New opposition dishing out propaganda

Mar 07, 2010 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
I start with a few words paying tribute to the vision of the former President of Guyana Dr. Cheddi Jagan.
And these words are quite relevant to the distorted and partisan media content put out by the mass media as the new opposition; the distorted and partisan media content is this new opposition’s brand of propaganda.
This month of March marks the 13th death anniversary of former President Dr. Cheddi Jagan. But this is not the time to lament his death; this is a time to celebrate his vision; the vision he had for this country, and, indeed, the world.
And history will remember Cheddi Jagan as a world leader; who struggled for social progress among the dispossessed and the disadvantaged; who vigorously implanted progressive political thought; who was a resolute builder of political movements; who forged the political-labour nexus; who was an unwavering Caribbean integrationist; who was a true internationalist in his unrelenting promulgation of the New Global Human Order (NGHO); and whose authentic local legacy has to be his tireless fight for national unity, working-class unity, and racial unity.
His ideas and his indefatigable promotion of these ideas have not only redefined the Caribbean, but have impacted the world of the poor. These writings and his grassroots work have a superlative nexus with current philosophical debates, particularly in the philosophy of history and the social and behavioural sciences coupled with moral and political philosophy.
This understanding of history sees economic, social, and political influences of human life as the most important factors shaping human experience, personality, ideas, and social arrangements.
And it is through this understanding of history that he was able to construct a proactive and empowering vision for this country.
But today, the mass media as the new opposition expends considerable mental energies at distorting Dr. Jagan’s vision for this country’s development.
Last week, I focused on the mass media as the new opposition that dishes up a thin interest within the populace; and I contended that its focus is too much on the ‘bull’, where even the bull is without evidence.
The interests of the mass media as the new opposition and the masses’ interests are not in sync.
Nonetheless, make no mistake about the fact that the new opposition, meaning the mass media and some political derelicts, has a propaganda system.
Every time a person writes or speaks in support of the Government’s line, that person receives the label of ‘propagandist’ from the hands of the new and old oppositionists.
But whether or not these oppositionists carry the wisdom of God to know that their line of work carries the full course propaganda menu really is a story that needs telling and retelling.
You have to constantly keep in mind that the new opposition is ‘the mass media’ to really understand their daily flow of propaganda; for oftentimes, people are apt to believe everything the columnists and news stories say against this Government. I have no doubts that there are flubs, or if you like a better term, ‘bull’, on the governmental side; but if that is all the so-called journalists can see, then God helps Guyana.
This argument is important to make because the new opposition’s mouth pieces, strategically placing themselves within the propaganda battle zone everyday, claim that everything they say is true; but apparently, they are not aware that nothing is absolute.
But in this battle zone, the mass media as the new opposition dishes out its own propaganda; interpreting some of Chomsky and Herman’s thinking, we could see the propaganda dissemination through the fact that (1) the relevant mass media outlets really are political agencies pushing their political interests; (2) commercialism now has a skewness toward partisanship; (3) there is the growing presence of a symbiotic relationship with national and international sources of information, invariably, skewed against this Government; in fact, some of the international agencies in Guyana possibly serve as conduits to filter through this skewed anti-government information; (4) there is the use of ‘flak’ producers to distort media content to finally produce partisanship and propaganda juice; and (5) infusing ideas of ethnic dominance and tension to become the creed of journalistic practices.
The mass media as the new opposition protects itself quite well, so that the ordinary people will have a hard time deciphering the true intent of the mass media as the new opposition; it is critical that the masses or ordinary people continue to see the new opposition as the mass media, and nothing else.
The new opposition creates the camouflage and credibility for its symbiotic link with the mass media through thought control, as Chomsky would say, not through a single party line for discussion or for news stories; but through several party lines which must be within the boundaries of acceptable opinion; as using only one party line in discussions, etc., eventually would result in ‘credibility loss’ and ‘camouflage elimination’.
At the endpoint with camouflage and credibility intact, what we see in the news stories and other controlled programming items put out by the mass media as the new opposition are items within these limits of acceptable opinion.
This approach provides people with choices but choices that have a life only within these boundaries; and simultaneously, using these choices for news stories, etc., that fall within these limits reinforces the new opposition’s propaganda system.
For this reason, certain television outlets only let people see what those outlets want them to see; and the mass media’s use of several party lines for the new opposition, instead of only one, provides some level of credibility and cover for its discussions and news stories.
Yes, the mass media as the new opposition does dish out propaganda on a daily basis.
Prem Misir

---

---