Stephen Vasciannie, Contributor
THE TALK SHOW is, of course, the most public avenue for the expression of our opinions. I mention this, not as a criticism of talk shows, but rather, simply as a statement of fact. Indeed, I am strongly supportive of talk shows, not only because they provide a modern-day forum for democratic exchange, but also because they expose us to current trends, social anxieties and the flow of political discourse in the wider society.
In some circumstances, too, the talk show will provide the means by which pompous bubbles may be publicly punctured. Mutty can do that - when he is not being unduly tendentious. On a good day, he can skewer a bad argument with one or two well-placed comments. The gladiatorial component of Perkins on Line has, however, diminished noticeably in recent times, for it seems that the real big wigs of both major political parties are now simply avoiding the programme.
Some of the other talk shows are still less entertaining than Mutty's, but they are arguably more informative. So, we have our pick. And if we don't like what's on offer, we can always turn off the radio or television, an option I recently exercised when a certain video was aired on the evening news. I am also inclined to move away from the television when the producers of the evening news present private grief in the most public manner imaginable. A mother weeps bitterly over her child's brutal killing: this strikes me as having relatively little news content. Is it not callous treatment of the grief-stricken?
PROBLEM SOLVING
The talk shows also perform the service of exposing us to different ways of thinking, and of problem-solving. For example, some analysts and policy makers are much devoted to history. In the midst of an important point about, say, efforts to reduce the number of police killings in Jamaica, there will be a sudden swing from today's realities to the events of the 1970s or the '80s.
History, of course, must have its place; and if anything, publications of record could be more mindful of the role of history in shaping the present. The point here is just that sometimes, when the same examples and episodes are repeated ad nauseam, disproportionate emphasis is given to one or two aspects of our history. And sometimes, the reference to history in the midst of an attempt to resolve an immediate problem serves to reinforce the notion that the problem cannot be resolved because it has deep historical roots.
This takes me to another common line of reasoning on some talk shows - the approach based on determinism. It goes something like this: most, if not all of Jamaica's problems, can be traced back to one or two sources. So, for example, if there is a difficulty with meter readings, the determinist will say, well, it's not so much a technical matter, we must link the problem to the structure of the political system, the nature of the Jamaican personality, the output of the university, or some other points-scoring question. Sometimes this can work, but on occasion, it wears very thin.
TUNNEL VISION
Other strategies for argumentation are also regularly on display. In some cases, tunnel vision is called in aid, or one issue is always pulled out for consideration, no matter what the topic of the moment happens to be. This may be a cousin of determinism: The argument may be about work permits, but you must find a way to inject a point about the environment.
Recently, too, there has been a tendency to invoke international law as an argument winner. On the brilliant and delightfully progressive Counterpoint, this line has been applied, in a misleading way, on the matter of sexual preference. And, just the other day, a (pro-choice) medical doctor, in debate with a (pro-life) Roman Catholic priest, firmly invoked Jamaica's international commitments to support his position. What, though, are these commitments? And how binding are they?
Finally, if you are on the radio and all else fails, call for more public education on the subject!
Stephen Vasciannie is Head of the Department of Government, University of the West Indies, and a consultant in the Attorney - General's chambers.
