SN had a recent exchange with Mr. Kit Nascimento. Before the column is finished, we will respond to the act of cheerleading that SN practises but accuses others of doing.   Now, let’s quote SN: “The public also needs no reminder of the newspaper’s role in helping to roll back the rigging of the 2020 general elections.”

Which role did the SN play in rolling back rigging? I lived in Guyana from March to July 2020, and I was involved in attempts to expose election rigging through the medium of a daily column and the daily radio programme, “Election Watch,” with Leonard Gildarie. The SN did not enunciate a policy of exposing election rigging between March and July.

For readers who are not familiar with how the press operates, let me explain. All newspapers have laid down requirements in their pursuit of news for the public. When a newspaper lays down a policy, it cuts across editors, columnists, photographers, and letter writers. The newspaper will not report on a factor or situation or issue that it does not want to highlight. This goes for the letter section too.

I will offer a practical example from Guyana. During the attempted rigging of the March 2020 election, Kaieteur News called a meeting in which I was a vocal participant. The meeting concluded that its policy on the election was to expose the conspiracy, and that must be reflected in news reporting, columns, editorials, and the letter section.

Two days after, the paper carried a misleading statement from GECOM Commissioner Vincent Alexander, which was a rejection of the legal position on the role of international observers, which GECOM Commissioner Sase Gunraj quoted from the law. The editor-in-chief, Adam Harris, lost his job over that and never again worked at Kaieteur News.

Between March 2 and July 31, SN never announced that it had adopted a policy of exposing election rigging. During the five-month-old election conspiracy in 2020, SN had three columnists (excluding Mr. Ralph Ramkarran, who is not an in-house columnist) who wrote in favour of the conspiracy. Now, it is very, very simple to determine my accusation here. Google it and see for yourself. In fact, one of the columnists was insulting to the diplomatic missions.

So how was SN rolling back election rigging when its columnists were in support of those who were involved in the election conspiracy? The newspaper had not laid down any policy so its columnist went on a rampage. The cheering, sycophantic bloggers from SN are too immoral to admit that.

But let us talk about who has cheerleaders in Guyana: I quote the SN again:    “Stabroek News role is mainly that of a watchdog, not a cheerleader. Cheerleading is to be left to others.” The SN is a cheerleader for Mr. Christopher Ram. There has never been a newspaper, past or present, anywhere in the world where an individual has complete latitude with the newspaper in publishing whatever is on his mind and whatever is on his mind finds constant space in SN.

I asked Mr. Ram if he has shares in SN. He said no. I should have asked if Ram & McRae has shares because the company is legally separate from Mr. Ram. I should have asked Mr. Ram if any of his close relatives have shares. Both Mr. Ram and SN should answer those questions in order to avoid rumours from swirling.

SN is a cheerleader for Mr. Mike Mc Cormack. He has been the head of the Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA) since 1979. The GHRA does no human rights work in Guyana but every one of its episodic press releases finds expression in the SN, with a majority being carried on the front page. If that isn’t cheerleading, then could someone define cheerleading for me?

The editor-in-chief of SN, Mr. Anand Persaud, referred to me as a PPP lapdog. I have absolutely no physical or political or bureaucratic connection with any part of the state in its totality in Guyana. I run a podcast named The Freddie Kissoon Show in which the guests are perhaps evenly divided between pro-PPP, pro-opposition, and anti-PPP. What then makes me a PPP lapdog?

Is Mr. Persaud a lapdog for the wealthy Mulatto/Creole owners of SN, the DeCaires family? The SN online bloggers and letter-writers in the print version love to refer to people who support the government as soup-drinkers.

Something has to be weird about science. If science produced people who are soup drinkers of the government, why can’t the owners of SN have soup drinkers that manage the newspapers, which is insanely hostile to the ruling PPP? Why am I a soup drinker and not Mr. Persaud too? To be continued.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Guyana National Newspapers Limited.