Excluding sections of the press – don’t do this, Mr. President

Jun 16, 2020 Letters

---

DEAR EDITOR,

The report is that President David Granger banned sections of the press from a news conference he held on Sunday. Banning, even for a day or for one media gathering is wrong, and I say so respectfully to the president. Selectively banning the critical sections only of the press is even more wrong, and I say so again. And banning the questioning, critiquing, disagreeing sections of the press at this particular hour, well, there are very few things that could be more wrong than that, and of which I cannot think of today.
I understand that Stabroek and Kaieteur, the Guyana Times and Newsroom were among those excluded. The first two I scan the headlines daily, with an occasional in-depth follow-through. I do so, because we are so predictable as to what is always present and unchanging in Guyana that I have heard them a million times. I do not read the Times, nor do I even know what the entity named Newsroom represents. Perhaps, I cheat myself, but I run that risk. These four agencies of the local media world have been found disagreeable and have drawn the ire of His Excellency. I detect recrimination and premeditation, which are usually underscored by malice. I think the president is, and should be, bigger than this low move. It is too much of what has been the customary in this country; it should not be his way.
The four news bodies have been objectionable because they dare to disagree. I have disagreed publicly with the president for whom I voted. By this standard, then I have to be found objectionable and disagreeable, too. That is ominous. More importantly, we cannot go on to be a progressive society, if this is how leaders react when surveying the field for who is critical and who is not. I confess to being unable to contribute as an interested citizen and concerned patriot (something which means much to me), if only the favourable and the acceptable is what finds the traction and welcome of reception. No! I object to any such restraint, mental or actual exclusion from today.
This does not bode well for Guyana. It does not fit seamlessly, but only crudely and unacceptably, in my evaluation of one David Arthur Granger, the army veteran, the historian, the chess strategist, the head of state and commander-in-chief. And above all of those, the exclusion on Sunday of what may be found to be insufferable sections of the press, does not align at all with my conclusions of David Granger, the Guyanese son and citizen.
It may not matter to the president, but I share something with him that I have uttered in public before, and more than a few times. I do not read the Guyana Chronicle. And this is despite the fact that parts of it is available online, and I could have readily availed myself of its paper edition, during the time when I helped at a state agency. I did not and do not, and I am a supporter, a watchful and critical one, no doubt. Perhaps that condemns me and consigns me to the rank of pariah status, too. As an outsider in this country that is not unknown to me, and I have found that I am at home when such is the case. It may be among my fellow Indians because of my identification with the president; I listen and march to my own drum. It may be among the few coalition supporters with whom I rubbed shoulders, who now look at me askance because of my sometimes caustic, still careful and conservative (according to many) assessments and reactions to political positions and actions that I am sure would not measure up before ethical and principled bars held at minimal heights. I continue to stay the course, as I run the race of life. Separately, it may please His Excellency to know that I read Demerara Waves, and am even a frequent contributor, though not of late due to circumstances. The publisher tells it as he sees it and hears it. I would hope that he is not singled out in time for the same treatment meted out to those fallen from grace.
Editor, what I am saying in all of this to the president is simple and summed up like this: as a child I never bowed before peers; as a man I do not follow the mobs. Be they a coalition mob bent along irreversible lines; or an opposition mob unalterably doubled in similar twisted configuring. It is too late for some of us to be different. In saying this I trust that the president can appreciate that I have to be me, which is what he is hearing, reading and absorbing today. The president has to be himself, and if this excluding of the press is his version of ‘I gotta be me’ then I regret that and distance from such. Guyana needs to hear the sum of positions and programmes from all minds and voices, and especially the doubtful ones now. It would be confirmation of leadership wisdom and maturity that such banning is an aberration. I trust it will not be repeated. For then what remains is the falsehood and hypocrisy of all voices saying one thing only. That would be the favourable. Count me out from now, please.

Sincerely,
GHK Lall

---

---