WHAT does journalism mean in the age of social media? Does truth still matter, and is research still central to reporting? The way we were taught in journalism school, research is important because it puts news in context and allows both the reporter and the reader to better understand the issue — assuming that the point of news is to inform, explain, or clarify, but does context still matter?

What about objectivity? Are journalists still encouraged to reduce their biases and try to stand outside of the issues they are reporting on? Do they still believe in reporting without fear or favour and in treating every person as equal in the sight of the law?

How do newsrooms treat press releases? Do they make the distinction between journalism and public relations? Is there still a difference, and does it matter?

Finally, are journalists still a part of the intelligentsia — intellectuals who form an artistic, social, or political vanguard or elite or “intelligent and well-educated people who guide or try to guide the political, artistic, or social development of their society”?

The media environment has changed. New media has revolutionised an industry that used to be far less competitive than it is today. Newspapers, for example, are dying or otherwise moving exclusively online where competition for readers is just as fierce. Breaking news rarely happens in traditional media anymore, and with so many players in the marketplace, this means an important competitive edge has been lost.

In our context, there are also many more radio stations than there used to be and savvy public or private entities control their own information by utilising social media. How do traditional media stay relevant in this environment?

Until I saw the story in this paper, September 6, titled ‘Dawes happy with Government’s health approach’, I had not decided what I wanted to write about. On my mind were the upcoming papal visit to Washington DC, and why I signed the pledge to “Walk with Francis”, as well as the annual discussions about beauty contests in Jamaica. I wanted to add to Joan Williams’ excellent analysis, last Friday, on Power 106, to Barbara Gloudon’s piece in this paper last week, and to Dr Dayton Campbell’s comments on what the pageants represent. I hesitated because, like Gloudon, I find them not merely boring but icky-like soft porn. Attention to anything that embarrassing should be kept secret, I thought. However, there are excellent sociological studies into why they have such pride of place in the country, even though they are both sexist and racist.

The comments made by Dr Alfred Dawes, president of the Jamaica Medical Doctors Association (JMDA), about the recently completed audit of health care facilities, made me laugh out loud, however. And I wondered why this newspaper reported it the way it did.

“When we initially brought the findings of our own ‘audit’, there was a lot of backlash and it was turned into a circus, and we are happy that now something positive has come out of what we did. We hope that we have played our part in fixing health care in Jamaica.”

Dawes said he understands why the ministry is against making the full report available to the public, “as the association itself, when it raised alarm about the frightening deficiencies in the sector, had purposefully not pinpointed any facility. He said he believed the Ministry of Health has been receiving “sterilised” reports that enabled the conditions at health facilities to persist for so long.

“It is clear now that there needs to be greater lines of communication between those who are in the trenches and those who are at the top who can ensure that the necessary changes are made; that they get the supplies that they need and whatever working conditions are on the ground, they can address them,” Dawes said.

In a story published in this paper, January 5, 2015, titled ‘Doctors blame lack of resources for poor health care’, this newspaper identified three leading medical institutions — Mandeville Regional, Kingston Public, and the University Hospital of the West Indies — where conditions are deplorable, and a few weeks ago, sections of the floor in one hospital caved in, almost injuring a worker. If the Ministry of Health does not want to identify the institutions, why not just go back to those stories for examples? The newspaper owes no obligation to either the minister or the doctors to adhere to its needs for secrecy. Plus, people go to these hospitals everyday. They know what the conditions are like, and none of the public hospitals is markedly better than the other in terms of availability of resources or quality of care, so what is the point of the secrecy? Are conditions even worse than what the public know to be true?

Health care requires audits not to determine whether these problems exist, but to identify how deep and how pervasive they are. The doctors were the last ones to join the conversation and only after growing public ridicule and physical attacks by patients. Dawes’ treatment of the issues smacks of a public relations agenda to deflect attention from the role of the medical personnel in fostering an environment that is often unprofessional and dehumanising. Lack of resources is one part of a much larger issue.

I began writing on these issues in 2011 following my parent’s experiences, and the realisation that little had changed in the last 40 years. The act of medical personnel in one of the above-named hospitals, restraining my father’s hands without his permission, I regard as a criminal violation and one which probably led to his death. The JMDA should not just cherry-pick what it wishes to focus on. For example, are doctors still using facilities at public hospitals to provide private services for patients who can pay?

The treatment of people in the public health care system actually has something in common with our obsession with beauty contests: They are constant reminders of how close we still are to the paradigm of the plantation.

A genuine intelligentsia will have no difficulty making the connections.

Grace Virtue, PhD, is a social justice advocate.