STABROEK News’ limited circulation and limited reach drove the Government Information Agency (GINA) to withdraw the placement of advertisements from that newspaper.
GINA’s policy on the placement of advertisements is as follows: place newspaper advertisements in the state media plus one private media house.
For some time now, Stabroek News preserved the private monopoly over state advertisements, as it was touted to be the largest and only private newspaper in Guyana. This situation no longer holds.
Kaieteur News, currently the largest private newspaper with huge circulation and extensive reach, has now removed the crown from the Stabroek News.
And so in order to comply with the policy of placing advertisements in only one private newspaper, GINA made a business decision to focus its commercials mainly towards the Kaieteur News, certainly not a pro-government newspaper. The Guyana Chronicle is the state’s newspaper, not a private newspaper.
GINA continues to place advertisements in the private sector, with probably all Government Ministries purchasing Stabroek News. Indeed, the Government of Guyana has a close working relationship with the private sector, cemented through the National Competitiveness Strategy.
At any rate, Stabroek News’ leaders are crying foul and describing the situation as a violation of press freedom. And they have invoked the herd mentality to solicit sympathies mainly from the newspaper’s Caribbean ‘family’ media.
At a time not so long ago, when Kaieteur News had no advertisement from GINA, the question of press freedom violation was not part of the Stabroek News’ vernacular.
This is the kind of hypocrisy and gross inconsistency permeating the land of Stabroek News.
In the U.S., where freedom of the press is a ‘big thing’, the state of New York places its advertisements only in a few newspapers; those newspapers devoid of U.S. Government advertisements do not moan and groan about press freedom violation; and the state of New York does not even bother about equitable distribution. The name of the game in the U.S. is capitalism with competition and free market forces driving business decisions.
GINA’s policy decision complies with these economic factors. And competition and the free market should further refine press freedom; at least, so say the advocates of capitalism.
But instead of refinement, the actions of Stabroek News with some allied local media forces point to an abuse of press freedom. Many private media houses are not fulfilling their public interest responsibilities, and really do not deserve the label ‘independent’; and many violate the principles of the free press: objectivity, accuracy, and fundamental fairness.
About 200 hundred years ago, President Thomas Jefferson said: “The only security of all is in a free press.” And in 1823, he said: “The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to…”
Today, in Guyana, these statements could be rewritten as: “The only danger of all is in a false media. The force of its false opinion must be rejected when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be refuted.”
The fact of the matter is that Guyana indulges in a journalism of allegations.
Keep in mind Stabroek News’ frequent incorrect statements not so long ago, which, among others, include (1) the lie detector equipment and test at the U.S. Embassy during the crime wave, (2) numerous innuendoes on the phantom death squad, intended to slur the Government, and (3) the bungling of migration statistics, even after USAID made a correction. Recent examples are available.
Is this type of journalism not endangering press freedom?
Stabroek News and a few other private media houses present a daily eruption of fog facts in the news, where useful information systematically fades away through opinionated news; the result is a paralysis of analysis of the information; the newscasts are supposed to inform, but as Schechter (2005) aptly asserts: “…much of the news often disinforms, distorts and deceives.” Is this type of journalism not endangering press freedom?
Captions also are at variance with their texts. For instance, a caption in a recent Stabroek News’ issue read “GINA complains of Stabroek News’ ‘lobbying efforts’ – policy decision to place ads in only two dailies”. The GINA text substantively covers other important areas not captured in the caption; yet the editor used this particular limited caption, and excluding large chunks of the GINA release.
Whatever may have been the editor’s intention, the fact of the matter is that the caption was at variance with the GINA text; and that is a distortion, overemphasizing an area only in Stabroek News’ interests. Is this type of journalism not endangering press freedom?
There is still another side to Stabroek News’ media distortions. For example, its excessive usage of ‘Reports suggest’, ‘Reliable reports state’, ‘this newspaper understands’, may in some cases conceal non-compliance with the verification principle in journalism. Journalists do not have to reveal their sources, but given the existing sensitivities in some stories, editors have to exercise greater vigilance where clearly excesses are being committed in the ‘reliable reports state’ reportage. Is this type of journalism not endangering press freedom?
Lord Hutton, concluding that the BBC engaged in a journalism of assertion, in broadcasting a sexed-up report on Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, argued for a journalism of verification and fact finding.
And so Stabroek News’ weeping and gnashing about a breach in its press freedom is a sham; really the people should slam Stabroek News and a few private media for their crass abuse of press freedom!
Incidentally, Stabroek News needs to assimilate the fact that I am not the Head/Director of GINA.