Dear Editor,
I refer you to various letters written by Mr Frederick Kissoon (SN 07.10.05; KN 07.10.07) and SN 07.10.13, “The Two of us are the only ones at UG who speak to the press”, to which Mr Jason Benjamin’s name is also attached. This intervention will highlight just one factor, and not his several personal attacks.
Mr Kissoon protests that he has no conspiracy with Kaieteur News to publicly promote Mr Benjamin’s candidacy in the University Students Society elections. In the course of this, he makes the following disclosure : “I leave readers to decide if there is a conspiracy. Incidentally, Mr Creighton sent his letter to KN, called in to say that he withdrew it to re-work it, but never sent it back. It appeared in SN” (Kaieteur News, Oct 7, 2007).
The very significant question here is, how did Mr Kissoon get hold of that information ? I submitted a letter to the Editor of Kaieteur News. I later called him to advise that I had discovered a couple of necessary amendments. He agreed that I should make them, and he would wait to publish the amended version. How is it that I had a private conversation with the editor of Kaieteur News and moments later that confidential exchange found its way, word for word, in a letter written by Mr Kissoon. It is a very serious ethical question.
I have had cause to complain before about the treatment of certain issues at Kaieteur News, but the editor has always denied that there was any breach of ethics. Now here it is that Mr Kissoon has knowledge of an unpublished letter that he had no right to have been told about, in order to better fashion his response before it was published. What Mr Kissoon has blurted out in public has unwittingly exposed and utterly compromised both himself and the newspaper
Incidentally, contrary to what he wrote, I did send back the letter; but Mr Kissoon is unable to report accurately even when he is fed with privileged information.
Given the foregoing, and the damage it has done to trust and confidence, can we be convinced that there is no collaboration in the public promotion of Mr Benjamin ? One can be led to suspect that this is an attempt to influence the elections in order to have a UGSS president who is a faithful follower of Mr Kissoon. On almost every recent campus issue, only Benjamin and Kissoon are interviewed and quoted in the Kaieteur, although they are not the official spokesmen for the studentship or the lecturers.
Mr Kissoon’s struggle with factual accuracy is directly linked with this. He asserts that “there is a near impossibility of getting (sic) people to talk to their reporters” at UG (Stabroek, 07.10.13). The media houses can find no one to talk to “on campus when there is an unusual development. They have to resort to the same people – Benjamin and Kissoon” because no one else is willing. Mr Kissoon is gravely mistaken.
Several members of the University staff have spoken to the media on various thorny issues. For example, on different occasions in different media coverage, Andrew Hicks, Hector Edwards, Patrick Ketwaru, Godfrey Adams and Melvin Sankies spoke out on the asbestos issue. Adams had a great deal to say on the recent industrial issues. Chief Accountant Neil Browman spoke freely to the media about the robbery; the PRO Paulette Paul communicates with the media consistently and has issued countless statements on such issues as asbestos, security and the closure of the Turkeyen Campus back entrance. Vincent Alexander has repeatedly spoken on asbestos, security and other matters, as has Tota Mangar.
Perhaps the Kaieteur News never approaches the UGSS president when they need the views of students. Past presidents, such as Kadri Parris, have not been reticent about speaking to the media on issues. Neither have current students, several of whom were interviewed on the first day of the new academic year in September 2007.
Current post-graduate student Alvin Doris has been very vocal on many critical issues. He has been interviewed and quoted on matters including the recent industrial situation, the suspension of the First Year Programmes in Communications, Registra-tion issues, the increase in Late Registration Fees and a recent summit of UG campus societies.
Mr Kissoon purports that Dr James Rose as Vice-Chancellor never spoke to or made statements in the media. Such a claim has been a part of his protracted attacks on Rose, but, again, he is sadly uninformed. Two of the more recent issues on which VC Rose made direct interventions were the asbestos issue and the controversial queries raised in the press about the Certificate in Legal Drafting. He appeared in an in-depth TV interview on University issues on Channel 11, and has given viewpoints on radio on different matters.
It is hardly the practice for Vice-Chancellors anywhere to answer every query in the media; normally, other officers hold that portfolio. Yet Vice-chancellors are frequently quoted in the media on several matters. That is because they make public speeches and statements. Thus, Rose as VC was often quoted in the media in that way, and has made other statements and answered queries through the Public Relations Division. At UG, speaking to the media was the task of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor who had overall responsibility for public relations. That was the administrative arrangement during the flood of 2005, even though the VC did speak to the media, including to those reporters who called him at his home.
In the face of all that evidence, the Kaieteur News cannot justify their consistent focus on Kissoon and Benjamin with any claim that no one else will speak to them. But Mr Kissoon’s personal agenda can be advantageously served by having only his views reflected in the Kaieteur and by the return of Mr Benjamin to UGSS office. To quote Mr Kissoon, himself, “I leave the readers to decide if there is a conspiracy”.
Yours faithfully,
Al Creighton
