We have linked to the Keltruth Blog to update this story. If some of us felt that the Kingsland Estate trial ongoing in Canada is not news worthy enough for the traditional media, maybe it has now become so. If we understand Keltruth latest blog right, they have sent letters to all the world leaders attending the United Nations 63rd General Assembly in New York today (23 September 2008).
Barbadians read in today’s Nation newspaper (September 07, 2008) that “VIVIAN ANNE GITTENS, CEO of the Nation Publishing Co. Ltd, has been appointed head of The Nation Group.” For what it is worth we congratulate her on being admitted to the old-boys club. She will now join the Patriarch and Chairman of the club Sir Fred Gollop on the board of directors of the parent company One Caribbean Media Limited (OCM). We did a quick check of the Nation circulation numbers and we have not detected any appreciable movement upwards. We also recall that that early in 2008 advertising rates and the cost of the newspaper increased. We also remember that the Nation refused to print several stories scooped by the blogs, the most notable was the 3S/Jonathon Danos story.
What we are saying to the BU family is that it seems Vivian Anne Gittens has been rewarded for propping-up the status quo, and the old boys club has rewarded her handsomely. We cannot find any innovative initiative which has been promoted by Mrs. Gittens reflected in the content and layout of the newspaper or in its recruitment practice, truly amazing. Let us not forget that under her leadership the Nation has pissed-off the current government while in Opposition and this is now being reflected by the significant advertising revenue being deflected to the Advocate newspaper by the government.
It seems that the Democratic Labour Party now in government remember some of the shenanigans by the Nation newspaper which took place in the build-up to the January 2008 general elections.
Most amazing is the fact that a veritable Who-is-Who of Barbados which includes Prime Minister David Thompson, as well as former Prime Minister Owen Arthur and Chief Justice David Simmons have been hauled before the Canadian Court to answer a law suit, and the Barbados media has turned a blind eye. We have decided to to allocate greater blame to the Nation and her sister companies because they have the lion’s share of the media market in Barbados.
We are sure that some members of the BU family have been following the Kingsland, Classic, Nelson Barbados Limited Affair with interest. Whether one is for, against or neutral it behooves the media of Barbados to acquaint Barbadians about this most unusual development. We cannot accept that the reason this case has not been picked up by the local media has to do with a dearth in legal competencies in the journalistic profession.
We asked a member of the BU family who is versed in the unusual court case the following question:
Do you think the Bajan media should be highlighting/exposing this case to Barbadians, or is there merit for them to retreat in the cloak that the matter is sub judice?
Here was their lucid response:
Part (i)
David, do I think it is a matter that ought to be covered by the “legitimate” organs of the press? Hell yes. Do I think it will be? No. I think the biggest problem is that, unlike some of the blogs, the reporters for the “legitimate” press lack the necessary qualifications IN THIS AREA to do other than make a hash of any report they may write. Look at the mess that Patrick Hoyos made of those very subjective and biased reports from the Privy Council – having read them and that judgment, one wonders if Mr. Hoyos was in the correct court.
Sub judice. Won’t fly here as an excuse for the local Bajan press. There can be no impropriety in reporting a case that is sub judice, not in Barbados, but in Canada. I think they have a duty to report it – a regional duty, since I understand that Almighty Allard has shifted the sphere of his operations to our sister islands of Dominica and Grenada. They ought to be warned. Next thing you know, you will have Stuart Heaslet telephoning highly placed people in those islands from Peter Allard’s property seeking to entrap them.
So, sub judice does not an excuse make for the local “legitimate” press. Not in the Canadian case. In a Barbados one, yes. But this is not a Bajan case.
This is a case where it could happen to ANY Bajan or Grenadian or Dominican. It has happened here and the press has to report it as a warning. Will it? NO. Even though they all have lawyers who can advise them on matters of defamation.
Part (ii)
David, after writing my reply to yours, I went out shopping and all the time your question stuck with me. I have to ask you this: If Canada and its PM and opposition leader and A-G and CJ were being sued in the Barbados courts, do you think tha the Canadian press would be in the slightest bit reticent about carrying full reports on it? I think that all the Canadian TV and radio networks and all the major papers would carry the story and commentaries and expert opinions. They would not be bound by the sub judice principal, simply because the action was filed in Barbados. So, since this case is the other way round, why are our TV and radio and newspapers hiding behind the sub judice excuse? I do not understand. Do you?
I think it ought to be aired fully and not the one sided reports that made me suspicious as hell with photos of Madge and chickens pretending to be something she is not, never was and never will be – and, of course, the Hoyos reports before, during and after the Privy Council hearing.
By the way, question. I forget whether it was the Advocate or the Nation that carried the daily Hoyos reports from London from the Privy Council, but I find it so difficult to believe that either Advocate or Nation paid for Hoyos’ trip. Did he pay for it himself, or was it a kind benefactor or “philanthropist” who paid for that?
While our mainstream media maintains the status quo, the blogs in our David versus Goliath like manner continue to fight the good fight.
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.