Dear Editor,
I am again deeply disappointed by media houses that choose not to investigate adequately and run with stories even to the editorial level that have not been substantiated by hard evidence. In lieu of this I am trusting that you will see it fit to publish this response to what has clearly been a witch hunt with very specific intentions.
As manager of Videomega Productions since 2015, I have had the opportunity to be privy to the transactions that have taken place between the Ministry of Public Telecommunications and our company over the period in question, and I can state categorically that Videomega Productions did not receive in excess of $6 million as has been stated by the media over the past few days, and again in Kaieteur News’ editorial (March 3 2021). My decision to write this letter comes because the repetition of this falsity is exacerbated by a relentless press with the express intention of impugning Catherine Hughes. It is unfortunate that by extension this also sullies the reputation of the company I run and, as such, I felt it critical that I lay all the facts on the table and put this matter in perspective. The issue is one of context and the perception is that there is an attempt to place government funds in the company, and thus the former minister, which is most decidedly not the case.
Videomega has been an Advertising and Production Agency business for 26 years and we have done projects for successive administrations over that period, both PPP/C and APNU/AFC. We have also worked extensively with Non – Governmental Organisations and International Agencies and we have a proven track record of integrity, quality work and reliable service. In 2015 I took over all day-to-day activities when Mrs. Hughes relinquished same to concentrate on ministerial duties. In the case of the then Ministry of Public Telecommunications, it was the Public Relations Officer who would usually call, knowing of our long-standing relationship with the media houses, in most instances late on a Friday afternoon, to get ads into the media on short notice, knowing that we would go out of our way to facilitate the process. And actually, it was to the media houses that the bulk of the money really went. Kaieteur News, Stabroek News, Guyana Times and the Chronicle, along with most of the television and radio stations were the recipients of most of the money in question and the money did not go into the coffers of Videomega as has been implied; by the very same media houses who are now suggesting that we benefited significantly from this relationship.
It is a well-established fact that ad agencies receive a 15% commission for placement and that is what Videomega would have received. So, if we are to consider that our company received that commission then on average we would have really gotten 15% of $6 million, or a yearly average for the 5 years of the gargantuan sum of $180,000 per year. Videomega also extends a thirty-day credit facility to its customers, inclusive of government agencies, and it was largely for this reason that the PR officer would have called us, since the ministry’s bureaucracy would not have allowed that kind of turnaround time for the ads to be inserted. And it is interesting to note that in more than one instance we had to wait for almost a year to be paid by the ministry for the placements. For the amount of work involved and for the stress entailed, this does not even make monetary sense, we did it only because of our relationship with the former minister and our commitment to public service, knowing that it was important information that needed to reach the public within a limited time frame. And for clarity let me state for the public record that of the $6 million mentioned, $5,679,639 went to the print media alone; Kaieteur News – $1,951,912; Stabroek News – $ 1,328, 948; Chronicle – $2,075,643; Guyana Times – $341,136. There were also placements in the electronic media – TV and Radio, which would have taken the figure even higher.
Let it be made clear that if there were any breach of protocols as it pertains to public service engagements that should have come from the permanent secretary of the ministry in question when the first invoice was submitted. No such correspondence emanated from the ministry and as such we continued to place ads in the media when asked. Let me also point out that the suggestion that the paltry sum of $180,000 a year over the five year period would have enriched our agency and by extension the minister, borders on the lunatic. While the minister may have been naïve in her actions, and that is understandable seeing that she was new to the arena and had come from a private sector background where things happen quickly, she should certainly not be accused of graft, which seems to be the distinct impression being peddled. I trust that the media houses who made the accusations will check the numbers and let us know with the same front page headlines that it was they who got the hog of the money.
Regards,
Russel Lancaster
Managing Director
Videomega Productions