JAMAICAN journalism has indeed lost a brilliant mind with the passing last Friday of Mr Wilmot 'Motty' Perkins.

Accepting death is never easy. As such, we share the pain and sense of loss being felt by Mr Perkins' wife, Elaine, and their family. We hope, however, that in their moment of grief they will be comforted by the many kind expressions of appreciation for Mr Perkins' journalistic talent and the contribution he made to the preservation of democracy in Jamaica over many years.

No one can challenge the fact that Mr Perkins practised his craft with fearlessness and that his penchant for deep analysis, as well as his unyielding drive to unearth the facts contributed to many Jamaicans viewing him as a champion of the dispossessed and marginalised.

Our colleague senior journalist, Mr Claude Robinson, eulogised Mr Perkins perfectly when he told this newspaper on Friday that "Motty considered himself the watchdog on government, revelled in controversy and was never shy about expressing his opinion". We agree with Mr Robinson, too, that whether you liked Mr Perkins or not, you could not avoid admiring his intellect, which obviously had its foundation in his apparent voracious appetite for the written word and his ability to retain and regurgitate what he had read.

We hold the view, though, that Mr Perkins not only revelled in controversy, he actually invited it, as controversy always elicits vigorous debate, which works particularly well for radio where Mr Perkins spent many hours practising his craft.

We suspect, though, that there were some views that he advanced and defended vigorously, but from which he divested himself once he was off the air. One such view, we believe, was his very strong declaration that late reggae superstar Mr Robert Nesta Marley was a hooligan.

That pronouncement, we remember, resulted in a barrage of calls to his radio programme, for well over a week, from Jamaicans who were offended and who felt he should have apologised. But Mr Perkins stuck to his position, even playing a line from Mr Marley's Bad Card and offering it as proof that there was truth in what he said.

We recall as well that Mr Perkins did not do himself any favours when, after the death of former Prime Minister Michael Manley, he was particularly unkind in his commentary. Even one of Mr Perkins' most ardent supporters confessed to this newspaper at the time that the comments made him uneasy.

One of his shortcomings that we found was that in taking on the visage of being the journalist-gladiator that his late friend-foe Mr John Maxwell enjoyed, he charged, sometimes recklessly, at people in high places, as if it were a wrong to achieve beyond the ordinary.

Maybe on reflection Mr Perkins regretted the comments, and if he apologised he would not have been acting out of character, for he recognised and accepted that apologising for a wrong is the mature and responsible thing to do.

What is important, though, is that he never claimed to be perfect. For we are all human and prone to error. However, the true test of our mettle lies in how we recover from our mistakes and the lessons we take from them.

There's no doubt, though, that there now exists a huge void in the mid-morning to early afternoon slot on weekday radio. The iconoclast is no more and it marks the undoubted end of an era in journalism. The only question now is how will men speak Mr Perkins' name?

  0 comments

  10 comments

  4 comments

  3 comments

  5 comments

  4 comments

  0 comments

  3 comments

  7 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  10 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  2 comments

  3 comments

  1 comments

  2 comments

  9 comments

  3 comments