Colin Steer, Associate Editor - Opinion
A CYNICAL wag suggested a few years ago that journalists more often than not behaved like fish swimming around in an aquarium peering outside for something interesting. Somebody drops a morsel of food in the tank and they all dive at it at the same time.
That unflattering, but not entirely inaccurate, assessment of journalism is equally applicable to all aspects of media focus and programming in general. The growth in media outlets in Jamaica, and for that matter the world, has been generally positive, offering more avenues for expression and creativity.
The development of the Internet has given rise to a myriad of arenas for reporting, analysis, discussions, and even rumour. But in reality, never before have so many had so many outlets to say so little. The self-indulgence which characterises the local talk show circuit is a case in point. While there are the occasional exposés and insightful interviews allowing listeners to be better informed on some issues, the public is still left tremendously short-changed, considering the amount of air time given to these kinds of programmes across broadcasting entities. Relatively little time is given to proper research and preparation, so the same talking heads move around in the same tank, offering tidbits of wisdom and surface analysis.
NOT PECULIAR TO JAMAICA
The scenario is not peculiar to Jamaica. As soon as a new concept is developed and seems to capture the public's imagination, variations on the same theme, or cheap copies are reproduced - not only from station to station, but from country to country and across continents. The latest and best example of this is the 'reality TV' concept.
Yet, there are others who are concerned that media should be doing more in focusing on development issues, to enable peoples and societies to be better informed about themselves and the world they live in, and to be guided into taking actions that can affect their lives for the better.
Much of the focus across the globe today, World Press Freedom Day, will be on the age-old concerns of freedom of the press, restrictions on journalists, censorship, access to media and to a lesser extent, media ownership and control. But all of these concerns must hinge on the question: How do media best serve the public's interest?
A press statement issued yesterday by the U.S. ambassador to Jamaica, Brenda LaGrange Johnson, quotes President George W. Bush as saying, "The policy of the United States is to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture."
FREE PRESS ESSENTIAL TO DEMOCRACY
He added: "We vigorously promote media freedom as a core component of our diplomacy and our assistance programmes because a free press is essential to democracy."
As a statement of public policy, there is not much ground for criticising the U.S. official position. But some critics point to an undermining of those very ideals even within the United States itself.
In The Problem of the Media, Robert W. McChesney suggests that the concentrated corporate control over the media system with its obsession with maximising profits has had a negative effect on the public interest.
We in Jamaica are not far removed from that scenario. The major media houses control several entities in broadcast and print with new moves to secure even greater alliances. It is arguable whether in the main the Jamaican public is as well informed about world affairs, for example, as we were two decades ago with fewer entities.
Arguing from U.S. perspective, McChesney says the problem is not only journalism's poor performance, but the commercialisation of the culture. In an earlier work, he charged that media have come to serve the interests of corporate profit rather than public enlightenment and debate.
This is not to suggest that there is no exception, but increasingly the convergence is towards the commercial interest.
World Press Freedom Day then must be 'commemorated' not only with references to jailed journalists in restrictive societies, but also to the narrow commercial interests in a 'free society'.
