Dear Editor:
IN seeking resolution to any issue, the facts have to be identified and the truth has to prevail. Let me from the outset make it known that no government should be using state advertisements (ads) to muzzle any media house.
In the issue of what is being touted as a withdrawal of ads by the Department of Public Information (DPI), a Government of Guyana agency, efforts have to be made in identifying the facts towards finding a resolution. In the specific case of Stabroek News (SN) where it is being alleged that the government is denying the papers ads for political purposes, such must be examined and laid to rest.

The nation was told that the present impasse emanated from non-payment by DPI for ads published by SN. It is in the public space where it is established that SN had said to the DPI it will not carry any ad for the agency until the debt is cleared. It should be said in normal business arrangement one of the first steps that would have been taken was engagement between the parties and a payment plan agreed, which the customer would be expected to honour. At the same time, it is being noted SN’s stated skepticism of the debt being honoured in the no-confidence environment and should there be a change in government. In the meantime, the DPI wanting to continue its work found alternative avenues to advertise as it sought to honour its debt which the nation was told has since been cleared.

No government has the right to get involved in the internal affairs of employers’ organisation, be it newspaper, manufacturing or any non-governmental business, for the right to non-interference is protected under international conventions. In this specific case, it is a business transaction between two parties that created an impasse and it has to be dealt with using the tools in negotiating normalcy but taking the facts on board.
The facts in the public domain are:-
i) The contract between the two parties was severed/put on hold by SN when it refused to publish any more ads until the outstanding debt was cleared;
ii)  The DPI in the intervening period took its business elsewhere;
iii) When the debt was cleared the DPI was advised by SN it can resume the placement of ads, which is a return to the status quo;
iv) The DPI to date, based on its (non) placement of ads in SN, has signalled a disinclination to renew the relationship on term(s) set solely by SN.

There existed a contract, written or unwritten, for the newspaper to publish ads and the intervening incidents have created an atmosphere of lost confidence between the parties. The issue of state ads is not a right, but what needs to be considered is the environment within which we live. It is for this reason that the parties need to sit down and have the matter resolved.

As an aside, on the issues of fair and accurate reporting, the media as the fourth estate shoulders a responsibility to always strive for the truth. This responsibility in our polarised society is particularly needed if we are to prosper and live in peace and harmony; and it is not unfair to state that since the no-confidence vote, some sections of the media have made it a trying time for the society in deciphering fact from fiction, lies from truth, doing more harm than good to the body politic. Correspondingly, where government or any feels there is inaccurate or unfair reporting on any given issue, civic duty necessitates a response to set the record straight. The responsibility goes both ways.
Regards
Lincoln Lewis