Media as social advocates

with Clare Forrester

Wednesday, December 14, 2011



 

It is not only the political leaders who have come under the public microscope in recent weeks following exaggerated and/or misleading claims, usually against their opponents. The media have also been subjected to relentless criticisms albeit by some politicians themselves and their supporters who seem to be forever in a love-hate relationship with the media. It is, however, pleasing that in the most recent cases, the media practitioners involved have emerged with their credibility intact.

I especially want to commend those from the fraternity responsible for two recent interventions associated with the election campaign. One is the three-part political debate and the other is the "fact check" series being run independently by both Television Jamaica and the Gleaner. As is widely known, the political debate is a long-running media production. The only difference now is that, unlike in earlier years when arranged by the Press Association of Jamaica, the series is currently being run by a specially convened media commission headed by the very capable managing director of the RJR Group of Companies, Gary Allen. Although there are two more debates to come, the Commission deserves praise for a good start to the series. While there have been some close calls in past years, I don't believe that getting both political sides to buy into the debate has ever been more challenging than it seemed this time around.

I was fortunate to catch a repeat of the first "youth" debate carried live last Saturday night, having missed it the previous night. The popular view was that that Team PNP carried off the prize for this one. More than that, Lisa Hanna clearly stole the show. Just goes to show that beauty and brains sometimes come in the same package.

There can't have been very many political observers who would not have sensed that this young lady is going places in terms of a political career. Last Saturday night she confirmed her potential. I share the view of the majority of analysts that all three debaters on the PNP's team did well, despite some of the comments I've seen and read, and a lot has already been written and said about that debate. I do think that some of these young analysts to whom the station gave a forum for their views need to ask themselves whether their expectations of an exercise like last Saturday night's production were realistic.

By tomorrow, the talk will be about the confrontation involving the colourful Audley Shaw and the erudite Dr Peter Phillips. Given their experience and contrasting styles, this should be an even more interesting contest. We can hope.

While most would have been watching the performance of the teams on Saturday night, or the repeat on Sunday night, I was equally impressed with the panel of journalists who quizzed them - Ingrid Brown of the Jamaica Observer, Nadine McLeod of Television Jamaica and Garfield Burford of CVM; also the moderator, Archibald Gordon of Television Jamaica. I have not seen any comments about their performance, which is a pity, because with the possible exception of Burford, who seemed to have been the most relaxed, this was a young and inexperienced team and it would be understandable if they wanted to get feedback from viewers.

True, some of the questions could have been tighter, but generally speaking there were no catastrophes on the panel. In fact, I sought the response of some similarly young viewers as well as from some more mature ones and the response was a bit contrasting. The younger viewers seemed to think that the questions, although general, were fairly well constructed and delivered and were questions that they wanted to be posed. The more mature viewers tended to think that the questions were not sufficiently probing and lacking in specifics. While I got no comments about the moderator, I do believe that that was not a bad thing. In fact, in my view, he acquitted himself in the best tradition of our more veteran moderators.

My main criticism was the format of the debate. Regrettably, after so many years of doing political debates, we can't seem to get it right, or maybe it is that the politicians won't agree to a more sensible format. I remain unconvinced that the best use is made of the 90 minutes allotted. But the time allowed for rebuttals is ridiculous and may explain some of the reasons why many of the younger analysts, in particular, expressed so much dissatisfaction with the discussion. Presumably the debate between the heavyweights, Phillips and Shaw, and the two party leaders, that are still to come, will produce more satisfying results all around.

Despite some criticisms, the fact-check series being run in the print and electronic media by the Gleaner and TVJ is also serving as a useful exercise in consumer advocacy and should be retained on the agenda indefinitely. I have yet to see a TVJ report explaining the method they use to check the veracity of statements uttered by politicians. However, I suspect their method is along similarly credible lines to the Gleaner's. Generally, I feel that the TVJ features that I have seen to date vary slightly from the version produced by the US television network where the focus seems to be more on a straight analysis of the statement highlighted. The TVJ analyses that I have seen of statements by both political leaders - Andrew Holness and Portia Simpson Miller, provided more opinions than concrete information, which may eventually open the series to criticisms of bias, if it has not happened as yet.

