for critical analyses is non-existent in the state owned media. Under Mr Hoyte, his openness and accommodation of healthy criticism continues and SN should today tell readers if advertisements were withdrawn under Mr Hoyte’s administration.
It is a pity that this issue of government’s unwarranted withdrawal of advertisement from Stabroek News is now becoming a political tool to unjustifiably attack the PNC governments. In the process, rather than sticking to principles and fundamental rights to freedom of expression, it is most unfortunate that our Caribbean newspapers are taking the unethical stand of slandering the PNC and misrepresenting history in their efforts to influence the PPP to return government’s advertisements to Stabroek News. Unfortunately this unwarranted reference will only bring about further degeneration and disrespect of the press in Guyana since this approach creates undue conflict to the society’s detriment. The risk is that it can alienate and silence some of the very voices supporting Stabroek News. While the motive is not clear, it is advisable that these media houses, even under financial threat, should strive to maintain the highest ideals of truth and ethical journalism, which can never justifiably be replaced by inconsistencies and irregularities.
Yours faithfully,
Humphrey Charles
Editor’s note
For the last years of Mr Burnham’s rule the state had established monopoly control of the media and had even tried to close the Mirror and the Catholic Standard by starving them of newsprint. It was Mr Hoyte who opened up the situation and the Stabroek News started in 1986 under his presidency.
The Jamaican Gleaner, the Trinidad Express, the Barbados Nation and the Stabroek News do not share common ownership. The Express owns 20% of the Stabroek News and the Express and the Nation have merged.
