The media in today's Bahamas...is it fair and objective or does it display a bias which seems to favor one political party over another?

The media in The Bahamas

By Philip C. Galanis
Nassau, Bahamas



I have previously written about a series of "ideal institutions" to which we should aspire as a young nation. Those included articles on the ideal nation, the ideal electorate, the ideal prime minister and the ideal leader. Each of those articles sought to identify some of the features that would differentiate the empirical from the epitome, with a view to presenting characteristics of the ideal in each case. The last in that series was an examination of the role of the Fourth Estate in our nation and addressed some of the characteristics that we should expect and even demand of the ideal media.

Recently there has been considerable commentary from many quarters of civil society about the media in today's Bahamas which is why this week we would like you to Consider This... is the media in today's Bahamas fair and objective or does it appear that the media displays a bias which seems to favor one political party over another?

The answer to this question is critically important because, as the Washington Post’s Donald Graham once observed, journalism is the “first rough draft of history.” Here in our Bahamas, in the absence of the amount of written history that most other nations have, it is the print media especially that historians of today and the future depend upon for the stories of our times. The clarity and fairness of stories carried in the media become even more urgently important as we enter what has come to be referred to as "the silly season", that is the season during which we move toward general elections.

The media immensely impacts our impressions, ideas and insights about our world. Can we ever forget that old saying “if you hear it on ZNS, it must be true”? In fact, one of the first human impulses of the day is to turn on the TV or radio to learn what has what happened overnight. We often quench our insatiable thirst for news by purchasing the morning newspapers as soon as possible. Is it any wonder that all of the newspapers in The Bahamas, without exception, are now morning dailies? It is because, in perhaps the most unconscious way, the news that we hear on the radio or TV or that we read in the newspapers with our morning coffee sets the tone for our daily lives.

We often determine what we will do in our daily lives — and how we will think about an issue — after listening to or reading that day’s media reports. If that is not powerful in a very personal way, then that word should be redefined. We are constantly seeking stimuli that impact our existence and the most common method of receiving such incentives is by means of the news.

However, it is a widely held belief that the press in The Bahamas does not always seem to have the capacity or the will to deeply research all aspects of a topic and then present it in an informed way to the public. Sadly, the reason so many of the stories that we read in the papers or hear on the radio or television sound so similar is that many reporters rely on the “copy and paste” method of journalism, taking the press releases they get and simply regurgitating them verbatim with no additional in depth unearthing of other facts that could make the story richer and more complete. Our Fourth Estate, it is very sad to say, sometimes exhibits a kind of intellectual indolence that cannot — or will not — give the public the full story on many of today’s issues.

Then there is the “brotherhood” of our media that allows one reporter to use another’s information, instead of digging up their own facts and angles. Obviously, such sharing creates not only a similarity in what is reported but it often perpetuates one point of view, complete with mistakes and biases, as opposed to allowing the public access to varying viewpoints and diverse perspectives as regards a single story.

And then there is the overarching influence of the sensational. Oftentimes, our media prefers to offer — instead of solid, fact-filled chronicles of our time — the sensational sides of those same stories, reveling in the scandalous salaciousness of the events of the day and leaving out the more mundane particulars that hover far closer to the truth than those shocking bits of sip-sip that pass for the truth in our modern Bahamas. The average Bahamian would be surprised to learn how many of the “solid” news stories that form the headlines of the day originate not from the newsmakers but from those who hover on the periphery of those well known lives, people like a Minister’s driver or someone who passed along a tasty tidbit heard in a barber shop.

We recently read the Wikileaks disclosures which chronicled the sentiments that operatives in the United States Embassy here share about some of our politicians. The newspaper that printed those stories insists that they are only reporting on what was contained in "confidential missives" from the Embassy and that they have not distorted those views, although sometimes distortion can result from the simple decision of using one part of a story over another. While we accept that editorial position of the newspaper, it is equally important that the right balance is struck in the reporting of those stories.

We do not believe, as some do, that there is a pernicious conspiracy by that daily to undermine or to denigrate one particular political party. We are not so sure that the same can be said of some of the other newspapers. Nor do we ever believe that we should kill the messenger because of the message that is delivered. However, a discerning public demands and should demand that a balance should prevail in the reporting of such stories.

The question that really needs to be asked is why Wikileaks chose to disclose only these more recent cables when so much of our present day events were supposedly shaped by events that allegedly took place back in the 1980s and 1990s that deserve to come to light. Whose decision was it to access only these more recent cables, once again telling only a part of the story of the relationship of Bahamian officials with emissaries of the government of the United States.

As we approach another political campaign, one that will be undoubtedly fiercely fought, it is vitally important for the media to be balanced, to present the news in an uncensored, unadulterated manner. It is critically important that, because of the vital role that the media plays in shaping public opinion, all reporting be fair and balanced and, most important, inclusive of all sides and all facts, no matter the work involved in uncovering them. It is only in this way that the electorate will be able to objectively determine the truth of the matter, free of biased and skewed reporting, enabling Bahamians to make an informed decision about the merits or demerits of a story. Every member of the media should remember that a story with some of the facts left out is as damaging as a story with incorrect information.