Regardless, I think that this is one of the best media series in a long time and should not be confined to analysing statements by politicians during election campaigns. Clearly, it is not only our politicians who need to be kept honest. Statements by several personalities in the public sphere could do with some placement under the microscope of investigation.

antoye@gmail.com


OTHER STORIES
Nomination Day activities closed
NOMINATION Day activities have now officially closed. Candidates were streaming into the 64 nomination centres operated by the Electoral Office of Jamaica (EOJ) since 10:00 am today. The process was ... more
RJR right to suspend Portia tracing ad
If the Gary Allen-led Radio Jamaica (RJR) Group had not suspended that distasteful television tracing commercial featuring Mrs Portia Simpson Miller, pending possible editing, we would have called f ... more
The 'Coronary' List
AS the analysis continues into what caused last Thursday's massive upset at the polls in favour of the People's National Party (PNP), questions are being raised as to how some of the Jamaica Labour ... more
Steady voting in Manchester
MANDEVILLE, Manchester -- From approximately 21 polling stations in Manchester yesterday police officers, soldiers and election day workers cast their votes at their respective centres. The Obs ... more
KSAC fires worker who contested poll
THE Kingston and St Andrew Corporation (KSAC) has fired Ann-Marie Evadne Thomas, the procurement officer who unsuccessfully contested the St Andrew South West constituency seat in the December 29 ... more
Has Tivoli Gardens operation caused low voter turnout?
ELECTION Day workers are reporting a low voter turnout at polling stations in West Kingston, some of which were empty when the Observer visited. A source, who requested anonymity, told the Observer ... more
Take them down!
THE police yesterday appealed to supporters of the nation's political parties contesting the December 29 general election to desist from placing banners across roadways and on utility poles. Th ... more
Be civilised, end political violence
Dear Editor, I am calling on all Jamaicans to stop and think about the future of our country and our children. Life will continue after December 29 and it makes no sense to continue the old ways of ... more
PNP Condemns Savanna-la-Mar Shooting
THE People’s National Party (PNP) has condemned a shooting incident in Savanna-la-Mar, Westmoreland last where persons attending a meeting of Jamaica Labour Party candidate Marlene Malahoo For ... more
Mr Holness's preoccupation with damage control
THE week between the announcement of a general election and Nomination Day should normally be a good one for a prime minister with the constitutional prerogative to make the call. After all, he/she ... more

POST A COMMENT


You must first register and then login to be able to post a comment.

HOUSE RULES

 

1. We welcome reader comments on the top stories of the day. Some comments may be republished on the website or in the newspaper – email addresses will not be published.

2. Please understand that comments are moderated and it is not always possible to publish all that have been submitted. We will, however, try to publish comments that are representative of all received.

3. We ask that comments are civil and free of libellous or hateful material. Also please stick to the topic under discussion.

4. Please do not write in block capitals since this makes your comment hard to read.

5. Please don't use the comments to advertise. However, our advertising department can be more than accommodating if emailed: advertising@jamaicaobserver.com.

6. If readers wish to report offensive comments, suggest a correction or share a story then please email: community@jamaicaobserver.com.

7. Lastly, read our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, and before commenting you need to register, conveniently, by clicking the link above.



Comment (required):

You have characters left.
captcha f815c023263a4c21b7ee5e97ecaf070f
Enter text seen above:

For information about privacy please read our Privacy Policy.

I have read and accepted the Terms and Conditions


COMMENTS (1)

Mark Forbes
12/14/2011 - 11:57 AM
TVJ seems to have succumbed to the criticisms. Ms Hanna was correct about the recession being the cause of lower interest rates. JDX was merely the vehicle. The recession was the fuel, and in the same way a car will not go anywhere without gas, JDX wasn't possible without the recession. In a sign of confusion they think it is exchange and inflation rates that are impacted by the recession. These 3 rates are too closely linked not to share common factors.