The Media Challenge

Last Wednesday, the Media Institute of the Caribbean (MIC) convened a virtual “conversation” on regional media coverage of elections. The panellists included Dr Steve Surujbally, a former chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) who has served on election observer missions all over the world.

Alongside Dr Surujbally was decorated Jamaican journalist, elections observer and former Editor-in-Chief of the Jamaica Gleaner, Wyvolyn Gager. Then there was T&T-based Saint Lucian journalist, Peter Richards, who has covered numerous Caribbean elections.

The background to this exercise was the fact that this year as many as ten elections are likely to be held in full and associate Caricom member states. Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) was the first to go to the polls on Feb 7 and the Progressive National Party (PNP) maintained its hold on power there.

Next up, on February 26, was Anguilla where the Anguilla United Front (AUF) under now first-time female premier, Cora Richardson-Hodge, turned the tables on the incumbent Anguilla Progressive Movement (APM).

Curaçao, where there is proportional representation (PR), held its elections on March 21 and Gilmar Pisas was returned as prime minister. On the immediate horizon are T&T on April 28 and Suriname (PR) on May 25. Not far behind are Guyana (PR), Jamaica, St Vincent and the Grenadines, and we do not know what will happen in Haiti.

Such a backdrop was useful to declare since there are unique, interesting features of each country’s electoral system and practice requiring clinical dissection, and lessons to be learned regarding media coverage of encounters there.

Though media performance was the main focus, we spent some valuable time fleshing out the view that there are systemic issues associated with our electoral systems that do not do not always produce outcomes of the greatest democratic value. I will explain what I mean by that in a while.

Relatedly, it was argued that “voter apathy” had become a recurring fixture of elections, in part because of a lack of confidence in the ability of the process to reflect collectively fashioned views on our countries’ developmental paths.

Accounting in part for this is the fact that our political parties have been efficient at identifying symptoms of our dysfunction and not always focused on key structural, causative factors.

Additionally, there does not exist a perfect electoral system and informed national discussions focused on fixing key elements are needed.

Yes, this is not a new concern, though we generally operate pretty tight systems with high levels of institutional accountability and responsibility in most instances.

The political organisations that mobilise for electoral contests should find ways of integrating the prospects for change, if required, as part of their platform talk.

Moreso, journalists should better acquaint themselves with such matters so as to expand the coverage of campaigns and the entire elections process beyond routinised claims and counterclaims and outlandish promises.

For journalists, elections should also increasingly be recognised as a process and not as a singular event confined to campaigns comprising claims and counterclaims, gratuitous doses of defamation and character-assassination, spectacularly contrived defections, and the disingenuous insertion of personal taste and views into expert and reportorial narratives.

There is a concern that while there is abundant focus on some discrete components of the electoral cycle that begin and end with announcement of an election date and declaration of a result, there are important features of what happens between elections often ignored or inadequately addressed.

Additionally, with voter education being a key output of election reporting, there are parts of the process that are too often neglected or under-reported outside of isolated fiascos associated with them.

Focusing on these areas requires critical and knowledgeable journalistic attention to existing electoral and representative systems and their impact on the sustenance of democratic conditions.

For example, does the first-past-the-post constituency system produce outcomes truly representative of “the will of the people?” What becomes of the 39% or 42%, or even the 10% or 15% of the electorate that did not support the victorious politicians?

Every time the T&T constitution is being discussed, this comes up in the context of the PR option – too often minus thoughts on the desired version of the system. Guyana and Suriname offer different approaches next door and there are others elsewhere.

No time for all this now though. In under one week from now, we shall see where slick and shabby campaigns, and predictable narratives have taken us. The journalists who have contained their personal enthusiasm have played their important parts, but hopefully in the knowledge that much, much more is expected.