FREEDOM of the press is the palladium of all civil, political, and religious rights.

It is, therefore, a vital part of a free society. In addition to their traditional roles, the media have assumed a non-academic role in societal organisation and informal institutional arrangements. It is, however, equally important that freedom of the press does not mean freedom without responsibility.

‘The fear of missing out means today’s journalists, more than ever, hunt in a pack. In these modes, they are like “feral beasts” just tearing people and reputations to bits.’

In Guyana, the media exist, function, and operate almost entirely without regulation and oversight. The main purpose of this article is to describe the consequential problem of no regulation and oversight, its effects and suggest a solution.

I am, however, limiting commentary to the “newspapers” medium because it is still, despite the nascent technological shift, the main source of disseminators of information.

First, newspapers here in Guyana and around the world have always had political, economic, ideological and partisan editorial inclinations.

That is not unusual so it is asserted that this is not the problem. The problem is that the editorial inclinations of two newspapers are perceived to have an orchestrated vitriolic anti-government campaign and they dangerously inculcate public cynicism and unfairly galvanise an almost pervasive perception of corruption.

Beware of the monster you create and nurture. It may turn around and consume you!

Journalists have even said to me in confidence that, as a result of the way in which their articles have been altered by their editor, they invariably request NOT to have their names published and appended to that article.

The government and other “victims” of the newspapers’ truculence or aggressive hostility devote an inordinate amount of time, energy and resources clarifying these published canards and aggressively defending their reputation or record.

Second, as the four “mainstream” newspapers jostle for a share of a saturated market, balance, ethical standards, and credibility have been significantly eroded and sensationalism becomes the common practice of reporting.

Further, the fear of missing out means today’s journalists, more than ever, hunt in a pack. In these modes, they are like “feral beasts” just tearing people and reputations to bits. For a recent instance of this, one could simply refer to the latest Sharma saga. Erstwhile former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Tony Blair, in a speech made on June 12, 2007 at the Reuters Institute stated that, “the deteriorating coverage of political reporting in particular had “sapped the country’s confidence and self-belief; it undermines its assessment of itself, its institutions and above all else it reduces our capacity to take the right decisions in the right spirit for our future.” Most people, organisations, etc, that are essentially focused on progressing and improving welcome the feedback, the constructive criticism, the investigative journalism, and the utilitarian “public good” function that the media provide. The real problem is with lack of balance.

Third, this almost unbridled freedom (excluding any recourse to the courts for slander, libel, etc) results in the unverified publication of information from highly questionable and unnamed sources.

Even if the story turns out to be false, in an ostensible attempt at expiation, the newspaper then publishes an apology on page 16 at the bottom of the left-hand corner. At that point, the harm has already been done and the seeds of perception that the originating story would have sewn, would have germinated into an unwavering conclusion.

Now compare journalists to some other professions that have a significant, systemic impact on 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? Ironically, these writers never become the “writees” or the people who are the subject of criticism and calumniation.

It is as though the sheet of paper and the camera lens provide a veil of protection. How is this situation fair? It is therefore respectfully submitted that the time has come for the creation of a “Media/Press Complaints Commission” as an oversight mechanism that possesses the necessary enforcement powers that can ensure that the media is held to a high level of journalistic accountability and balance.

Furthermore, it is also evident that self regulation and voluntary codes are ineffective so it may also be necessary to introduce the legislative instrument that compels mandatory compliance to journalistic codes of ethics. Beware of the monster you create and nurture. It may turn around and consume you!