Dear Editor,
NCN’s extensive coverage of a vigil held by its workers and sympathizers, followed immediately by a panel discussion on the effects of the budget cuts on the LCDS, is probably the strongest example of how this particular state agency continues to be used as a means of propagating the PPP/C’s political perspective.
The programmes were aired during prime time on the evening of Thursday, April 26, just hours after the passing of the 2012 Budget in the National Assembly, and both were strongly critical of the opposition parliamentary parties for their role in the budget cuts. The extent of human suffering that would be caused by these cuts was highlighted ad nauseam, with the AFC and APNU being labelled as vengeful, heartless and selfish.
While I strongly believe that the persons expressing their views on those programmes should have every right to do so, I find it mind boggling that anyone would think that it is okay for our state-owned media to carry only one side of such a topical and contentious issue without allowing equal time for proponents of the budget cuts to make their case to the Guyanese people.
There seems to be a prevailing notion in less enlightened circles that the opposition is some sort of subversive collection of trouble-makers whose views don’t merit public dissemination or even official acknowledgement. This notion has hitherto been backed by governments relying on brain-dead parliamentary majorities, not just to allow the restriction of views expressed through state-owned media, but to generously fund such lop-sided operations.
Inherent in any democracy is some system of checks and balances and our current parliamentary configuration provides the best opportunity that Guyanese have seen in a very long time to curb the excesses of the executive. It is clear that the executive in this case is both unfamiliar and uncomfortable with this new and improved arrangement and is missing the free ride extended to them in the past. Perhaps another stint on the opposition benches might reinforce the value of this particular model.
With regard to our National Communications Network, I have also heard the ridiculous argument expressed by some including the immediate past President, that there are so many private media operators through which the opposition can access the public that NCN is merely countering the opposition propaganda so that the public can benefit from a balanced view. While clearly ridiculous, it is also a devious device in that it targets those with limited access to information and reduces their expectations of what the state should deliver.
Whether with a fifty-one per cent majority or a forty-six per cent minority, the combined opposition has traditionally represented a significant section of the tax-paying Guyanese public who have every right to receive information from their parliamentary representatives via the state media. It is sad that this right has been ignored for so long by NCN and its predecessors GBC and GTV, and I am hopeful that by withholding funding pending reforms our National Assembly can correct this longstanding imbalance.
Finally I cannot stress enough how important it is for any developing country hoping to one day attain the status of developed nation to nurture and encourage strong and independent national institutions. NCN in its current form would be hideously out of place in any developed country.
Yours faithfully,
Dominic Gaskin
