The government has a flawed communication strategy

May 28, 2024 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Kaieteur News – In his introduction to his most recent press conference, Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo conceded that he had difficulty in preparing for it because of the paucity of comments and criticisms in the public domain, including from the Opposition.

In other words, he was admitting that it is the critics of the government that provides the oxygen for his press conferences. Without the critics, he has no or limited material for his weekly diatribes. If the Opposition stays silent then he would have nothing to say other than to go after independent critics in the newspaper, including the Kaieteur News and the Stabroek News.

Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo’s admission introduces a disturbing revelation about the function and purpose of these press briefings. His admission that the scarcity of public criticisms and opposition feedback made it challenging to prepare for his address underscores a troubling misuse of press conferences. These forums, ostensibly intended to disseminate information and provide updates are instead being weaponized as platforms for responding to criticisms of the government. A party’s press conference should not be used for such purposes.

What we have taking place is essentially a party press conference being used for countering criticisms of the government. It begs the question as to why the government is not holding weekly press conferences if it feels the need to react to criticisms. Why hold a party press conference to delve into government matters?

When are we going to return to the days of the weekly Cabinet press briefings/ When will a Cabinet Secretary be appointed to interface with the media?

Press conferences offer a direct line of communication between the government and the public, enabling the dissemination of crucial information, clarifications on policy decisions, and responses to pressing issues affecting the nation. However, Jagdeo’s statements suggest a deviation from these principles. Rather than being a conduit for transparent governance, these press conferences have morphed into a reactive spectacle, hinging on the criticisms and queries posed by opposition parties and independent media.

The essence of Jagdeo’s acknowledgment—that without criticism, he finds it hard to have substantial content—reveals an alarming dependency on conflict rather than constructive communication. This dependency indicates that these weekly press engagements are less about providing substantive information to the public and more about engaging in verbal skirmishes. Such an approach undermines the very purpose of these conferences.

If Jagdeo wants to respond to criticisms of the government, he should do so in his capacity as Vice President of the government and not as General Secretary of the PPP. Such governmental press conferences should be rich with data, reflective of strategic planning, and indicative of a forward-thinking administration. Instead, Jagdeo’s approach reduces them to a series of reactionary monologues, where the primary focus is on countering critics rather than enlightening the populace.

This strategy not only diminishes the informative value of press conferences but also casts a shadow on the government’s intent. If the administration requires external criticisms to construct the content of its press briefings, it suggests a lack of intrinsic agenda and vision. Governance should be driven by a proactive and well-articulated plan, not merely by the necessity to respond to detractors. The reliance on criticism as a basis for press content indicates a deeper issue of governance—one where the leadership is more concerned with image management and rebuttal than with genuine nation-building and policy execution.

Moreover, this approach has dire implications for independent journalism. By focusing primarily on countering criticisms from media outlets like Kaieteur News and Stabroek News, the administration signals an adversarial stance toward independent media. This antagonism discourages journalistic scrutiny, a crucial component of any healthy democracy. Instead of fostering an environment where media can question and critique freely, the government’s stance creates a chilling effect, potentially stifling journalistic independence and discouraging critical reportage.

If a government’s primary response mechanism is hinged on countering criticisms rather than presenting coherent, well-thought-out policies and initiatives, it signals a deficit in substantial governance. Effective leadership should be able to articulate and implement policies independently of the opposition’s stance, showcasing a clear vision and strategic direction for the country.

In essence, Jagdeo’s admission inadvertently exposes a flawed communication strategy. Press conferences should be about transparency and proactive governance, not a stage for reactive defensiveness. The Vice President’s approach reduces the sanctity of these engagements, transforming them into mere platforms for political theater rather than instruments of democratic dialogue. The need of the hour is a recalibration of the government’s communication strategy. Press conferences should return to their core purpose: informing and engaging the public on key issues, policies, and initiatives. They should reflect the government’s accountability and willingness to communicate transparently with its citizens. This requires a shift from political sparring.

---

• Both President Irfaan Ali and Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo, opposition, Press Conference, public domain, Vice President

---