Toolbox

Maintaining the ban on Mr Moseley gives the government an unfavourable image

Dear Editor,

I thank Dr Prem Misir for clarifying the reason why Capitol News reporter Gordon Moseley was banned or suspended from covering events at the Office of the President and State House in a letter captioned ‘Freedom of the press is not absolute’ (SN July 19). Misir penned that Moseley wrote “reproachful and disrespectful comments” about President Jagdeo in a letter published in SN and KN. During the course of interviewing people over the last week for a poll I am conducting, several people justified GINA’s suspension of Moseley, claiming that he habitually made disparaging and denigrating remarks about the President. While I agree that reporters should not denigrate or attack legitimately elected leaders (especially with untruths) such as Mr Jagdeo, one must distinguish between attacks on and critiques of a leader. I do not know if Mr Moseley routinely attacks the President as prominent lawyers and doctors have informed me.

But even if he attacked the President and even if his reporting of the President’s meeting in Antigua was inaccurate, or even if he disrespected the President in his recent letter, the punishment must fit the ‘crime.’ In the US, readers and judges feel a bad or inaccurate press is better than no press. Bad reporters are punished but banning them from news events is rarely invoked.

While reporters enjoy broad freedom to report the news, reporters have a moral duty to accurately and objectively report on newsworthy events. I remember Bro Eusi Kwayana mentioning to me some time during the late 1980s about reporters at times incorrectly reporting on his statements and views on political issues. Reporters must strive for accuracy, regardless of whether they like the newsmaker. They should not let their own feelings and views interfere with news reporting. News is news, not one’s personal views, which must be separate from reporting. Credible reporters hardly ever attack leaders personally; they may pen op-ed commentaries. In turn, leaders or their functionaries should not punish reporters for their op-ed comments.

I am not a scholar of the American media but I have studied Supreme Court cases relating to the American media and have served as a reporter for ethnic newspapers in NY for almost 30 years. I do not know of any reporter being banned from press briefings or events, although such discretion can be exercised by a leader. Reporters should be free to carry out their business without unnecessary restrictions.

I urge Dr Misir who himself was a ‘press man’ for a few years as publisher and editor of the weekly Carib-bean Journal newspaper before returning to Guyana to work for the President, to use any influence he has to urge the President to revoke the ban on Mr Moseley. Main-taining the ban gives the government an unfavourable image. The Trinidad News-day, for example, severely critiqued President Jagdeo on press freedom in its Sunday edition.

Yours faithfully,
Vishnu Bisram

Comments

About Comments

We reserve the right to edit/delete comments for length, any libel and taste. We moderate all comments so be patient while your message waits to be approved.
Curious about the little images next to each commenter's name ? Go here and sign up using the same email address you used to register for Stabroeknews.com then upload your image and confirm it.
We recognized that the registration process was troublesome to some users. So now in addition to being able to fully register and subscribe with a username and password, you can also comment on the articles by simply entering a name and email address. If you are a frequent commenter, you will want to login so you don’t have to re-type your name and email address everytime you make a comment.

7 Responses to “Maintaining the ban on Mr Moseley gives the government an unfavourable image”

SUPERERRO
on July 22nd, 2008 7:11 am

I witnessed first hand at York College in New York that President Jagdeo has a problem with being questioned or Challenged. He reacts vehemently to being challenged, period.

I agree that reporters should be fair and balance in their reporting. There is nothing in that letter of July 9th that is disrespectful to Jagdeo or his office. This guy is clearly succombing to William Pitt’s claim that “unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it.”

Academics such as you and Prem Misir should stop defending this guy, period! This government should not have been reelected to office and you fellas know it, unless of course, you possess blind loyalty!

It certainly did not take Moseley case to deem this government, unfavorable.

[Reply to this]
cochore
In reply to the above comment on July 22nd, 2008 2:40 pm:
The truth can never be, I repeat, can never be disrepectful to anybody at any time, even if it’s a President. The truth should always be our highest standard period, therefore, any public servant who cannot handle the truth shouldn’t SERVE.

[Reply to this]
Evan
on July 22nd, 2008 8:41 am

Bisram is right to add his voice to the call for recinding the ban imposed on Moseley from entering the OP and State House which are not private properties of Mr. Jagdeo, Prem Misir, Kwane McKoy nor the PPP party.

Bisram, you should know that when on does polling, the respondents respond according to what they think the interviewer wants to hear, especially if they are smart to this and similar interview methods of seeking information from the public. I wonder who were the eminent lawyers and doctors you spoke to. Or are you invoking these professional categories to justify why Mosely should have been banned and then basically pay lip service in calling for recinding the ban. Since when are those “eminent lawyers and doctors” the arbitors of what is disrecpectful and what is not? Everything is politicised in Guyana and even eminent lawyer and doctors takes side to support politicians of their choice and their actions even if these actions are indefencible. Give me a break!!!

[Reply to this]
La vie est bonne!
In reply to the above comment on July 22nd, 2008 11:40 am:
Bisram writes as his so called polls comes in the opposite.
Therefore, he is implying the opposite of the written words.
Go figure.

[Reply to this]
guyanesestarfish
on July 22nd, 2008 10:33 am

i think most of mr. bisram polls are opposite from his survey. so, i’m assuming this letter is the opposite of what he is implying.

[Reply to this]
justice4all
In reply to the above comment on July 22nd, 2008 12:02 pm:
Bisram carried that survey at Richmond Hill Queens, a stronghold of the PPP. He could predict the outcome from polling there, which is why he choose to do so. Even when he is trying to sound balanced, one can clearly discern the machinations in what he does and what he says.

[Reply to this]
Saudia
on July 22nd, 2008 3:55 pm

Again I ask - WHO IS BISRAM? What qualifies him to pontificate on every topic known to man? justice4all, I couldn’t agree with you more!

[Reply to this]