Bi-partisan politics and the media
Posted by: kaizenlog in Malta, tags: Bi-partisan politics and the mediaEditors who take sides.
I decided to send the letter that appears hereunder to the Editor of the daily edition of the Malta Independent because, in the run-up to the election, I had grown tired of the one-sidedness of their articles and editorials, which I judged to be inconsistent with the scope and purpose of the ‘free’ press whose first responsibility lies in passing on to the public accurate, unbiased reporting, as well as representing a crucial link between the public (for whom they should show their prime concern) and the established order. I thought that biased reporting to the public in favour of one side against another or others, in an effort to tarnish political programmes belonging to those quarters that the paper does not wish to see elected, is veering more towards dictatorships than democracies.
I no longer buy The Times and Sunday Times because, last year, they both blacklisted me for having remitted letters to them for publication, which criticized our local parish priest for his considerable lack of respect for his church’s neighbours through the excessive and very loud infernal noise created at all times of day on his orders; which, in reality, ridicules the Curia’s new-found concern for the environment. Is it possible that the latter have not heard that ‘deeds speak louder than words’: nor are they possibly aware any longer of “By their deeds ye shall know them”? I would think it is impossible that they have forgotten who spake so! In the end, their deeds make a mockery of their words!
So, as I no longer buy the Times publications, I don’t know (except from hearsay) whose trumpet they were blowing. Going on their level of concern for the discomfort the public has to endure because of the established church in, at the least, my particular instance, it does not take much intelligence to deduce the status quo attitude they must have taken in the last election.
They could maintain that they have a right to their own opinion! As ordinary private citizens they certainly have, but as Editors of truly INDEPENDENT newspapers, their duty and responsibility lie in giving their readers an unbiased account of facts; not one generally tainted with, even transformed by, their beliefs and ideas of who is right or wrong, otherwise it becomes merely propaganda for their chosen side!
What makes a superior newspaper is one where the editor recognizes his readers and the public in general as the most valid part of his business, and consequently works ceaselessly to, and pulls no punches in exposing shortcomings and inconsistencies in the established ruling classes without any favour. Their loss becomes the fact they no longer appear to own their own minds, capable of independent thought! Their other and greater loss is one of reputation, for a thinking and discerning public could perceive them as having selected a side that could them the greater patronage they seek, even if this were not at all their intention.
The Malta Independent, and, dare I say so, most likely The Times too, fostered division amongst a nation already very polarized by political factions, cliques, clubs, sycophants and the general streak of primitive tribalism evident among a politically immature population. To crown it all, right after the election and even before the results were known, they were then preaching their “one country” faith! Vide – Independent/Editorial/ 08.03.08/last paragraph! Is this not a monumental contradiction; well past the ridiculous? The preceding three paragraphs make equally interesting reading too in this context!
I repeat I was not concerned with who would win the last election, except for, perhaps, a human innate sympathy for the underdogs. My avowed concern was and continues to be for our Environment and so I wished for a Parliament that would not continue to decimate fast-dwindling natural resources, but instead treat God’s creation with the undoubted respect it deserves.
With the great wisdom of hindsight and in light of the current situation, can they honestly and truly say they have served the public well? Can they truly and honestly say they have served Malta well?
——————————
Dear Mr. Calleja,
You will probably remember my name as you had printed some past letters of mine that I had submitted.
This time, I am writing on a semi-personal note and not for publication in your paper, to tell you that I have been extremely disappointed with your newspaper.
After my experience with ‘The Times’, who blacklisted me for having ‘dared’ to publicly criticize our local, excessively noise-loving parish priest for his uncivil and unchristian attitude towards his neighbours/parishioners, who still go only so far as whispering their discontent in the alleyways reminiscent of the mediaeval mindset of accepted ‘droits de seigneur’, I had been hoping that the one remaining English language daily that I was still buying would not let me down. Unfortunately, the lead-up to the Elections has made me realize the great shortcomings inherent in the Independent’s (?) setup.
Being a supposedly ‘independent’ newspaper, I had expected to always read a balanced, fair, properly structured and unbiased account of what was on offer by all the political parties. That Malta mainly offered only poor quality political intrigue, speeches and activities was something that is common knowledge. I had hoped that the Press would have tried to encourage our ‘ruling classes’ to improve their level of behaviour but, instead, you, as the Editor, decided to cease being ‘independent’ and took sides to the detriment of the other parties but especially, to those of your readers who did not share such a one-sided view of things. Of course, I now wonder if this vaunted independence is all just pretence! Instead what emerged from your write-ups was a fine example of political tribalism that would have graced any backward political consciousness, unfortunately still evidenced, in some African countries. You had me wondering if the Maltese, with such a similar attitude, should have tried to join the African Union and not the European one!
An Editor, last time I heard, was supposed to always take on the responsibility of upgrading the quality of journalism featured in his newspaper. In this particular event, the quality of journalism and editorship were very poor indeed. Taking sides, unless the paper is a party mouthpiece, is not the Editor’s job! Making sure that he ‘honours’ his paper’s independence of thought and opinion, however, is; especially if it includes the word ‘Independent’ in its banner. Independence of mind means walking a fine line of subtlety of character and consciousness, so that no particular part of its readership is offended and so that, whichever party wins the election, it will always be treated with the merited, though at times begrudging, dignity and respect. It is called integrity! Your articles; your editorials failed completely in this particular subtle and intelligent stance.
Some of your opinion columnists were truly offensive and showed inherent bad manners under a very thin external veneer of education. It seemed that anything was acceptable so long as the chosen one-sided view was upheld!
I did not care which party won the election; but I had fully expected to be kept up-to-date with occurring events in a properly balanced and reasoned manner.
I am still reading your newspaper (only just), so you have not yet lost the minimal income from my purchase. What you and your columnists have lost, where I am concerned, is your credibility, and that, dear Editor of an ‘Independent’ newspaper, you should have recognized as your greatest asset. I shall never again read any article or editorial in it without wondering what axe you are grinding! Buying a newspaper and finding that the crossword is the most believable section left to it is truly sad!
Finally, since you had obviously perceived the Green Party as being the greatest threat to the status quo, as otherwise you would not have adopted such a sledgehammer-to-crack-a-very small-nut approach, I am sending a copy of this letter to them to see if they would like to feature it in their electronic newsletter, or elsewhere, or not at all. This way they will know that not everyone is so easily taken in by a projected pseudo-authority
Alexander
Popularity: 3% [?]
Welcome to Kaizenlog.com If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed , Twitter You can contact us by using the contact form or submitting a comment. You can also share this post with your friends by clicking on the 'ShareThis' button above. Thanks for visiting!
Print This Post
Entries (RSS)