The job of the media is not for the faint of heart. They are the men and women who wield what is probably the most powerful weapon ever invented, giving truth every day to the saying that the “pen is mightier than the sword.” As Adolf Hitler's Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels said: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” So, should that weapon spread lies or even half-truths, considerable and lasting harm can be done to people, to societies and to nations. But when members of the media do their job, live up to their calling, exercise discernment and freely tell every part of a story, the truth creates a free people and a great nation.

Philip C. Galanis is the managing partner of HLB Galanis & Co., Chartered Accountants, Forensic & Litigation Support Services. He served 15 years in Parliament. Please send your comments to pgalanis@gmail.com

Jun 06, 2011

thenassauguardian

Bahamas: This upcoming general election, like all others before it, will be a race of Leadership

Election will be a race of leadership


By RUPERT MISSICK Jr
Tribune242 Chief Reporter
rmissick@tribunemedia.net
Nassau, Bahamas


WE BAHAMIANS are a people of shifting anxieties. We will rend our garments because of the drought on Monday but tear out our hair because of the rain on Tuesday.

This is such a persistent state of our nature that it is strange to hear people debate which ideological issue will damn or elevate the PLP or FNM to the next government of the Bahamas.

Let's be honest, Bahamians don't choose governments based on ideology nor do they reject a government based on controversies that might plague a particular administration.

This upcoming election, like all others before it, will be a race of leadership. The public when all is said and done will decide which man, Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, Opposition Leader Perry Christie or DNA leader Branville McCartney, they want to lead the country.

Many seem to believe that the sale of BTC will be the nail in the coffin for the FNM. I strongly doubt it.

The prime minister announced in March that he will close the current voters' register in June or July of this year, which is more than enough time for emotions surrounding the issue to cool or even be forgotten.

There are three rules when it comes to controversy in Bahamian politics.

The first two are:

* It is the totality of the "scandals" in an administration, not one individual issue that may cause a party to lose an election.

* If a leader appears unwilling or unable to face the challenges these "scandals" brings to his administration the bad taste will linger longer in the mouths of the public.

Issues

After the 2002 general elections there were a plethora of issues which people thought would sink the PLP. Early on it was the allegations of Mohammed Harajchi and later on it was the Korean boat scandal etceteras, etceteras.

By the time the 2007 election rolled around, however, these issues were forgotten and it still came down to who the electorate could stomach more, Perry Christie or Hubert Ingraham.

Because even if voters took into account these scandals and added the embarrassment of Anna Nicole, the money in the closet issue and the Cabinet fight and considered the PLP unpalatable, it still boiled down to how well Mr Christie handled, or didn't handle, these issues.

People wondered WWID (What Would Ingraham Do) if two of his Cabinet ministers nearly killed each other with furniture in the Churchill Building. WWID if one of the MPs of his party facilitated the commercial activities of foreigners in our fishing industry and so on and so forth.

Now, after the FNM's win in 2007 a number of issues have arisen which persons feel will work against the governing party when persons go to the ballot box.

There was the issue of Saunders Beach, the relocation of the port, the inconveniences of the New Providence Road Improvement Project, the Bell Island issue, the number of Chinese workers needed for Baha Mar and now most recently the sale of BTC.

The final truth about political controversy in the Bahamas is that if a scandal happens long enough before an election it won't be remembered and this is the main reason why issues like the BTC sale will not directly factor in a win or loss for the FNM.

Effort

By the time an election is called there will be too much happening in personal lives of the citizenry for them to expend the emotional effort to be upset about BTC.

As stated before the Prime Minister said that he will close the register in either June or July. In the end, like Mr Ingraham likes to say, only one man knows the actual day when these things are to happen, but if one were to take bets I think any date after July 11th would be safer than a date before.

Between now and July 11 there are five public holidays, and six Family Island regattas and 30 home comings and festivals on all of the major islands, including New Providence.

By that time Bahamians will already be used to the idea of being a customer of Cable and Wireless. I mean if you really think about it people were upset but not upset enough to put down their cell phones or blackberries to boycott the company.

Even after the voters' register is closed it stands to reason that there will be at least another 11 to 10 months before elections are called and thus far there is no reason which is readily apparent for the prime minister not to wait until May 2 of 2012 for the election to be called.

All this considered I am not fully convinced that the majority of Bahamians, particularly the tech-sensitive younger generation who were either used to the telecom services they enjoyed while away in school or hearing their friends abroad boasting the benefits of their 4G networks, cared that the company was being sold.

Even one of the union leaders involved in the protests against the sale of BTC, NCTUB President, Jennifer Isaacs-Dotson admitted that the movement lacked sideswiping national support.

