.jpg)
A WAY of life, particularly one that exhibits an unerring recourse to daily untruths, is indeed the well known masthead of Kaieteur News, Guyana’s best known print medium for distortions, and everything associated with unethical journalism. Months ago, because of its compulsive predilection for reporting untruths and distortions, this epitome of misrepresentation was forced to issue an apology to a magistrate adjudicating in a matter heard in the Essequibo jurisdiction. This was for erroneous reporting.
It goes without saying that any media house, founded on the well grounded principles of professional journalism and ethical reporting, would have learnt from such a lesson, ensuring that it is not faced with such an embarrassment, again. But not Kaieteur News; and the reason is not very difficult to comprehend.
This daily believes that it is the embodiment of the right to publishing all and every news report without recourse to proper verification. This, as is so well known in the media, has often led to inaccurate reporting, leading to incorrect conclusions on the part of the readership, on issues, events and personalities. Such a culture has the cumulative effect of even ruining reputations in many instances.
Any media house, even in its formative stage, would understand such a causation of bad reporting; much less a journal such as the Kaieteur News that has an editor of such long-standing media experience. But there is a reason for this decidedly desultory journalism, which would have been expressed in numerous prior pieces in this newspaper, and therefore would not detain us in this editorial.
It is a given that coverage of judicial proceedings has to be undertaken with the utmost accuracy, given the nature of legal proceedings and the need for a clear and proper understanding of what is being said and interpreted legally; and its serious implications for justice. No proper court will ever tolerate misrepresentation on what has been elucidated in its respected assembly.
This was the lesson that both the Kaieteur News editor and his free- lancer, appears to have forgotten, that caused both to be arraigned before a trial judge in the Supreme Court to answer charges of contempt, relative to a murder trial over which the latter judge had been presiding. It is baffling that this newspaper can seek refuge under the blanket of “total lack of knowledge of the judicial system, an ignorance of what a ‘voir dire’ is, and poor editing and management by Kaieteur News Ltd.” It begs the question as to what journalistic training, if any, is conducted for its journalists.
The fallout from such inaccurate reporting on the trial is, of course, aborting of the proceedings in the proper interest of justice. This means that the accused will have to re-appear again in a new trial, which is a situation of justice delayed, because of a grossly irresponsible press; and further expenditure for a new trial. There is also the serious implication that witnesses for the trial can become seriously incapacitated, rendering them incapable of further testimony, and even dying.
Whether this sanction puts a brake on the recurring practice of misrepresentation and inaccurate reporting on the part of Kaieteur News, remains to be seen. It is time that this media house suffer judicial consequences for its intransigence. It has been long overdue. No court must tolerate such disrespect.
The honourable trial judge must be commended for his forthright action in the interest of judicial practice and principles, and his fearless decision to penalise the errant parties.
It goes without saying that any media house, founded on the well grounded principles of professional journalism and ethical reporting, would have learnt from such a lesson, ensuring that it is not faced with such an embarrassment, again. But not Kaieteur News; and the reason is not very difficult to comprehend.
This daily believes that it is the embodiment of the right to publishing all and every news report without recourse to proper verification. This, as is so well known in the media, has often led to inaccurate reporting, leading to incorrect conclusions on the part of the readership, on issues, events and personalities. Such a culture has the cumulative effect of even ruining reputations in many instances.
Any media house, even in its formative stage, would understand such a causation of bad reporting; much less a journal such as the Kaieteur News that has an editor of such long-standing media experience. But there is a reason for this decidedly desultory journalism, which would have been expressed in numerous prior pieces in this newspaper, and therefore would not detain us in this editorial.
It is a given that coverage of judicial proceedings has to be undertaken with the utmost accuracy, given the nature of legal proceedings and the need for a clear and proper understanding of what is being said and interpreted legally; and its serious implications for justice. No proper court will ever tolerate misrepresentation on what has been elucidated in its respected assembly.
This was the lesson that both the Kaieteur News editor and his free- lancer, appears to have forgotten, that caused both to be arraigned before a trial judge in the Supreme Court to answer charges of contempt, relative to a murder trial over which the latter judge had been presiding. It is baffling that this newspaper can seek refuge under the blanket of “total lack of knowledge of the judicial system, an ignorance of what a ‘voir dire’ is, and poor editing and management by Kaieteur News Ltd.” It begs the question as to what journalistic training, if any, is conducted for its journalists.
The fallout from such inaccurate reporting on the trial is, of course, aborting of the proceedings in the proper interest of justice. This means that the accused will have to re-appear again in a new trial, which is a situation of justice delayed, because of a grossly irresponsible press; and further expenditure for a new trial. There is also the serious implication that witnesses for the trial can become seriously incapacitated, rendering them incapable of further testimony, and even dying.
Whether this sanction puts a brake on the recurring practice of misrepresentation and inaccurate reporting on the part of Kaieteur News, remains to be seen. It is time that this media house suffer judicial consequences for its intransigence. It has been long overdue. No court must tolerate such disrespect.
The honourable trial judge must be commended for his forthright action in the interest of judicial practice and principles, and his fearless decision to penalise the errant parties.
