THE recent sordid unfolding journalistic practices of Rupert Murdoch’s media empire have compelled the United Kingdom to conduct its open and honest public debate over the regulatory framework within which the media operate. It also allows Guyana the opportunity to do the same.
In Guyana, the media exist, function, and operate almost entirely without regulation and oversight, so the risk is of a similar nature. Admittedly, the nature of this sordid unfolding event is different than what happens in Guyana, but the risk is similar because of this absence of regulation and oversight. When I published an article in the Guyana Times a little over a year ago about the establishment of a Press/Media Complaints Commission and called for operational regulations to be formulated, some were concerned about protecting the “freedom of the press” in its recognised and accepted role as the palladium of all civil, political, and religious rights.
I, however, argued that it is equally important that we proceed sensibly on the basis that freedom of the press does not mean freedom without responsibility.
I compared journalists to other professions that have a significant systemic impact to our societal structure e.g. doctors, lawyers, bankers, Members of Parliament etc. They all have their legally prescribed codes of ethics and practices. Why not members of the media?
As a perpetual student of history, crisis after crisis has reminded us that the absence of regulation in any form is a meretricious myth.