By Dr Prem Misir
Guyana Chronicle
March 15, 2001

UNLIKE many countries experiencing transitional democracy, Guyana is one of the few that has an abundance of private media interspersed with the state media.

The private media, particularly through talk show hosts, play a daily role in attempting to influence the governing process in Guyana.

Every day, the private media attempt to evaluate the Government's performance, but this evaluation does not always comply with the norms of objectivity and fundamental fairness.

Talk show hosts of the private media ilk may be quite fine, if their reporting is value-free and conform to some semblance of objectivity. But they are not.

As you relate to the broadcast, print, and electronic media each day, it is obvious that many private media houses, through these talk show hosts, are driven by partisan political sentiments. In some ways, these private media houses place a higher priority on partisan political interests than on the national agenda.

Dwight Whylie and Harry Mayers of the Independent Media Monitoring and

efereeing Panel (IMM&RP), both prominent Caribbean Communications specialists, indicated in their second report, that talk shows have degenerated and were a 'significant destabilising factor' in the society.

The IMM&RP found Clem David's Sunrise Show to be obnoxious and statements spurted out as lacking in evidence. Clem David claimed in his response that talk show hosts do not have to provide evidence.

Whylie pointed out that for any talk show host to claim that it was not his/her responsibility to provide evidence was sheer illiteracy, as all information has some foundation for truth.

The notion of talk show hosts not wanting to seek out the evidence is dangerous and irresponsible, according to Whylie.

Media monitors Whylie and Mayers also criticised Mark Benschop for broadcasting several expletives in a conversation with Police Commissioner Laurie Lewis.

The panelists believe that this broadcast violated the code of ethics in journalism.

The independent panelists confirmed that Benschop's information is 'unsubstantiated allegation or accusation, much of it defamatory and likely to fan the flames of distrust, prejudice and discontent. In our view this is grossly irresponsible in a volatile political climate leading to general election'.

Most Codes of Ethics in broadcast journalism require journalists to collect and report information of importance and interest to the public accurately, honestly and impartially.

The main purpose of talk show hosts presenting an opinion or commentary is to inform the public and help them to make judgements on the issues of the day. Talk show hosts' opinions and commentaries must be held to the same standards of accuracy with regard to facts as news reports.

Clearly, Codes of Ethics in journalism support Whylie's position, that talk show host Clem David in not providing evidence for his remarks on the Sunrise Show, violated the public trust.

Talk show hosts need to be reminded that they do not own the electro-magnetic spectrum; the airwaves are a national asset.

The Representation of the People's Amendment Bill, No. 1 of 2001 was introduced 'to prohibit person/political parties to incite racial or ethnic violence or hatred'. Yet, on a nightly basis, we see a few talk show hosts heaping mountains of verbal assaults on persons and groups, assaults that may be construed as racist, or as incitement to ethnic violence.

A sample of Clem David's remarks made on Saturday, March 3, 2001, follows:

** 'Millions of dollars to buy people who work at GECOM'; this was a reference made to the PPP/C.

** 'There is a command centre at UNDP and Pegasus Hotel'.

** 'Operatives inside UNDP office being paid to rig election'.

** The truck that brought stones to the recent Tucville political meeting belonged to a prominent PPP/C individual.

Incidentally, Clem David certainly is not the only talk show host that violates the norms of professional journalism.

Some talk show hosts recently have addressed the national ID cards, legally to be used for voting. Guyanese of many different political persuasions, as of today, still have not received their ID cards.

However, these talk show hosts present the issue as if only PNC/Reform supporters are intentionally denied access to these cards.

Whether or not, talk-show hosts' inflammatory remarks on the ID cards may have led to street protests over the last two days, will only be discerned through a comprehensive investigation.

Currently, GECOM is exerting tremendous efforts to ensure that the distribution of these ID cards is completed in the next few days.

I think it is time that all Guyanese and the political parties show trust and confidence in GECOM, an independent constitutional agency.

Give GECOM a chance to function appropriately, so that it can swiftly remove the chinks in the electoral process. (Broadcast on GBC today)