"It has no strategic value. It has no importance," he is quoted as saying. "The Government has no business owning a media house and I strongly believe that the country and the employees of CNMG will be better off if it was sold. In fact, I would prescribe it. GISL serves the purpose they need," he said.
Maxie told the Express newspaper selling the state media has been "my consistent position" since before the change of administration.
However, it seems that despite his principled stand Maxie was happy to use the state-media for government propaganda during his tenure at GISL.
I am sorry. I beg to disagree with Maxie or anyone who advocates the sale of the state media in Trinidad and Tobago.
And that has been my consistent position for decades, arguing for state ownership of media, but not control, with media icons like the late George John, who agreed with me.
The media collectively is an essential part of democracy. That, more than any other reason, is why in a society such as ours we need to have state ownership, which by extension means ownership by the people.
The trouble is that in Trinidad and Tobago successive governments have abused their privileges in how they treat ownership and control going back to the days of Trinidad and Tobago television (TTT) where I began my journalism career in 1972.
Read related column: Remembering ttt - a personal view
People like former Prime Minister Basdeo Panday and Senator David Abdullah would likely remember the edict of Chairman James Alva Bain that the voices of Panday, George Weekes and Raffique Shah should be banned on TTT.
Bain said that policy was based on the fact that the trade unionists were also politicians while at the same time allowing Sham Mohammed, a PNM cabinet minister, to host a weekly television show.
My argument has always been the same. Private media have their own agenda and must satisfy the bottom line and the needs of shareholders. Look at the United States today and the role of FOX news.
In Trinidad and Tobago powerful conglomerates own all the main media. That means their interests come first, although there have been no sustained attacks similar to what we see in the U.S. with the FOX experience.
Still there is the danger that citizens would not get the whole picture if they rely entirely on private media. I concede that technological changes today with social networking and the Internet have changed the rules since anyone can become a publisher.
However, conventional media is still expensive and I would argue that it is the responsibility of the state to ensure that the people have full access to media through their own state-owned facilities.
The BBC, and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), where I have worked since coming Canada in 1988, are examples of the value of state media.
In Canada, for example, anyone who talks about selling the CBC is accused of being unpatriotic. And for good reason. CBC has always been and remains the vehicle through which this country communicates its values with its diverse population and its vast regions.
According to the Broadcasting act, "...the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, as the national public broadcaster, should provide radio and television services incorporating a wide range of programming that informs, enlightens and entertains...".
Its focus is to produce and broadcast programs that are distinctively Canadian, that reflect Canada and its regions to national and regional audiences, actively contribute to the flow and exchange of cultural expression, contribute to shared national consciousness and identity and reflect the multicultural and multiracial nature of Canada.
Read: the CBC mandate
That is why the CBC has become one of Canada's most treasured institutions. And I would argue that is what CNMG can become with the right political direction.
The hoopla over the Fazeer Mohammed incident must not become an emotional distraction from the real value of state media; Trinidad and Tobago needs CNMG as the eyes and ears and the voice of the people. CNMG must become a part of who we are as a people.
News and current affairs programming, which must be fair, objective and unbiased, is only one part of what a state television or radio station must be.
There are a variety of state media options to follow. The fact is we need to preserve our state media in Trinidad and Tobago, not trash it or sell it. Selling is a retrograde step. We need to fix what is wrong, not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
And we can start by giving the People's Partnership the benefit of the doubt when it says that it is committed to media freedom.
I can say without contradiction that Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissesssar was genuine when she stated, "We will protect your right and we will expect that you will continue to operate without fear or favour to make your contribution to the creation of a just society."
Read the story: Worth repeating: PM Kamla pledges to defend of media freedom
One of the problems with successive governments in Trinidad and Tobago has been its misunderstanding of the role of the state media. For all of them, the media became another arm of the government's information and propaganda service.
And former Prime Minister Patrick Manning even felt compelled to intervene in private media when he attempted "to deal" with two on-air hosts of a radio show who disagreed with his policies. And many of us will remember the Julian Rogers incident during the Panday UNC regime.
The new government has the opportunity to change is relationship with state media. It does not have to exercise editorial or programming control of any kind.
What it needs to do as a matter of urgency is to clearly define what state media should do. That's a policy issue. And once that is done it must hand the job to professionals who are trained and capable of getting it done.
If it does that it would be true to PM Kamla's matra: "serve the people, serve the people, serve the people!"
Jai Parasram | Toronto - 12 Nov. 2010
No comments:
Post a Comment