IT’S not something that the slew of so-called local TV talk show hosts, wannabe political and other analysts and sham commentators will celebrate and praise.

It’s not an issue that they will give a big shout out about.

But the word is out and the latest United States annual report on human rights in Guyana has given press freedom here good rating. It also says the Guyana Government has generally respected the human rights of its citizens.

President Bharrat Jagdeo has repeatedly expressed doubts about the accuracy of reports issued on Guyana by the U.S. administration and some institutions, arguing that the conclusions they arrive at and based on their indicators are often at odds with the reality here.

The government here has also disputed claims in previous U.S. State Department annual reports about matters like the extent of trafficking in people in Guyana and the American assessment on this issue in this year’s report is more in line with local findings.

There may be other conclusions in the report that perennial critics of the Guyana Government will find comfort in but there’s not much solace for them in its section on press freedom in Guyana.

While charging that the government last year demonstrated diminishing tolerance for publicly expressed views or opinions different from its own, the report said: “The independent media were active and expressed a wide variety of views without restriction. International media operated freely. The partially government owned daily newspaper, the Guyana Chronicle, which typically displayed a pro-government slant, covered a broad spectrum of political and non-governmental groups. The independent daily newspapers Stabroek News, Kaieteur News, and Guyana Times freely reported and editorialised on the government’s policies and actions.”

The instances touched on in the document that may be regarded as breaches of press freedom are debatable – including the government suspension of the broadcast licence of Channel 6 for four months after it aired a threat by a caller against President Jagdeo during a live call in show.

People here too have differing views on the banning of television journalist, Gordon Moseley, from the Office of the President and State House for allegedly making “disparaging and disrespectful” remarks towards the President in a letter published in two local newspapers.

The letter objected to the President’s public repudiation of a report Moseley had aired; neither the report nor the letter was reported to contain anything offensive, the U.S. report offered.

These instances apart, the overall conclusion is that Guyana remains a free and democratic society, with the cardinal principle of freedom of the press alive and well.

This is a far cry from the days not so long ago when Guyanese were for years mired in a media totally controlled by the state and the party in power.

Newspapers of that era, like the Catholic Standard and the Mirror, that tried to offer readers alternatives to the steady diet of government and party propaganda served up by the state media, struggled to exist in dangerous circumstances.

Independent journalists suffocated by the iron fist of the state and ruling party migrated in numbers and those who remained practised their profession at their peril.

Guyana has moved light years away from those dark days and it is good for Guyanese of all walks of life to pause and reflect on these things every now and then.