Media freedom seen as ‘good politics’

A section of the Virgin Islands establishment appears weary of the media — especially the online comments. However, in this commentator’s opinion, it is good politics to allow the media free reign within the acceptable social and legal parameters.

 

The former governor recently refused to sign into law the original version of the Computer Misuse and Cybercrime Act, which could have put members of the media in legal danger. Legislators’ passage of the original bill — which was subsequently revised and put into law with revisions designed in large part to protect the media —HoHOU unearthed an establishment mindset that some could argue is anti-free-speech and anti-freedom-of-expression. This observer will not go to that extreme. However, he will assert that there is a great degree of sensitivity by the establishment when certain matters are commented on, or discussed, by the media.

Okay. Was that move to muzzle Jack the Journalist by powerful men and women a justifiable reaction to a media beast that exists to put questions to the powers that be? The media is tasked especially with asking questions of a ticklish and uncomfortable nature.

Justifiable excuse?

Is the claim that the reason for recently attempting to shackle the media “is to protect the territory’s secrets” a justifiable excuse for muzzling the mouth of the press? Is the warning from certain establishment figures that the media is harming the community at home and abroad justifiable? Or is the claim an establishment fear of the power of the media to ask the type of question that can expose aspects of governance that generate public heat and even anger? Is this a fear that the media can affect public opinion to such an extent that it can bring the swift judgment of the public in the polling booth — or even changes in public policy?

Or are these assertions by the ruling political class noble and based on the public interest?

Now, the very nature of news, and what is demanded by the reading and listening public, puts negative stories in greater demand than those articles that paint a rosy picture of society. That is the simple reality of the modern media beast.

Journalists’ three approaches

Reporters, and that includes opinion journalists like this old boy, tend to do one of three things in their writing task. First, the commentator can commend. That means he or she lauds, praises and compliments. This is the time when the writer extols the virtues of the subject. The idea of journalistic commendation is to ensure that a good work, great deed, or positive attribute, does not go unheralded. Commendation is a rare thing in modern journalism, however.

Second, the journalist can simply report. This is the most common task in journalism. The idea is to give the daily news as observed, without addition or subtraction. In reporting the news, objectivity and accuracy are considered great assets. However, even in basic reporting, most of the news that sells is negative. And even with simple reporting, the biases of the reporter can be very evident. That is the nature of the press animal, sadly. The press, after all, is composed of human beings.

Thirdly, the commentator or journalist criticises. Journalistic criticism is the most common feature of opinion pieces and editorials. Investigating and exposing matters that would otherwise lie dormant is the most critical task of the Fourth Estate. The press or media acts as a watchdog for the public. The journalist as social critic, especially the opinion writer, is overwhelmingly the task in which media opinion writers engage.

Internet service

For example, this writer has been highlighting in his weekly column the terrible Internet service haunting this territory. These stories have some way to go yet. He is unsure whether the scope and depth of the problem of poor customer service in telecoms would have been sufficiently stated if left alone by VI opinion writers. Insufficiently stated in the public forum, the problem of a poor telecoms service could have gone on indefinitely, to the great detriment of the territory.

Again, that is just this writer’s opinion.

{fcomment}