UNESCO poster reminds us there's still work to be done to protect freedom of speech and journalists, maybe now more than ever.
RESPONSIBLE. Accurate. Reputable. Truthful. Fair.
These terms are often associated with good journalism. News stories we can trust in whatever medium.
But when a government invites its citizens to “rely on...trusted sources” of its choice—as Wilfred Abrahams, Barbados’ Minister of Home Affairs, Information and Public Affairs, did in a recent listing of media houses with which his office has a “reliable and robust relationship”—we should pause, at least a little, as if at the words "fake news," ostensibly the reason for the alliance.
Another tenet of the profession is objectivity. Both media houses and government in our country need to work harder at observing their individual roles. Our own Clennell Wickham, arguably the most fearless newspaperman we've produced, would have reminded us: the choice between government without free press or a free press without government should always be a clear one.
There's a fine line for media houses between being a “partner,” social or otherwise, and being considered “accredited” (at best?) or “state-sanctioned” (the absolute worst?) The journey over that line, often drawn by party, leads to inevitable questions about the actions of burgeoning tyrannies and would-be dictators. Actions citizens don’t often see until after the slide down that slope into the quicksand.
Is this administration honestly telling people not to trust news from any other source, which may well be legitimate? Are they saying their press releases are the best truth or only truth?
The language of the notice (see below) is disingenuous and reminds us of the worst tendencies of ministers or secretaries of information. In a democracy, it is not for the government to determine arbitrarily which news agencies’ reports are fit for public consumption.
Donald Trump tried this repeatedly during his presidency. His aim in publicly disparaging media houses such as The New York Times and The Washington Post—to name only two of his favourite targets—was clear: to disrupt, discredit, disengage. To distract the American people from priority issues and control their opinions. His efforts largely failed to diminish these newspapers’ effectiveness.
Instead, government should work to sustain an atmosphere in which news and information may be accessed and vetted by its citizens, and in which its citizens are enabled to make informed and enlightened choices about what is or is not true. For a start.
The people's own government information service can fill in any perceived gaps from its own perspective.
The need for this kind of plurality, if not simple transparency, is even greater during times of crises. Many governments have had to enact or grant themselves on behalf of their people emergency powers to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic. Some governments, such as ours, felt they had insufficient powers and that they required more to deal with any public health eventuality. Without a doubt, we have been dealing with a fast moving and largely unknown entity over the last year-plus.
Yet other governments have no doubt sensed an opportunity to strengthen their political hand, whose form looks very much like an authoritarian fist.
“The coronavirus pandemic has reinforced and consolidated repressive tendencies worldwide,” Christian Mihr, Germany’s executive director of Reporters Without Borders, told DW in April. DW further stated in the same article that “reporting on coronavirus developments has been restricted in countries across the globe. Some countries have also seen governments use the crisis to tighten their grip on the media while others, including Germany, have seen an increase in attacks on journalists.”
These countries may need to be reminded by their people to release their grip once we’re on the other side of the crisis. And, as Mihr points out, independent journalism is the “singular effective tool against the misinformation pandemic” all countries fighting the virus have faced.
People should have and seek everyday news from a broad range of sources. Vigilance is as much their responsibility as it is their government’s.