"I don't think we really rallied behind the unions and BTC and all of the committees that came forward to lead that change. I still think that Bahamians are still very selfish and that Bahamians will have to realize that one day it's BTC and the next day it could be you, but we always pass the buck and say it's not happening to me," she told The Nassau Guardian.

There is always the temptation of believing that just because we and our friends are outraged about something that the whole world is up in arms. For better or for worse this is only the case some of the time.

To think that the upcoming election will be more about a fight is terribly naive at best and at worst shows a woeful or wilful lack of understanding of our culture.

In 1992 the country wanted less corrupt leadership so they chose a man who billed himself as a no-nonsense, liar-hating, mean what I say, say what I mean "delivery boy."

In 2002 when the country felt that the FNM was more concerned about infrastructure than the "poor man" they chose the son of a taxi driver and nurse who promised "help and hope."

In 2007 when the country felt that things were getting out of control and the nation was returning to the days of lecherous and corrupt public officials they wanted the return of a leader who would kick butt and take names later.

Now as 2012 approaches the desire of the FNM to frame the next election debate around leadership is obvious. As a matter of fact if it boils down to that, I believe it is a fight the FNM can win.

For all his faults Mr Ingraham and his team have done well to drill it in the public's mind that Mr Christie may have started the construction of the Straw Market, the Baha Mar deal, the New Providence Road Improvement Programme and the new airport, but he was not strong or decisive enough to finish it.

The PLP would do well to avoid a toe-to-toe battle on these issues.

However, they seem to be on the edge of a strategy that may work, but they are simply just standing on the edge. They are beginning to tell the public that Mr Ingraham lacks compassion, that the FNM is really the Foreign National Movement, but this talk will only amount to sloganeering if Mr Christie isn't a factor in their strategy.

They seem to forget that the last impression Mr Christie left the public with when he left office wasn't that he was kind and caring, but that he was indecisive and permissive.

What they should do is have Mr Christie explain what he would have done differently if he were in office. From Mona Vie right down to BTC explain Mr Ingraham's missteps and say what he would have done differently if he were in office.

Debate

The former Prime Minister missed a golden opportunity to do this during debate on the sale of BTC. Instead of focusing on what he saw as odious in the sale of BTC to CWC and explaining what he would have done differently he was out-manoeuvred by the FNM and spent most of his contribution explaining why Bluewater was the choice of his administration and answering criticism that his weak leadership almost caused BTC to be put in the hands of a less than desirable company.

Mr Christie's latest pronouncements of having the government backtrack on the port and BTC deal if he returns to office will please Mr Christie's base, but it makes swing and more moderate voters uneasy.

While my cynicism won't permit me to believe that Mr McCartney's DNA will stand a chance in the next election, the former FNM MP is obviously leaning on his greatest appeal as a prospective leader -- he is not Mr Christie nor is he Mr Ingraham.

There is a segment of the population that says they are weary of the Ingraham vs Christie battle, but that's what they say.

Mr McCartney has a Herculean task of trying to convert this type of public sentiment into actual ballots in the box. His victory depends too much on this for a reasonable person to think that his victory is assured.

He has to attract enough disaffected PLPs, enough disaffected FNMs and enough swing voters not only to win his seat, but to get the other members of his prospective party in the House of Assembly.

In his latest press release Mr McCartney compared the likelihood of his victory to the victory of Barack Obama in that many did not believe that Mr Obama - being black - could win the race against John McCain because America could not get beyond its historical racism enough to elect an African American president.

Of course Mr Obama won and now Mr McCartney uses this example to explain how it might be possible that he could become the next Prime Minister of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas.

Change

Mr McCartney's idea that there is so much thirst for change that his DNA will be able to tap into the zeitgeist and disrupt the two-party system in the Bahamas is a non-starter.

The circumstances that gave the people of Egypt enough courage and determination to remove President Hosni Muhammad Mubarak - which he also mentions in the press release - does not exist here.

And while it was an amazing achievement for the United States to elect Mr Obama, the US President did not go into the election without base support.

He is a black man, yes, but he is also the leader of one of the two major political parties in the country which he serves.

Nevertheless, Mr McCartney is doing what is smartest. He is using leadership as his platform. He is the only candidate who can truly boast that he is in fact new leadership.

There are many who decry the fact that politics in the Bahamas generally boils down to a cult of personality and does not depend enough on the issues.

But the Bahamas is not unique in this. In the United States business man and reality TV show star Donald Trump heads the field of potential Republican contenders while more sober choices like Mitt Romney are further down in the polls.

Like Sara Palin before him, Mr Trump's greatest attraction is his larger than life persona - it's hard to see what else qualifies him to be the leader of the free world.

As time goes on you can expect that the political campaigns will get increasingly personal with candidates attacking the various leaders and highlighting the inability of the leader opposite to rescue the economy, reign in rogue MPs and put a handle on crime.

This is because most politicians recognize what is apparent, that Bahamian elections are not ideological battles but are arguments over who will make the best king.

April 18, 2011

tribune242

Bahamas Blog International