Dear Editor,

We are fully aware that it is summer and school is on break, but it would appear that civil society has similarly taken an extended vacation. There is a loud silence from the usually outspoken guardians of democracy who pride themselves on accountability, integrity, transparency, and nation-building.

It is quite alarming that on the cusp of the well-anticipated general election civil society is missing in action. There are so many actions and malpractices taking place that need to be called out, but where is the voice of balance, reason, and truth?

The recent allegations of a near-miss road clash between the People’s National Party’s (PNP) Dr Alfred Dawes and the Jamaica Labour Party’s (JLP) Dr Andrew Holness and their supporters in Portmore should have been addressed by civil society. As is expected, various versions of the incident of political intimidation have emerged, but civil society should have added its voice, calling for respect and peace, irrespective of which party was at fault. Both political parties are hungry to form the next Government, and we know that things can get heated on the campaign trail. With the PNP describing themselves as “blood and fire Comrades”, there is no telling to what extent this attribute might manifest in the behaviour of its members.

Civil society was again quiet on the politicisation of the political debates being organised by the Jamaica Debates Commission (JDC). It has been said that the PNP blacklisted some journalists from Nationwide News Network (NNN), refusing to accept them as moderators or questioners in the debates. Similarly, reports are that the JLP also objected to a journalists from the RJR/Gleaner Communication Group.

The JDC expressed disappointment that the confidentiality clause surrounding the choice of journalists was breached. But why should this information not be public? It is good that the secrecy was unclothed.

One would be naive to believe that media bias does not exist. Like many others, I have had to question where some of these media practitioners get their training. Journalistic integrity has fallen to a new low. If political parties feel as though they want to avoid certain journalists and media houses, it means the concerned parties need to do some introspection.

But if politicians are doing their job well, why should it matter which journalist participates in the debate? Politicians should not be allowed to hand-pick their favourite journalists. We need the hard questions to be asked. We need journalists who can fact check the politicians’ responses.

Journalists and media practitioners should not be quiet about what is happening in the industry. They should support each other and defend their industry. But perhaps there is enmity among certain factions. However, they should remember that each media house will have its day.

It was also a little disappointing that the Press Association of Jamaica (PAJ) took some time to issue its press release on the situation, which some people believe was hogwash. It is as though the PAJ hopscotched around the elephant in the room to appear neutral and not call out any one political party. At the end of the day, the same PAJ will be quite loud should the country’s press ranking slip when next the information is released.

We must protect our democracy, especially in these critical times when the heat of the political campaigning has been amplified.

By the way, why isn’t the Jamaica Progressive Party (JPP) participating in the debates since it has nominated 47 candidates to contest the election?

Oneil Madden

Maddenoniel@yahoo.com