Freddie is overreacting, as usual

Mar 30, 2011 Features / Columnists, Stella Says

---

On Monday, in a column that was characteristically nasty, Freddie Kissoon demanded an apology from me for missing the overall “nuance” of his now infamous column in which he insisted the squatters who live near him will soon be forced to vacate the land on which they live.
Freddie stands by his original column and stated in a column on Monday, “I did not write about eviction. The KN reporters went to the squatters and asked them about that and inquired if they got eviction notices. Secondly, the squatters were questioned as to if I interviewed them. I did not do a column on the squatters and therefore had no need to speak to them.”
I do not agree with Freddie’s reasoning on this matter. He should have interviewed the squatters. He said that both electricity and water had been cut off for the squatters, which was not in fact the case. When he made this statement, he involved two businesses in his proposed conspiracy to remove the squatters and this should not to be taken as lightly as Freddie wants me to take it.
As is typical of Freddie when someone questions his suppositions, he decried my intellectual capacity and my journalistic integrity. My, but he can be so nasty. Good thing I have a thick skin. I live my professional life by the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, which is 1) Seek truth and report it, 2) Minimise harm, 3) Act independently and 4) Be accountable.
I do my utmost to live by these standards and I hold others in my profession to the same standards. In the column Freddie wrote on the squatters, I am sure his goal was to seek truth and report it. The problem was that he did not go far enough to seek the truth and because of that, he caused harm to the utility companies he implicated in his proposed conspiracy.
Freddie certainly acted independently in his assertion. However, he does not want to be held accountable for the shortcomings he displayed by not asking two simple questions of the squatters, “Has your electricity been cut off?” and “Has your water been taken away?”
Freddie’s statement that the electricity and water to the squatters had been cut off brought significant weight to his conspiracy and although this was just a piece of the puzzle he assembled for the reader to come to a final conclusion, it was a significant piece.
I am sure that Freddie and I will probably no longer be friends. It will not be because of me though. I am quite able to continue a cordial relationship with someone with whom I do not agree. However, with Freddie, if you question him, you become an enemy. Not unlike the current government of which Freddie rails incessantly.
I would now like to address that last line of Freddie’s Monday column in which he said, “I end by hoping that you are not so naïve as to do other people’s bidding for them, Stella. I am not so sure of who you are, now that I have seen your true colours.”
I admit that yes, I did what my boss asked me to do – in part. My boss wanted me to give Freddie a sound thrashing, but instead I pointed out the errors I saw in the culpable column and told my hot-headed boss and stubborn columnist friend to get over it and get back to work.
Was my boss happy with how I carried out his request? Not really, but he begrudgingly accepted it. I have seen Glenn Lall do good things for a lot of people and though I know he has his faults, I do trust him and I will continue to trust him until I am given a valid reason to do otherwise. But that day is not today.
This is how I approach all of my relationships, whether professional or personal. This is not being naïve, as Freddie insinuates, it is a healthy approach to life. However, if ever I have reason not to trust someone – that person will find that although I will be civil and respectful, there will never be a place in my life for him/her again.
For example, if I found that I am being used by my trusted bossman to address this issue with Freddie just to pacify a politician or businessman, I would then have reason not to trust my boss. I have worked hard to remain as objective as possible and do not wish to be tainted by the political games others play.
I have not – and will not – validate any political group. My work as a women’s advocate does not impede my judgement as a journalist. I attempt to approach every subject on which I write with impartiality and demonstrate far more objectivity in my writings than my colleague, Freddie Kissoon. In short, in a world of dirty politics, I try to stay as clean as possible.
That is not to say that others do not try to drag me into their political fights, but I have thus far escaped unscathed. I refused to be used by others for their own agendas. However, Freddie thinks on this issue I was used by my boss for reasons other than to champion the credibility of this newspaper. I am hoping Freddie is wrong.
When asked to write on this issue, I saw this as nothing more than the usual exchange of banter that occurs between Freddie and myself. However, it is obvious that Freddie sees it as more. He sees something dark and sinister behind this whole ordeal. Of course, Freddie would see something dark and sinister behind the Easter bunny, too.
If Freddie does not want to be friends, that is his choice and it will be his loss. I suppose we will not be meeting for coffee soon. Hey, maybe this is Freddie’s way of never having to meet with me at all.

Email: [email protected]

---

---