You may consider today’s offering as one of my (briefest) “time-out” pieces. (I truly admire those who could churn out numerous pages on issues they feel strongly about. Then again, there are abundant subjects to stress, fume and fret over – daily.)
I comment now on the rule and effectiveness of our many, many print media commentators, analysts, observers, columnists and letters–writers. During the worst days of Forbes Burnham’s reign persons were justifiably scared to register dissent publicly. It was my misfortune to know – from the inside – of media manipulation of the state press and the restrictions on material for opposition papers, such as “existed” then.
President Desmond Hoyte opened the door to Stabroek News’ emergence. And I make bold to state it was David de Caires’s letter–to–the editor pages which opened up (or re-opened) robust debate and exchanges in our local newspaper some thirty years ago. So fast-forward to our scores of commentators on the media scene today. Who are they? Why do they/we write? Or feel that they have to – or should?
***************
Who are they?
Because I’m mindful of not being unethical I’ll avoid names. The contributors come and fall in a variety of categories. Very qualified and lettered persons write on the economy, on medical care, on the environment, on educational issues, consumer affairs, literature, culture, etc, etc.
Others are of course, editorial writers for newspapers and like columnists who use pen-names, they are largely anonymous. I have fun sometimes detecting “anonymous” identities through style.
Special mention must be made of the political contributors. Through their columns or voluminous letters, they prosecute their positions and preferences.
Their Op-Ed (opinion/editorial) pieces are starkly partisan in the main whilst a few use references and other literary devices to attempt some neutral objectivity. I believe some (almost daily) letter-writers would fall seriously ill if Stabroek and Kaieteur ban their correspondence. They love to share their views and like me I suppose, seek to promote debate.
Other political writers naturally have their own partisan agenda for or against specific issues and personalities. Editors probably have their work cut out to look for libel, incitement and vulgarity.
************
Early in the morning?
I figure that some “correspondents” are on their computers/internet very early, by dawn, to peruse letters articles online. They then dash off their responses and positions instantly. Name twelve (12) daily letter-writers/contributors.
They say “where all men think alike, no one thinks at all.” A free press allows the democratic flowers of debate and opinion to bloom. Both the intellectual – the intelligentsia and the man-in-the-street vendor are allowed time and space to speak.
This flows, you know, from the Constitution of the Co-operative Republic. Check such articles as 38A, 139, 145 and 146. The latter, under our “guaranteed rights and freedoms”, speaks of freedom of expression, holding of opinions without interference, freedom to receive ideas and information and freedom to communicate.
Every right has a concomitant responsibility. Many of our correspondents seek to be opinion-shapers. Some stoke needless “controversies.” I’ve been fortunate enough to share my man-in-the-street views for 23 years. I’m not lettered but I know I’ve beaten many others to certain ideas. (But I’m not “lettered”).
All in all, I love the freedom we enjoy to exchange views. Even if I don’t always understand some words and usages of Charles Ramson (Senior) and GHK Lall.
***
Local government leaders (?)
Just before this year’s Local Government Elections, Observer Sherwood Lowe had asked what training would be afforded all the new councillors and administrators of the new towns, municipalities, NDC’s and those other community “governments”. His observations were timely, if yet unanswered.
Governing “yourself”, your community can pose myriad challenges. Is the much-vaunted Ministry of Communities assisting those communities indeed? Do the councillors know the local government regulations? Local folks managing their own turf has to be good. In principle. But knowing where a vital bridge is needed; where criminals lurk and how to tackle the villages’ solid waste problems are great. But the expertise needed will be a bit more complex, I’ll wager. The council/government must solicit, must employ minds adept at the law, health matters, commerce and so on. Let there be workshops and pre-emptive scenarios.
Alas, the goings-on in certain regions and town councils bare the fangs of partisan politics too frequently already. Are not the local “governors” working towards a common collective objective? The welfare of their people?
***
Putting democracy on pause
Every time I get to thinking that some society boasts too many freedoms or too much democracy, I manage to upbraid and correct myself quickly.
For I realise that there couldn’t ever be too much freedom or democracy. It is rather, how responsible or educated people are when they enjoy their rights and freedoms. So I must return to this issue because when too much “populist” sentiments permeate some wrong decisions result.
Sunday Stabroek editorial writer, in discussing the UK’s Brexit (Britain’s Exit) vote, remarked: “There is no doubt that direct democracy has its limitations and should be resorted to only rarely…” fascinating! A great moot for any debate on democracy and governance. Discuss ’til I return to this.
`Til next week!
