Latest update April 19th, 2024 12:59 AM
Jul 17, 2008 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom
I have not seen the letter which was written by Capitol News reporter Gordon Moseley in response to the government’s criticism of his coverage of a meeting the Head of State had with Guyanese resident in Antigua. As such, I am in no position to say whether I believed that he was being disrespectful to the Head of State.
I doubt, however, whether anything that the reporter may have written could compare to some of the nastiness that was leveled at the late Dr. Cheddi Jagan when he was Premier during the sixties.
At that time, the media was almost exclusively in the hands of forces extremely hostile towards the then PPP government.
Some of these reporters showed absolutely no respect and civility towards the office that Dr. Cheddi Jagan held and would turn up at his press conference to ridicule, taunt and harass him.
It was almost as if some of these reporters were extending the opposition’s campaign of harassment and misrepresentation into the press conferences.
I supported Cheddi when he banned one such reporter. I thought he did not go far enough because there were others who had no right being at his press briefings because they were not interested in what he had to say. They had their own agendas. I thought that Cheddi was extremely tolerant.
If I was in his position and some of the journalists had risked with me some of the abuse they hurled at him, I would have kicked them out from my press conference immediately.
It was no different overseas. The communist scare campaign was well entrenched in the foreign media. The American press had even urged their people to look under their beds to see whether there were any Communists hiding there.
After it was clear that the Americans were bent on bringing down his government by hook or crook, Cheddi went to the United States to try to explain his policies.
During that visit, he was interviewed by a journalist who was more interested in having Cheddi admit that he was a communist.
Cheddi tried his best to deal with the hostility of the media in the sixties but it reached a point where he had to draw the line and declare someone persona non grata to his Press Conferences. Since then, I have seen a lot of nasty things that pass for journalism.
I have seen persons who pretend to be bona fide journalists descend to unprecedented levels of abuse against public officials and even against the public.
One of the saddest days in my life was when I heard a talk show host on Channel 9 call on protestors to take their protests to the home of police officers.
However, I have also seen a great deal of intolerance from dictators and dictators in the making. I have seen politicians react excessively to the mildest of criticism.
I have seen one politician go after a local journalist by referring to his question as gutter journalism.
I have also seen a politician get upset at a Christmas Press Conference when instead of asking “positive” questions, a reporter dared to ask about reports of torture against civilians.
I think this is the same reporter who has now been declared persona non grata by the Office of the President. I doubt whether there can be justifiable reasons for this reaction and I therefore condemn it.
I am, however, pleased to note that when the matter was first brought to his attention, the President indicated that he was not aware of the situation.
I am sure that since then he would have had the time to familiarize himself with the matter and therefore by today the entire situation should be reversed and the stop order on the reporter removed.
I am sure also that the President will use his good office to enquire who was behind this piece of nastiness and would immediately fire that person for overreacting.
I am at pains to understand why GINA would be demanding an apology on behalf of the President of Guyana. I, however, acknowledge that GINA has the authority to suspend the accreditation of any journalist.
In any country, there has to be an agency with responsibility for accrediting journalists for official purposes.
If there was no such process it would mean that any fly-by-night and sometimes unknown media operatives would turn up at official press conferences. I have seen in Guyana, media consultants turn up at press conferences and ask questions as if they were reporters.
There is a need to determine just who is a bona fide journalist and just what categories of media workers are eligible to cover official press conferences, events and functions.
The purpose of accreditation is not simply to allow someone behind a police cordon. In fact, if the situation so demands, the police can limit the movement of a journalist in order not to compromise a crime scene.
The agency granting accreditation can also as the circumstances dictate withdraw such accreditation. One such circumstance would be if there is justified reason to feel that there has been gross disrespect to the Head of State.
I, however, do not feel such grounds exist in the case of the Capitol News reporter. I believe that this status of persona non grata should be immediately withdrawn.
I expect that the President will intervene and reverse this scandalous situation and in so doing fire whoever made such an intemperate and hasty decision.
And just in case there is a problem determining just who issued the order declaring Gordon Moseley as persona non grata, I would urge the President to make use of the polygraph machine.
Please share this to every Guyanese including your house cats.
Apr 19, 2024
SportsMax – West Indies Women’s captain Hayley Matthews delivered a stellar all-round performance to lead her team to a commanding 113-run victory over Pakistan Women in the first One Day...Kaieteur News – For years, the disciples of Bharrat Jagdeo have woven a narrative of economic success during his tenure... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Waterfalls Magazine – On April 10, the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]