Dear Editor,
An interesting scenario currently exists in the local press corps today. While some media workers on the lower level pat their GINA colleagues on the back in sympathy and whisper their support, they have to be careful their seniors don’t see them do this. In a country where the private media constantly bemoan the lack of press freedom, there is the freedom to condemn the work of their fellow professionals who work with the state, and openly support the parliamentary opposition as they try to muzzle the state’s press corps.
If this is not an issue concerning freedom of expression, then what is? It boggles the mind that the Guyana Press Association (GPA) is ready, willing and eager to jump on the bandwagon at the slightest sign of a perceived slight of a private media worker or entity, but refuses to look in the direction of a government worker. This is not surprising, since the GPA has never regarded a state media worker as a mainstream professional. Yet it would accept those same workers as professionals when they leave their government jobs and join the private media corps. Same person, same qualifications but only recognised when working with the private media.
Why then, if the state media is not recognised as comprising legitimate media professionals, was GINA condemned for not speaking out on the suspension of CNS 6? Did the GPA acknowledge then that GINA was legitimately a member of the local press corps? And now they are not when they are under attack? The entrenched position of the GPA is that the state media, specifically GINA, does not consist of professional media workers, therefore has no need of support from the GPA. Only when its workers join the private media corps, will they be protected. Additionally, the GPA is bent on ensuring that the state media are muzzled, giving total control of the media to the main opposition political parties, thus effectively killing once again press freedom as was the case in the last administration.
This will leave the nation at the mercy of the pro-opposition media houses with no input from the government creating a situation of no balanced coverage of news and issues, and no choice for persons to select what they want to see and hear. It has been clearly demonstrated time and again, that the private media houses are almost 100% politically biased on the side of the opposition, with some bullishly refusing to recognise the right of the government to have a communications department like any other government in the world.
A brief description of that agency which exists in the United States says that the White House Communications Agency (WHCA) is dedicated to providing premier, worldwide, vital information services and communications support to the President and his staff. The White House Director of Communications, is part of the senior staff of the US President, and is responsible for developing and promoting the agenda of the President and leading its media campaign, and ensures that the administration’s message has been delivered successfully. The communications office also works closely with cabinet level departments and other executive agencies in order to create a coherent strategy through which the President’s message can be disseminated. The WHCA works in direct support of the President, the Vice-president, and senior White House staff.
The mandate of the WHCA is clearly the same as GINA and possibly of all the others around the world. Why then does the Guyana Press Association and the opposition seek to shut this agency down? The rationale displayed here really boggles the mind.
Yours faithfully,
Rupert Singh
GINA
