Does Freddie have to respond to every person who speaks about him?

Oct 19, 2015 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
Permit me to respond to the recent article by Freddie Kissoon: I have suffered too much to let APNU-AFC destroy Guyana (Kaieteur News, October 18, 2015). May he be reassured that others feel the same way, although this sentiment may not be openly stated or expressed with the frequency as Mr. Kissoon.
In the article Mr. Kissoon refers to Loomarsh Roopnarine’s letter re an apology for referring to Indian Guyanese as Indian supremacists.  At this juncture, not only as an avid newspaper reader, but also a well-informed Guyanese expatriate, permit me to solicit an answer to this blatantly mundane question: Does Freddie have to respond to each and every person who speaks, leaks, reeks, alludes, preludes or concludes anything about his family, office or anything even remotely associated with him?
Granted, there have been times (more than sane individuals care to recalls) when the comments have been far from ingratiatingly. But without fail Freddie has taken the bait and responded with equal veracity as the sender. My now deceased father, an astute individual who ranked among the likes of Socrates, Aritotle and Plato oftimes during my adolescent years proffered the following advice, “Never miss the opportunity to remain silent”.
May I pass such advice on to Freddie?  Non response in certain situations, especially journalism bears no accompanying negative connotations but instead can be viewed as being indicative of intellectual rigor. Journalism is much more than the provision of an outlet for discussion or the addition of one’s voice to the conversation, but carries with it the responsibility to improve the quality of the topic at hand with displayed professional discipline.
Readers of the newspaper are no longer allowed to see the journalist at his best, acting as a societal cartographer, creating a map for citizens to navigate society, but instead forced to serve as unwitting literary onlookers to his raves, rants and musings.  Has he overlooked the fact that journalists should be as transparent as possible about sources and methods, so that the readers can make their own assessment of the information? The larger truth, over time, emerges from this forum.
Again, during his frequent unannounced distribution of nuggets of wisdom, my erudite paternal figure, would caution his offspring that not all battles should be fought and wisdom was imperative in selecting those that were battle-worthy. This gem of wisdom I am passing on to Freddie, loaded with the best of intentions and no strings or things attached. After all,  journalism should also endeavor  to fairly represent varied viewpoints and interests in society , and then to place them in context rahtehr than constantly highlight  only the conflicting fringes of debate.
With words spoken in sotto voce, once again permit me to bring to Mr. Kissoon’s attention the fact, which he already knows that while journalism should reach far beyond  topics such as public safety, legal manoeuvres and government , journalism that is overwhelmed by trivia and false significance certainly trivializes civic dialogue and ultimately public policy.
Sadly, the Kaieteur News has been relegated to an inferior level, all due to its own doings and machinations. Possessing a sense of ethics is perhaps most important for the individual journalist. In conclusion, as has been afore said and also well known, is the fact that it is enough to know that there was an election held on May 9. Remember  that the people who cast the votes decide nothing. Instead the people who count the votes decide everything.
Mr. Kissoon while you may not want to stand by and have suffered too much to let the APNU/ AFC destroy Guyana, let it be said that the voice of the people have been heard and they have asked for change. In fact, they wanted change so badly that even if it was brought by Lucifer in a calabash it would not have mattered.  To coin a known phrase  -They were no longer content to stay with the Devil they knew, but instead sought someone else’s Jesus.
Elections determine who is in power, but they do not determine how power is used.” To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.  Abraham Lincoln said, “Elections belong to the people.
It’s their decision. If they decide to turn their back on the fire and burn their behinds, then they will just have to sit on their blisters”.   I wholeheartedly concur with Freddie’s statement that the current leading party lack individuals with transformative leadership qualities, but let’s be intelligent; it is somewhat simplistic at best to believe that ballot papers define leaders. Leadership is defined by conviction, vision, passion and inspiration.
Authority confined in you does not make you a leader. It is the authority created by you that makes you influence people with your purpose.
So Freddie, roll down your sleeves, take a deep breath while you survey the depth.  Conserve your might and please pick your fight.
Yvonne Sam

---

---