By Dr. Vishnu Bisram

SINCE the change in political administration in August 2020 that led to new management of the state-owned media, the Chronicle has been allowed to be run very professionally; political interference is no longer part of its management. The Guyanese diaspora, especially in greater New York, notes the balance and a fair amount of coverage of community news of all sections and communities in the diaspora.

During the preceding administration, large sections (over half) of the diaspora were completely ignored by the government as well as the state media, as if they don’t exist. This writer and other reputed reporters in the diaspora penned several articles that were not published in the state media during the last administration. Even non-political articles about the diaspora itself were not permitted from these writers. Worse, this writer was attacked in the state media, but his response was not published. Preference in coverage was given to supporters of the ruling dispensation and in praising the regime. Attempts for consideration of submissions of reports on the diaspora were rebuffed. Also, the findings of opinion polls of this writer were not published in the state media.

The New York-based diaspora is pleased with the appearance of and coverage of news as well as commentaries in the Chronicle. Based on my informal poll (conversations with members) of the diaspora, a lot more now read the Chronicle paper and watch the DPI news than before. The diaspora praises the wide divergence of views that is allowed, unlike under the previous regime. They also note that there’s an ethnic balance of columnists and reporters unlike under the previous administration that favoured only one group.

The Chronicle and other state media were largely used as political tools for propagandistic purposes during the dictatorship (1966 to 1992). Independent media were punished, with newsprint being denied them. They were also silenced with countless libel suits from the state, all of them frivolous. There was hardly any media outlet for community news and objective commentaries in Guyana. Even coverage of newsworthy events of the diaspora was not supported.

When I left Guyana in 1977 to pursue tertiary studies as a 16 year old, there were no media in America for the Guyanese diasporic community coverage. And the state media in Guyana did not encourage reports about the diaspora or commentaries of the illegal authoritarian regime. So a group of us since 1977 when we were university students published regular community news reports that also featured news about happenings back home.

The PPP political support group, the ACG, also published a monthly or bi-monthly community report even before we started our occasional news bulletins and commentaries. This writer penned hundreds of articles in community publications that we started or to which we were affiliated. This writer was affiliated to several publications that focused on the Indian diaspora; several articles pertaining to events in the Guyanese diaspora were written by this writer and published in them. Our views and coverage of the diaspora were not featured in the then state media. It was not until the launch of Stabroek News in 1986 that the diaspora began to see coverage of its existence and activities. The restoration of democratic rule in October 1992 freed up the Chronicle and it began featuring coverage of community events and celebrations of festivals in the diaspora.  Both media also allowed critical public commentaries about the government. This was changed in June 2015 with a change in government. The Chronicle increasingly became a propagandistic tool of the regime. Worse, it libelled many people and business entities with personalised attacks. The paper was forced to compensate victims with millions of dollars.

Today, the paper looks differently than under the Coalition administration. There is so much coverage of the diaspora – about its activities, celebrations of festivals, visits by government officials, etc. This writer’s views and volunteer reports are now published unlike under the Coalition’s management. Objective critiques of governance and other matters of national interest are permitted. The paper does not libel people with personal attacks.

The diaspora looks forward to reading the paper online that provides informative reporting and critical commentaries. And they are so pleased to see the coverage they get for their activities, as well as to read about the history that they have created in the diaspora.