The media must report not interpret

THE EDITOR, Sir:

I FIND myself confused trying to understand the meanings that media practitioners continue to put to the pronouncements of politicians. For example your editorial of June 13, 2001, states that "The PNP through Vice-president Peter Phillips has repudiated allegations by JLP Leader Edward Seaga that the ruling party is fomenting the violence in West Kingston". In the next sentence you go on to describe Dr. Phillips' response as being part of a charge and counter charge. Since when is asserting one's innocence a "counter-charge"? Nowhere in his statement did Dr. Phillips accuse the JLP of being responsible for the violence.

Listening to the statements emanating from both parties I have picked up a consistent trend. The JLP accuses the PNP of being responsible and the PNP replies that the violence is being perpetrated by criminal gunmen from both communities who find it convenient to hide under the banner of the parties, so as to gain community protection. Yet repeatedly the media continue to report these exchanges as "finger pointing" and "blame game".

I respectfully ask that the media report on things as they are and not as it perceives them to be. Let the people draw their own conclusions. After all you are only a "medium" of information and not the interpreters thereof.

I am, etc.,

CARLTON

McNAUGHTON

Walkerswood PO

Note: Reader McNaughton should know that editorial commentary by way of analysis or interpretation is part ofthe media's function. ­ The Editor.

Back to Letters