Editors are gatekeepers of media responsibility

Mar 17, 2020 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

Britain has decided to quarantine its citizens who are 70 years of age or older. This group of citizens is considered a high-risk for coronavirus infection and is being asked to self-isolate for a few weeks in order to stem the fatalities from the pandemic sweeping the world.
Guyana has recently confirmed four cases of the coronavirus. But far more dangerous and deadlier than this virus is the spread of irresponsible commentaries of some of our journalists and editors. We have some over-seventy persons in the media whose editorial judgments are making a bad situation worse.
At present in Guyana, political and social tensions are inflamed. The situation is inflammable. The slightest irresponsible flicker can become explosive. In times such as these, editors – the gatekeepers of media responsibility – have to be both mindful and circumspect of what they propagate, lest exacerbate tensions with society.
The pages of a responsible newspaper should not be used for regurgitating – in whatever form – venomous comments which appear on social media. Some things are better left unsaid, because, if repeated, they add fuel to an already combustible environment.
The emergence of social media makes editorial gatekeeping more critical, not less. Newspapers can lose credibility if they are seen as more conduits of fake or offensive information which originate on social media.
No one disputes that ugly things are being mentioned on social media. No one disputes that some of what is being spread on social media falls into the category of hate speech. But it remains downright irresponsible for such comments to be republished even as an opinion piece.
Social media has allowed for the easy and fast spread of ‘hate’ comments. Hate speech on social media represents a threat to democratic values, including freedom of the media.
That threat becomes magnified when inflammatory speech on social media finds its way into the mainstream media, either as news or unqualified opinion pieces. The duty of the mainstream media, including their columnists and editors, is to exercise greater responsibility and not be lured into repeating things which incite hatred. The mainstream media, including the print media, must not become an echo chamber for the unverified and irresponsible bunkum which appear on social media.
Editors are not expected to suppress inflammatory or hate speech. But they should never regurgitate such speech without an outright denunciation. Imagine what would be the state of journalism if every ‘hate’ comment is reproduced in our daily newspapers. Even op-ed pieces should avoid disseminating intolerant rhetoric especially that which can promote discrimination, incitement and hatred.
No one wants that to happen and this is why it is important that commentaries, which address inflammatory or hate speech, should denounce such comments, lest some people interpret its publication as an endorsement.
Some editorial boards are stricter. They have a policy of refusing to report hate comments, even when done in an interview. They refuse to do so, not as a form of news suppression, but so as not to allow their publications to become a platform for dangerous drivel.
I certainly condemn some of the inflammatory comments, which have appeared on social media, in relation to Guyana’s elections. I would never reproduce or make reference to such comments without offering a condemnation of same. We need less incendiary comments at this time.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News