In the English-speaking Caribbean, press freedom advocacy is
left almost entirely up to voluntary organisations and individuals earning
their incomes mainly as working journalists or, depending on the circumstances,
is left to media owners and managers responding to a variety of general
regulatory requirements and specific threats to their individual media
enterprises.
During the course of the Grenada Revolution of 1979-1983,
oppressive media conditions in that country stimulated action by a
cross-section of regional publishers led by Ken Gordon of the Trinidad Express
with important support from newspapers in Guyana, Barbados and Jamaica. Except
for regional responses to the state advertising boycott of Stabroek News in Guyana
of 2007-2008, there has not, in recent years, been a similar instance of significant,
concerted regional solidarity by newspaper publishers for each other.
There is, as well, no serious culture of human rights
advocacy which positions freedom of expression as central to either civil
political rights or as a pillar of economic, social and cultural rights. In
fact, with few exceptions in Jamaica and Guyana, there can be said to be no
functioning human rights organisation that has withstood the test of political
incumbency.
The Bar associations of the region, together with the legal
fraternity they represent, have failed the people of the Caribbean badly
through their lack of active interest in this area of human rights.
In Trinidad and Tobago, the T&T Publishers and Broadcasters
Association (TTPBA) has flown a generally consistent press freedom flag,
together with the Media Association of Jamaica (MAJ) which has provided a sound
platform for media solidarity in the face of industry-specific threats. But,
apart from a floundering politically-volatile experiment in Guyana, through a Media
Proprietors Association (GMPA), there do not exist concerted and cohesive
efforts by the media fraternity to address press freedom challenges when they
arise elsewhere.
The Curacao Media Organisation (CMO) which was recently admitted
as a member of the Association of Caribbean MediaWorkers (ACM) appears to be a
hybrid association comprising both media managers and working journalists.
For the most part, the ACM has been the region’s premier
press freedom advocacy group with critical support from its network of almost
entirely voluntary organisations, some of which occasionally sink and emerge
from significant organisational challenges.
There are current ACM-mediated “rescue” efforts in Antigua
and Barbuda with respect to the Antigua and Barbuda Media Congress (ABMC) and
the Media Association of Trinidad and Tobago (MATT) while the Barbados
Association of Journalists (BAJ) is yet to hold a long overdue general meeting and
the Sint Maarten Media Association which had a promising start under Marvin
Hokstam is now defunct.
The volunteeristic nature of all of these organisations can
be said to be among their sternest challenges. Because both their leaders and
members tend to be busy journalists and other media workers, little attention
is paid, or is possible, to attend to the second most important element of the
game which is the availability of money to keep things going organisationally.
In Latin America, still in recovery from the dictatorships
of the relatively recent past, and with a much shorter history of democratic
governance than the English-speaking Caribbean, organisations that pay
attention to freedom of expression and press freedom tend to be full-time
professional outfits funded by development-support and human rights institutions
primarily from the developed world.
In the Caribbean, such international agencies, trusts and
foundations have not recognised how possible it is to have long traditions of
peaceful democratic life while at the same time confront serious attacks on the
ability of the press to function in an unfettered manner.
There is the added difficulty of many international
organisations not recognising the vital distinction to be made between the
countries constituting the geographical area of Latin America and the Caribbean.
In fact, there are United Nations agencies that do not make
the distinction and are quite happy to report on the state of affairs of “Latin
America” as a region without reference to the Caribbean, notwithstanding
official mandates to disaggregate the two distinct sub-regions. I can say a lot
about this particular feature of some international inter-governmental
institutions but won’t provide such a distraction at this stage.
It seems to me that the challenge of volunteerism in press
freedom advocacy is how to combine the best features of working journalists
intervening on their own behalf while maintaining a sustainable, professional
environment to facilitate expression of their concerns.
This perhaps requires a re-thinking of current approaches to
include some elements of the following:
1. That Caribbean media workers associations consider
formal, legal incorporation as entities with the ability to conduct research
projects, training programmes, fund-raisers and campaigns that earn them an
income to meet recurrent expenditures on staff and secretariat space. This, of
course, carries with it the burden of corporate obligations to prepare
financial and management statements, pay taxes and take care of staff needs;
2. That the state and corporate sectors be encouraged to
establish independent philanthropic trusts from which funding from such
enterprises can be derived for institutional support of media associations. The
funding mechanism developed for independent support for the Caribbean Court of
Justice is a fine example of how this can be achieved;
3. That media enterprises consider seconding full-time
journalistic staff over limited periods to serve on a full-time basis with
media associations. This can be a meaningful contribution on the part of media
owner and manager organisations in an area in which there is mutual interest together
with media worker organisations;
4. That trade unions active in the media sector play a role
in lending operational support to national media worker associations;
5. That the constitutions of national associations
re-consider the trend toward longer terms of office for elected officials. The
recent trend has been toward extending terms to a period of two years. It might
be that such a term is too long and that executive committees require more
frequent refreshing;
6. The issue of entitlement to membership should be debated
to determine the degree to which new media and other entrants to the industry can
be embraced;
7. That national media associations play a role in
developing national level frameworks for media self-regulation;
8. That, in some instances, where the national media
landscape is small and limited, consideration be given to merging the
operational and institutional arrangements for representing both media
enterprises and media workers;
There is little doubt that the ACM, as the umbrella
organisation and international interface for the Caribbean media worker
fraternity also faces similar challenges of its own. But many challenges are
associated with the fact that too many national affiliates are dysfunctional,
poorly funded entities driven by a few devoted volunteers.
Opponents of the free press are wont to gloat on such a
parlous state of affairs. So too do uninterested media workers who have proven
to be their own worst enemies.
National media worker organisations are absolute necessities
in today’s world. Those that continue to function well against all odds are to
be applauded. Those that falter and fall need much broader and urgent support.
