Latest update April 25th, 2024 12:59 AM
Oct 09, 2014 Letters
DEAR EDITOR,
I noted a very interesting development in Kaieteur News of Saturday October 04, 2014. In that edition an article, authored by a Kaieteur News reporter captioned, “Parliamentary contributions of the Opposition… Granger, other APNU MPs ‘ineffective’ in the National Assembly – Chris Ram – that is an unfair and misguided criticism – says Granger” was published.
On reading the article I came to the conclusion that Mr Granger was, I dare say, tricked into responding to something which he thought was a recent criticism, but which in fact was posted on Ram’s website about four months ago. I recalled when Ram’s criticism was first posted it appeared in the local press and Mr Granger had given a very passionate response, stating in no uncertain terms his disagreement with the observation.
Editor, I believe you have a responsibility to your readers to ensure that when they receive information through your paper that its context is clear and not misleading. While it could be argued that a reporter is within his/her right to ask a question on a matter raised some time in the past, it is not proper for the reporter not to state that the information contained in the question is not of recent vintage.
Further, I also believe that since Kaieteur News had carried Granger’s earlier response, it was incumbent on the Editor of the paper (a widely respected person with tremendous experience in the field of journalism) to have corrected the reporter’s deliberate misrepresentation of information when the story was being put together for public consumption.
It is nothing but gutter journalism for matters as old as this one to be recast as a recent statement by Ram or any other writer, particularly when the intention is to hold the responder to a question up to public ridicule.
Mr Granger is well advised to be more alert to these nuances in the present political atmosphere and demonstrate when he is being interviewed that he is the person in charge and not the reporter, whose only motivation in these situations is the desire to score big whenever the opportunity arises. The APNU Leader should have pointed out at the press conference that he had already dealt with that matter when it was first raised. If he had taken that course of action it would have made it difficult for the issue to be presented as negatively as it was.
Tacuma Ogunseye
EDITOR’S NOTE:
In December of last year, a reporter attached to this publication conducted several interviews with analysts, on the performance of the opposition and government in the National Assembly. One analyst, Mr. Ramon Gaskin, was of the opinion that the opposition, A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) in particular, had not performed adequately, and that much more could have been achieved if the coalition’s leader been more militant.
This year, in July, Leader of APNU, Mr. David Granger, held a press conference to mark the third anniversary of the coalition. At that forum, Mr. Granger had boasted that the coalition had made significant strides in holding the government accountable at the Parliamentary level. The criticisms of “unnamed critics” were then put to Mr. Granger. In light of that, he was asked if he would still hold firm to his position that his coalition had performed to the best of its ability. He had cited the lack of resources, among other factors, which contributed to APNU not being as effective as it could be.
Following that press conference, Chartered Accountant Chris Ram had posted on his website, a two-part analysis (July 19 and August 15, 2014) of Mr. Granger’s responses. He had also touched on what he described to be the “unimpressive” parliamentary contributions of the APNU Leader and his fellow parliamentarians.
Mr. Granger was asked not too long after Mr. Ram posted these articles, to respond to the claims therein, but he had indicated to the reporter that he was busy at the time.
In light of looming general elections, the reporter decided to ask Mr. Granger to revisit Mr. Ram’s comments and respond appropriately, but Mr. Granger again said that he was busy and asked for the articles to be emailed to him. In person, Mr. Granger was also informed of the dates of the comments made by Mr. Ram.
The reporter did as requested, but Mr. Granger, via email, said that he was preoccupied with other engagements and asked for it to be deferred to a more appropriate time. He had also, via email, indicated that he was apprised of Mr. Ram’s comments.
At his next press conference, Mr. Granger was then asked to respond to Mr. Ram’s comments. So, contrary to Mr. Ogunseye’s belief, Mr. Granger was not by any means “tricked” into thinking that Ram’s comments were recent.
Jagdeo giving Exxon 102 cent to collect 2 cent.
Apr 25, 2024
By Rawle Toney Kaieteur Sports – The French Diplomatic Office in Guyana, in collaboration with the Guyana Olympic Association and UNICEF, hosted an exhibition on Tuesday evening at the...Kaieteur News – Dr. Bharrat Jagdeo, the General Secretary of the People’s Progressive Party, persists in offering... 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]