MMU lambastes NCN for Election Day news item

Dec 21, 2011 News

---

 

 

Pull quote: “The MMU harbours absolutely no misgiving in labeling the “news” item as a blatant act of electioneering lacking the sophistication of subtlety.”  

The Guyana Elections Commission’s Media Monitoring Unit (MMU) has lambasted the state-owned National Communications Network (NCN) over what it described as a “downright unethical” piece of journalism which was broadcast on the morning of last Elections Day.
The observation was made in the MMU’s final report which was released yesterday.
According to the MMU on the morning of November 28, the announcer who presented the news on the Voice of Guyana 06:00 hours newscast read a news report which had implications for voters heading to the Polls on the same day.
To drive home its point the MMU quoted the piece in question.
“The latest opinion tracking poll conducted by the North American Caribbean Teachers Association (NACTA) shows the incumbent People’s Progressive Party Civic heading for another victory over the three opposition challengers. It shows that the PPP/C is winning 52% of the votes which can go up to 60% with A Partnership for National Unity at 32%, the Alliance for Change at 14% and The United Force less than 1%. This suggests that the PPP/C is about 19% in front of APNU and 27% ahead of the AFC. NACTA said given the undecided voters, soft support for AFC and the marginal variance, it is not impossible for the PPP/C to get close to 60% and APNU to get close to 40%.”
According to the MMU, as incredible as it may seem from a journalistic standpoint, the piece is a true and accurate account of what was actually reported as news on State Radio on the morning of voting in the just concluded 2011 elections.
The MMU said it harbours absolutely no misgiving in labeling the “news” item as a blatant act of electioneering lacking the sophistication of subtlety.
“To all intent and purpose it was a foolhardy and crude attempt to sway voter preference in a certain direction. The State Media’s (Radio) observed engagement in electioneering on Voting Day cannot, should not, and will not be swept under the carpet as a minor misdemeanor, since it was a flagrant violation primarily of  Section K of the Media Code which explicitly states that the publication of poll results should always be accompanied by information regarding the “…date, location, financial backing, methodology used, number of persons interviewed, questions asked and margin of error…”Secondly, and more importantly, even without the Code serving as a compass, it was downright unethical and a breach of all the known tenets of professional journalism to indulge in that sort of behavior on such a critical day in the country’s history.”
The MMU said that it holds the Editor of the newscast responsible for the airing of the news item.
THE MMU also did not hold back on chiding CNS Channel 6 for views expressed on the December 10 broadcast of the Voice of the People, which was hosted by Mr. C N Sharma.
On that programme, one of the guests, Mr. Jinnah Rahman, repeatedly made allegations to the effect that the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) was complicit in the alleged ‘rigging’ of the 2011 elections results.
According to the MMU, the fact that Mr. Rahman made these allegations impugning the integrity of the Commission, without presenting any credible or convincing evidence to substantiate his assertions, was serious enough to warrant its attention, since the host of the programme, Mr. Sharma, was observed verbally leading him (Mr. Rahman) down the pathway of irresponsibly slandering GECOM.
The Unit felt that the comments made weren’t the usual slip-of-the-tongue, laissez-faire sort of remarks directed at GECOM that the public would very likely dismiss instinctively as arrant nonsense.
“In this instance, the allegations made were deliberate and intended to influence a sinister outcome, since they were uttered in the midst of the aftermath of the declaration of the elections results, with the streets of Georgetown teeming with protesters and emotions running high. Having regard for the extant situation on the ground at the time, the allegations made have to be objectively seen for what they are: an incitement to riotous behavior and public disorder.”
There were many issues affecting media performance that were brought to the fore during the implementation of the Unit’s monitoring programme over the past four months, which demand that some amount of introspection be done accordingly.
“Sometimes introspection can be cathartic, and we (the Unit) feel that now is a most propitious time to take a cautionary step back and soberly reflect on the media’s performance during the pre-elections and immediate post-elections periods.”
When compared with the past, the local media’s performance during the past elections period was observed to have markedly fewer instances of the airing/publication of racially divisive material by the print and broadcast media.
“Comparatively, in 2006, there were seven such incidences documented by the Unit, as against just two for the present corresponding period, which says a whole lot about the forward strides that have been made in this area of reporting in both the print and broadcast media.”
The MMU however warned that before members of the media fraternity preemptively roll out the champagne glasses, order drinks on the house, and get into a celebratory mood, they should first cogitate on this piece of information: “The observed instances of opinionated news-reporting (especially in radio and television newscasts), and occurrences of inequitable and imbalanced reporting, were far more prevalent in 2011 than in 2006…which also says a whole lot about the areas in which the media has retrogressed.”
According to the Media Monitoring Unit, looking back, the media’s coverage of this year’s elections has clearly shown that actual potential is there for incremental improvements in certain areas of news reporting if only owners, managers and editors “mustered the gumption to untangle themselves from the control of inverse political influences.”
“Put simply, the arbiters of media information are faced with two choices: pursue with the present status quo and continue to wallow in a stultified media environment; or, renounce the nuptials that keep them wedded to political allegiances. Choosing the latter option would surely allow them to exhale freely, while at the same time being able for once to pursue an independent pathway; one that leads to the evolution of higher levels of media standards in the country.”
A breakdown of the report clearly shows a similar pattern to what was observed in previous reports.
The state-owned media, NCN Radio and Television and the Guyana Chronicle, along with the Guyana Times and a few television outfits favour the ruling People’s Progressive Party/Civic, while the other independent media houses gave more positive coverage of the opposition.

---

---