Stephen Vasciannie LAST YEAR was a good year for journalism, almost. Cliff Hughes was named Journalist of the Year by the Press Association of Jamaica. This was well-deserved. Mr. Hughes combines the sharp ability to find the news, with the natural flair of an expert analyst, a man in touch with the past but willing to penetrate the future.
Mr. Hughes' success was also a positive development because it says something about independence. One has the impression that the financial arrangements between Nationwide and its host station, are not entirely typical, or at least not the usual relationship of journalistic employee and radio station employer (ditto Impact and its home station). It may be that these arrangements recognise independent news-gathering and analysis in a way that encourages personal initiative in the Hughes Corporation.
This is valuable, and frequently results in a better product for the listener. The downside, though, is that the arrangements could encourage a greater undue degree of commercialisation in the presentation of news: hence, those seemingly interminable product placements and visits to various business institutions, perhaps advertising at its best for Saturday morning fare, but not the real thing.
But a good year, only almost. Desmond Richards, the President of the Press Association says the train is moving, and he could be correct. As it moves, though, it should one day explain why Wilmot Perkins has not been named Journalist of the Year at any time since, say, 1993. Surely, it cannot have escaped the attention of newshounds that, notwithstanding his critics, Mutty remains immensely influential ("influential" is a word that Mutty would not want to have used about him, but that's another story).
MUTTY
When the PAJ ignores Mutty, it does itself a disservice. The standards for assessing the Journalist of the Year, and that kind of thing, can only be meaningful if the PAJ consciously seeks to disregard ideological bias. It is part of Mutty's stock in trade to be controversial, but his arguments are invariably constructed on a foundation that requires careful analysis. We listen to him to be challenged, we may switch when he annoys us, but in terms of technical presentation, analysis and communications skills, Mutty is still the father.
That needs to be recorded not so much for Mutty, but for the credibility of the PAJ. And, by the same token, the PAJ needs to reconsider the concept of the "working journalist". If you are not working as a journalist, then you are not a journalist; but what, really is a working journalist?
The term has been used as an exclusionary device, but it is neither logical nor otherwise defensible. A few years ago, under the presidency of the Spike, the PAJ quite properly made an award to Morris Cargill for his services to journalism. Years before that, however, Cargill had been characterised by many as the quintessential "non-working journalist" (to put it mildly), ostensibly because he did not spend all or even much of his time in journalism, but really because of ideological biases within the PAJ. That kind of exclusion is not justifiable.
ADVERTISERS
Last year was a good year for advertisers, almost. From the perspective of the television viewer, there were notable attempts at public engagement. And, on the positive side, it cannot readily be said that metropolitan advertisements dominate as they did in the old days. Reliance on catchy Jamaican music prevails in many cases, and Jana has been made to bring out the gentler side of the Warlord, in singing.
The telecommunications struggle has also produced its fair share of switching on. One company claims to be the owna, while the another plays to the idea that your self-esteem is enhanced by owning a cellular phone -- but their soft messages are conveyed with flair.
There is much flair on offer, too, in that partially multicoloured Report on Job Interviews usually presented at news time. This advertisement grew on me during the year: it's a tribute to the interviewee that she so tellingly portrays nervousness, contempt, red-eye jealousy, ambition and adolescent admiration, all in 30 good-looking seconds.
But a good year, only almost. Will someone please tell the supermarket in question that "privilidges" reflects, at best, an eccentric approach to spelling? And then there is, or was, that exasperating attempt at humour. Man gets gift from store, man offers gift to girlfriend. Girlfriend shots him the most vigorous box conceivable. We are expected to laugh.
Never mind, for the moment, the heavy issues of domestic violence, male marginalisation, and the mischaracterisation of women implicit in this sequence -- just tell me why this is funny. The sequence has now apparently been changed, and humorous portions have been retained in more recent versions of this advertisement.
Do you remember that advertisement some years ago when a bougouyaga (effectively played by Oliver Samuels, I think) roughed up his wife for not having butter in the refrigerator. Well, if the advertisers had remembered the kerfuffle prompted by that advertisement, they would not have strayed into the land of gratuitous violence in their attempt to sell furniture this time 'round.
CHUCKERS
It was a good year for chuckers in cricket, almost. Murali continues to get away with a very bent arm, as he chucks his way into the record books. Now, one gathers, the problem is even more pronounced when Murali delivers his Doosra, the wrong one that you may think is an off-break, but which really turns the other way. Umpires are reluctant to report Murali for his obvious violation of the laws of cricket, either because they fear reprisals or because they buy the argument that Murali has a birth defect which leads to his irregular arm action.
The Emperor is naked, and the ICC should say so. While the Emperor is on parade, our own Jermaine Lawson must be going through the most difficult time of his life. One hopes that the Jamaican cricket authorities are helping Lawson to the fullest extent; could they not bring in Hurricane Holding even at this late stage?
Finally, I had planned to say it was a good year, almost, for Parliament. But, then, last week happened.
Stephen Vasciannie is Professor of International Law and Head of the Department of Government, UWI,
Mona. He is also a consultant in the Attorney-General's Chambers.
