Press conference fiasco

Sep 18, 2025 Editorial, News

---

Kaieteur News – President Irfaan Ali began his second term in office with the promise of forging a stronger relationship with the local press and committing to greater access to information, an issue that dogged him throughout his first five years.

He vowed a more transparent, open presidency, one that would give the people’s representatives in the media freer rein to ask questions and hold his administration accountable. He said:”…we recognise and respect the essential watchdog role of the media, and we will ensure greater transparency by instituting mechanisms in every ministry and department that provide the facts in a timely way. Additionally, and of no less importance, we must hold those who are tasked with the dissemination of information accountable for their actions. They must be held accountable, also.”

But if Tuesday’s press conference fiasco is anything to go by, the President’s promise has already stumbled at the starting line. Instead of ushering in an era of greater openness, the event has left the media fraternity bruised and the public asking whether the Office of the President really understands the meaning of free press and transparency.

During his first term, President Ali was no darling of the media. He held fewer than five press conferences, and when cornered by reporters on the sidelines of events, he was often testy, combative, and visibly uncomfortable. Yet, to his credit, as time wore on, he matured. By the end of his first five years, he had grown in confidence, his command of state matters had improved, and when he was civil, he gave detailed, even impressive responses. That growth held out hope that in this second term, the President would embrace the press rather than resist it.

Which is why the heavy-handedness that was on display on Tuesday is so disappointing. Instead of building on the progress he made, President Ali has reached back into the 18th century, dragging out Mr. Kit Nascimento as his so-called media czar. With all due respect to Mr. Nascimento, his old-fashioned and bizarre approach to media management has no place in a modern democracy. Restricting the number of questions, curbing follow-ups, and arbitrarily deciding which media houses are allowed into a presidential press conference undermine not only the work of the press, but also the credibility of the President himself.

It boggles the mind, what special talents or wisdom Mr. Nascimento, in the twilight of his life, is supposed to be bringing to this role. What was evident on Tuesday was not wisdom but chaos. Reporters were cut off, respected media outlets were blanked, and the President’s own stated commitment to openness was left in tatters. If the idea was to shield the President from uncomfortable questions, then it has had the opposite effect. The restrictions created outrage and suspicion, casting a shadow over everything the President said.

The situation was worsened by the troubling practice of the President’s press officer, Suelle Williams, contacting individual reporters directly instead of inviting their editors to send representatives or even sending the press invitation directly to the media houses themselves. This is not only bad form, it is dangerous. The editor, not the Office of the President, decides who covers an event.

As is being rightly observed, this is nothing less than an attempt by government to dictate who covers them and to steer coverage in their favour. Such meddling in the independence of the press is unacceptable and must be resisted at all costs. The government does not have the right to decide which reporter a media house sends on assignment. That is our decision alone.

Equally unacceptable was the blatant exclusion of several well-established and accredited media entities from the press conference. When a government cherry-picks which reporters and outlets can ask questions of the President, it undermines the very foundation of a free press. It signals not transparency, but control; not openness, but censorship.

President Ali must reflect on this debacle and recognise that his promise of improved media relations has already been compromised. If he truly intends to lead a government of transparency, then he must reassess the role of Mr. Nascimento in his media operations. The President needs no gatekeeper who muzzles the press on his behalf. He should welcome tough questions, not avoid them. For it is in the rigorous give-and-take with journalists that the people get answers, and that the leader of a democracy earns credibility.

If the President wants to convince the nation that he is serious about openness, then he must ensure that his press briefings are accessible, fair, and free of arbitrary restrictions. Anything less is interference. Anything less is a betrayal of the promise he made to the people.

Mr. President, your relationship with the media does not need a throwback to colonial-style control. It needs respect for the independence of the press. It needs courage to face questions without fear. And it needs a firm commitment that the flow of information to the people of Guyana will not be filtered through outdated, heavy-handed tactics.

Your first press conference of this term was the worst possible start. Now the ball is in your court.

---

• Editorial, fiasco, media, President Irfaan Ali, Press Conference, Press Freedom

---