Trudy Simpson, Correspondent

Founder of Guyana's first independent paper explains why everyone needs a voice

LONDON, England (The Voice):

TO MANY in the Caribbean, David de Caires, founder and editor-in-chief of Guyana's Stabroek newspaper, is a good example of what it takes to get and maintain press freedom.

De Caires and his wife Doreen set up the newspaper in 1986, at a time when there was no press freedom in Guyana.

The press was government-controlled under former President Forbes Burnham. There were reports that ministers' aides would go to newspapers with security guards to force staff to print certain stories or censor others.

De Caires, a former lawyer, helped bring about change by allowing criticism of government and different views to be published in Stabroek, expressed in interviews or its popular letters' pages.

Over the years, the independent newspaper has also clashed with government officials, wary of - or riled by - criticism.

In fact, as recently as 2006, government agencies and ministries withdrew advertising in Stabroek, after President Bharrat Jagdeo blasted the newspaper for being critical of his administration during the general election.

The regional press condemned the move.

In an exclusive interview with The Voice, de Caires talked about what's needed to maintain press freedom.

What lessons have you learned about free speech in your 20-plus years of publishing?

I have learned that free speech is the devil. What I mean by that is it is not a nice thing. I used to, perhaps naively, think that if you let everyone have their say, somehow or other some kind of consensus view would emerge or an approximation of the truth. I don't believe that any longer.

Emergence of truth

David de Caires (centre) with The Voice's head of advertising and marketing, Ope Bankole (left), and Managing Director George Ruddock.

I believe that is a very difficult topic and it is naive to feel it is as simple as that. A lot of views are underinformed or biased and you end up more readily with a tower of Babel than with the emergence of truth.

My views on free speech initially were a little naïve and oversimplified (but) it is absolutely vital that people should have the power to express their views and that within limits, their views should be taken seriously. It is where you draw that line that is so difficult ...

Often we cannot conclude whether this is a good faith expression or whether it is some twisted individual who has had a raw hand at some stage. It's very hard because all kinds of people have different views. But, you cannot be a censor. That grey area is a huge responsibility to the publisher.

What is needed to maintain press freedom in the Caribbean?

This recent encounter with the government convinces me that the regional media should work together whenever possible because it has much more clout regionally than it does on its own. We need that kind of regional unity.

I think it's certainly desirable for us to create something where we come to terms with the fact that many of us face the same problems. It would be useful to meet each other and find out how we deal with them.

How do you overcome challenges posed by limited resources?

People emigrate. This is a huge problem and it makes it difficult to maintain the kind of quality that one would ideally wish. People vastly underrate the importance of journalism. I think a really good journalist is on par with other professionals.

I feel there should be an attempt to explain that this is a high-status job and we should seek to attract high-quality people coming out of the education system. This is the message that you should be carrying to universities. Journalism is on par with being a doctor or lawyer, in my opinion.

Are there any lessons for the black community in England?

I think there are occasions on which it could be important. It is yet another example where we could work together to achieve an objective.

There are certain things that benefit the Caribbean. The banana industry has suffered seriously and it was noticeable to us there was no organised lobbying here.

Not that people weren't willing to do it, but there isn't any group that functions that way, which carries placards down the road ... and asks for an audience and puts some pressure on.

Our attitude is that nothing is sacred. You must be willing and able to raise every issue which is relevant but you must think carefully about it, you must talk sensibly about it and you mustn't bring bias or bigotry to it.

But you must not duck it because if you duck it, you are not doing your job.