Try as I might, I cannot disguise what is generally referred to as my “writing style”. Irrespective of whether my name is withheld from an article or I absent myself from the delivery of a speech, they are those who, with a tremendous degree of accuracy, can declare “that is a Hartley Henry” speech, column or opinion.
That comes, I guess, from several years of writing, where persons have become familiar with a particular turn of phrase or use of language. I am sure other leading writers in Barbados experience the same, where persons say, “I look forward to reading you every week. I like your style”. What they are in effect saying is that ‘you have a trade mark’ or that ‘you are consistent in your line of thinking’. That is very flattering for a writer.
I am an avid reader of most newspaper columns in Barbados and I too have come to recognize and appreciate certain styles and approaches. I know Stephen Alleyne’s style. I know Leonard Shorey’s style. I know David Cuke’s style. I know… By the same token I know the styles of Tony Best, Robert Best, Peter Wickham, Clyde Mascoll, Peter Simmons, Harold Hoyte, Al Gilkes and the like. All their styles and nuances have been established and have become entrenched over the years. You read them weekly to know what they are saying, because you like the way they are likely to say it.
The same goes for most reporters and social commentators. Their styles are consistent. The only frequent writer whose style I cannot track is Albert Branford.
Several years ago I worked with a journalist by the name of Albert Branford whose style I knew and really admired. He was a fearless, objective, down-the-centre writer who, through his writings, informed as well as educated. That writer back then was ‘in the know’. His articles were well researched, accurate and spot on. As a Political Writer he attracted the ire of politicians of all parties and political persuasions. Back in the 1980s Errol Barrow, Tom Adams, Richie Haynes, Bernard St. John, Henry Forde all had reason, on occasion, to congratulate as well as criticize Branford for his writings, but none could accuse him back then of bias or unreasoned thoughts.
That Albert Branford was highly visible. He sat in Parliament for long hours, following the cut and thrust of debates. He attended public meetings, branch meetings, town hall meetings and other forums convened for the sharing of information. There was not a press conference, Prime Ministerial tour or other politically driven media assignment where Albert Branford was not present. Albert Branford of the 1980s and 1990s was a household name and a household face. He earned his every accolade.
Sometime towards the end of the 20th century and the dawn of the 21st the Albert Branford that I knew appeared to have underwent a journalistic makeover. His “style” became somewhat blurred and incoherent. Actually, it changed from week to week. The style that was once his became rather unpredictable, sounding very often like that of a few known political operatives.
Indeed there was a period at the turn of the century when after reading Albert Branford I thought the changed style was quite similar to that of a then sitting parliamentarian. Indeed, I was amazed by the likeness of the parliamentarian’s spoken and Branford’s written words. The fact that there followed a string of articles, all in support of the views and ideas of that former Parliamentarian, was significant but perhaps only coincidental.
Now of late I am observing an equally baffling coincidence where the ever changing writing style is now more in sync with the stated views of a high profile female politician, who, incidentally, has been the subject of the most recent series of articles. It would appear to me that the new style of writing mirrors that of the person who is being written about.
I am firmly of the view that if a column is going to appear under the tag line of a leading journalist, that that journalist must at some point be heard, seen and given an opportunity to interface with the person or persons targeted by such said articles.
Accordingly, while week in and week out the Prime Minister of Barbados is the subject, some may say target, of articles bearing the name of an Albert Branford, I do not recall adequate opportunity being given by the office of the Prime Minister for the said Mr. Branford to quiz the Head of Government on the goings on since January, 2008.
As Political advisor to the current Prime Minister I take full responsibility for this slip up. Mr. Branford is deserving of an opportunity to quiz the Prime Minister of Barbados on the myriad number of issues raised in the articles that appear under his name. Accordingly, I would wish to indicate publicly my support for the Hon. Prime Minister of Barbados facilitating Mr. Albert Branford in a no-holds-barred interview on live radio and television.
The Hon. Prime Minister has established a pattern of regular meet-the-press forums, and I am hereby inviting Mr. Branford to avail himself of the opportunity for a live one-on-one televised interview with the Hon. David Thompson.
Here, Mr. Branford cold have all his concerns addressed and questions answered and the public of Barbados would benefit from his spirited and enlightened interface.
What says ye, Mr. Branford?
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.