Dear Editor,
The Working People’s Alliance (WPA) and International Decade for People of African Descent Assembly-Guyana (IDPADA-G) in separate statements condemned the Stabroek News’s cartoon for the negative stereotype image depicting a young African man robbing/pointing a gun at citizens. The WPA for its part called on Stabroek News to apologise and take action against those responsible for this assault on the dignity of African people. Unfortunately, Stabroek News (SN) declined to do so, instead to hide behind a worthless self-serving defence.
However, to its credit, Stabroek News published both statements by the WPA and IDPADA-G. In response to the WPA’s statement, an invited comment by the editor was attached, which speaks volumes. Firstly, it was not voluntary, as SN indicated that it was an invited comment. Readers can infer that if the editor were not asked for a comment SN would not have demonstrated any professional res-ponsibility in this matter. Before I continue, let me say that the correct thing was for SN to admit to poor judgement in allowing the cartoon to be published. More importantly, to apologize to the African community and the nation. That course of action was the least required despite SN’s position that the cartoon was misinterpreted.
In its defence, Stabroek News raised a question through its editor about how the WPA determined that the character depicted in the cartoon was African. This argument is a non defence since the portrayal strongly suggested it was of an African youth, a conclusion widely regarded as undeniable. The editor’s attempt was seen as an effort to be “smart,” an approach that ultimately proved unsuccessful.
The next point in Stabroek News’s response that this letter addresses is the editor’s citation of the cartoonist’s right to free speech. While I fully support the constitutional right to free speech for all Guyanese, it should not serve as a carte blanche to act without consideration. It is crucial to balance the exercise of this right with its impact on individuals and society. Given the controversy this issue has stirred, I question whether the editor still aligns with Mr. Harris’s cartoon. I suspect that the cartoonist is not devoid of self-criticism.
In conclusion, I have intentionally refrained from discussing the “themes” of the cartoon that Stabroek News suggested readers should contemplate, as those are not the issues I am disputing.
Yours sincerely,
Tacuma Ogunseye.
