The following is an open letter to the president and executive of the Press Association of Jamaica:

I wish to register my serious concern about what I now view as a trend of the Press Association of Jamaica (PAJ). The association appears reticent to acknowledge when a major blunder has been committed by one of our members in the public domain or accept when a member has conducted themselves inappropriately.

It cannot be right for us to view as merely “inelegant” the move by one of our members to ask a public figure about sexual activities in his bedroom while drawing into the mix the individual’s spouse, who is a ‘non-combatant’ and is irrelevant to the core issue of public concern, namely, whether value for money was obtained via the expenditure of public funds or whether nepotism played a part in the award of contracts.

Should we consider it merely inelegant and leave room for it to be contemplated as perhaps acceptable for one of our members to publicly enquire into the marital or intimate affairs of a public figure, we risk engaging a slippery and inappropriate slope which many in the profession are not prepared to personally confront.

We must remember that some of our members may rightfully be considered public figures. Are some of us prepared to face questions about our bedroom activities? Are some of us prepared to submit to justifications for those inappropriate questions? Why then should we subject anyone else to such a line of questioning?

To make matters worse, our association merely considers it inelegant but refused to outrightly call a spade a spade and declare as wrong and inappropriate that which is wrong and inappropriate. That is sheer hypocrisy on our part.

I heard one of our members saying part of the objective of the errant journalist in asking the question was to enquire about the morality of the public figure. Are we prepared to be publicly judged by the morality of our intimate relations? Is that a standard we are prepared to apply to ourselves? Treading into the waters of the morality of one’s sexual affairs could open the floodgates drowning others by the waves of the illegality of their affairs.

Ian Boyne was right when he posited in one of his columns, “The journalism profession may be the least introspective of all professions. Arrogance and complacency are occupational hazards, even when cleverly concealed. Journalists ask tough questions of everybody, except themselves. Quick to criticise and lambaste, they bristle when mere mortals ‘attack’ them, retreating under the barricade of ‘press freedom’.”

Perhaps it represents a glimmer of hope that a senior member of the fraternity had the courage to speak the truth on the controversy at the recent media conference. President, I refer you to H G Helps’s Sunday Brew column in the Jamaica Observer of Sunday, July 19, 2020, where he described the question as “utterly distasteful and unnecessary” and posited that he “never imagined that in this age a so-called journalist could ask such a foolish and irrelevant question at a news conference”. That is calling a spade a spade and speaking the truth.

I am not making a case for the PAJ to police the work of its members or nitpick or habitually shame members when minor errors are made. Indeed, some have advanced the view that the PAJ is akin to a trade union and, therefore, at no time should criticise its members. I disagree. Our vocation is unique. Unlike many unionised employees, at the core of what we do is to demand accountability and appropriate conduct from the general public, including public officials. We call them out when they make major errors.

Consistency, fairness, and just behaviour should provoke our conscience to not equivocate in acknowledging when one of our members has crossed the line and conducted himself or herself in an inappropriate manner. If we shirk from doing this we are no better than those who some of us criticise for being marinated in the ‘squaddie mentality’.

Indeed, if when we propose to speak on an issue of significant inappropriate conduct by one of our members, but fail to clearly and publicly acknowledge the conduct for what it is, we will soon lose all credibility with the public and be regarded as hypocrites whose work and words carry little or no weight.

We must do better, and I invite the PAJ executive to lead the way. I intend to make my view on this issue public.

President, do accept the assurance of my highest consideration.

Abka Fitz-Henley is a journalist. Send comments to the Jamaica Observer or abkafitzhenley@yahoo.com.