THE media is a key and necessary component of any democratic state, given its all-important functions as public watchdog; keeper of the public’s conscience, and protector of the rights of citizens.

Add to this its seminal role as the bulwark against state-sponsored tyranny, and one will undoubtedly understand why its presence in any society represents a test as to whether that State is truly an adherent to the principles of democracy.

Given its time-honoured role as a powerful influencer and shaper of opinion, promoter and conveyor of ideas, its views are always greatly examined as to how it is leading the conversation, whatever that conversation may happen to be, and which interest group(s) it may be perceived to be supporting or vice versa.

In any state, a free media is mandatory to the expression of opinion, for there is no media that will stay silent on the pivotal issues of the day, be it political, social, or economic, all strands that are intricately interwoven and impact on the societal debates of the day. Its arguments will always flow from a particular position of interest.

Therefore, its centrality as a part of the state being able to find solutions for problems cannot be overestimated, given its great ability to direct the course of the debate. Thus, it is agreed that any democratic state will facilitate the media in its important quest to function in a manner that will serve the best interests of the state, and the well-being of its people.

But this can only mean a media that is responsible and ethical in its daily journalistic practice, and one that shouldn’t have to be reminded that because of its important role, adherence to its well-known principles is an absolute guarantor for objectivity, truth and balance.

The media in Guyana is functioning at a very critical period of its modern political history, particularly given the fact that there are very serious challenges, with that of race being at the top of the agenda. This categorises the media here as operating in a complex situation.
Put simply, although democracy gives the media the right to have its political affiliations, it does not mean the wherewithal to aid and abet narrow, insular, and dangerous ideologies that are harmful to the best interests of the nation.

Because, in a society that has racial overtones, the media should function to promote national conversations that will lead to solutions rather than facilitate views from politicians, and supremacist groups that are unmistakably about domination that can only lead to further fissures throughout the society.

This cannot be objectivity, being truthful, or seeking ways to finding a solution to a problem that continues to fester at the centre of the nation’s core.
Therefore, it was encouraging, timely, and appropriate that the Ethnic Relations Commission’s (ERC) first encounter has been with the national media in terms of the former endeavouring to have such an institution as part of its mission of defeating racism and such forms of discrimination.

The given positive assurances from the media gathering bodes well for this great national mission.