By Denville Larry O J Vaughan
.jpg)
Having had the opportunity to listen to your broadcast of the radio show Voices, today Thursday 29th October, I am compelled to write to you to express my utter disgust at what appears to be a hatchet job on free speech and democracy, in their names.
I am and I will always be an advocate of free speech. I believe that our forefathers fought for that right for us and because it is enshrined in the Constitution Order of this proud Federation, I will be its most vocal defender - in cases where men and women are deprived of their free speech and in cases where gossipers, slanders and bigots don its cloak to broadcast their mischief as truth and gospel.
I also believe that 98.9 WINN-FM brings to the local media a blend of talk radio that was missing in this country. Along the way the directors of broadcasting and content, along with the hosts, have allowed this programme in particular to become a free for all where the show now lacks content and structure.
I remember the days when Mr. Paul Fergusson, Mrs. Jacqueline Armony, Pastor Loughlin Tatem, Mr. Schneidman Warner and Miss Toni Frederick were the anchors of this programme. Under their watch, there were conscious and concerted efforts to discuss issues on the show in an organised manner with guests who were able to guide discussion and provide answers on matters scheduled for that day.
I could recall listening to the programme in those days. The callers then were admonished to be cautious of what they said to guard against slander. The hosts warned, corrected and sometimes disconnected persons to keep a level of decorum in the programme.
Then, I believe that there was an effort to educate the people of this country with reagrd the issues that affects us, the things being done, those that ought to be done, those not seen to be done and those that ought not have been done.
After listening today, I realise that the recent criticisms made by Minister Sam Condor, however strongly worded they were, were both accurate and informed. While I do not share his recommendations for boycott and relocation of the broadcasting house, I ended listening the session believing that your hosting lacks the organisation and controls needed to ensure that balanced truth and elevating education are imparted through this medium.
I compare the programme I heard today, as being served road kill for gourmet dining. A programme that allows people to openly express their views of consent or dissent on issues of a national, neighbourhood or personal levels were presented carte blanche in the form of slander of persons and organisations.
Cases In point:
Today you allowed a caller right to place the personal life of retired Police Commissioner Robert Jeffers into public scrutiny. Mr. Jeffers had to call in to clear the issue on his present employment which had been raised discredit him and the service he gives to his current employers. A third caller also had to raise an objection to the poor taste of the initial comments.
All the while, you allowed all this to go on and sought to absolve your act of incompetence by saying that on Voices, the callers have choices. You should have stopped it in the first place. Be as liberal as you can be, but be relevant.
Secondly, you allowed a caller to raise unfair questions about a Government Statutory Corporation and its manner of discharging its duties. The caller was allowed to speculate and charge workers of the corporation with clandestine actions which even if they are so, should have been reported to the relevant authorities.
As the host, you never encouraged the caller to exercise his civic right and responsibility to report the matter that had allegedly taken place, but you stood by and allowed the misinformation and rumour to be peddled on your air waves. You allowed the show to be a source of scandal.
The last point I will discuss is the way you allowed a caller to further malign the police force. The caller spoke of her two nieces who reported to her that a police officer almost ran them over with a government issued car and used foul language. Then the woman went further to make a veiled threat of retaliation had the officer hurt her relatives.
As the host, you allowed her to carry on in tearing down the policing as a whole only to advise her about the time constraints of the show. I got the impression that Voices under your watch is forum to incite malice and sow discord as there is no resolution being sought nor offered.
Voices has been allowed to be a venting ground for the disenchanted and villainous to say what they want, about who they want, sometimes for as long as they want. Are we to believe that those are the only people in our country and those callers we hear on a regular basis represent the concerns and causes of all the people?
Under your watch Voices has alienated the wide cross section of people who would seek to make contributions to discussions on issues. There could be a greater number of people who share similar views with the callers but while this show is perceived as a daily attack on the status quo, in aid of political change, the calling pool will not go beyond those whose tone and tenor grate nauseously on the nerves of people put here.
Your show fosters a design, internally or externally, to stir and sustain hostility in this country. This is an abuse of free speech. This threatens democracy and further heightens the animosity and anger that controls the thoughts and actions of some of our people.
“Voices”, in its current form, is a liability on the books of your media house. The programme, as it stands today, saps the nation of its full potential for open dialogue in a context of balanced broadcasting.
I close by saying strongly, that the criticisms of government are healthy and are always needed. Governments and their leadership must always be held accountable. So I warmly welcome the criticism of Labour. I believe that as a party with 77 years of history and 14 years of action the leadership should be able to account for its stewardship.
It would be unwise for any media house that considers itself to be neutral and unbiased to allow itself to be viewed as the vehicle of propaganda, mischief and mayhem. Let truth and order prevail.
Bert, you have been given the opportunity to educate and elevate the people of this country. Do it. You have been appointed with the task of moderating the forum that could stimulate discussion and allow our people understand that issues are not the monopolistic properties of parties and their supporters. So, moderate effectively.
Bring back organisation and decorum. This is my appeal to you.
The writer is a former teacher and current social and political activist.
