The Tribune, the Nassau Guardian and the Freeport News have announced a partnership for sales, purchases and printing production. It’s called a Joint Operations Agreement (JOA). The Tribune and the Nassau Guardian have promised to remain independent of each other where their editorial policies are concerned.
This has caused a heated tirade from some of the leaders of the PLP. One of whom actually called for a boycott of the papers. It’s as if this was a travesty for free speech in the country.
Of course even if the papers were to amalgamate their editorial teams, there are two other privately owned newspapers (The Punch and the Bahama Journal) that remain outside this JOA, so there is no need to fear.
However, we must take the newspapers at their word for now.
I’m reminded of how the PLP fervently promised to review the banking laws and labour bills that the FNM put in place, and how the FNM emphatically promised to downgrade the Bahamas Embassy in Cuba. Of course they both found reasons to change their minds once elected to office.
As Frank R. Kent, correspondent for the Baltimore Sun said in 1932:
“In politics it is difficult sometimes to decide whether the politicians are humorless hypocrites or hypocritical humorists; whether fooling the people they also fool themselves, which means that both the politicians and the people are stupid, or whether the politicians are smarter than the people and know exactly what they are doing. Probably the truth is the politicians are smarter, but not much smarter, and that both are without any humor whatever.”
Your not so humble blogger would dare say that at any given point politicians can be “humorless hypocrites” and/or “hypocritical humorists” depending on the circumstances.
Before the recent general election the PLP were threatening The Tribune for its editorial stance. Now they are threatening The Tribune, the Nassau Guardian and the Freeport News because of some conspiracy theory that they might collaborate on their editorial stance even though they say they won’t.
This go round the PLP appear to be “humorless hypocrites” measuring the newspapers by their standards of transparency or rather their lack thereof.
Politics aside, I believe that the amalgamation has far-reaching implications for journalism in the nation. No paper is independent of its financiers, and if the same people are behind the major dailies — which have thrived for years on a policy of one-upmanship (we used to joke that if you want to get something out to the press, just tell the Tribune that the Guardian had refused to run it, or vice versa) — then something is bound to change. Mouth could say anything. It’s what the two of them do that counts.
Thanks Nicolette:
We will have to take them at their word for now, but it is hypocritical of the PLP to talk about this when they approved a similar arrangement with the Burns House, Butler and Sands deal.
But of course we should forget that right?
And I’m not suggesting that liquor and newspapers are one in the same, just the principle of granting monopolies.
Then we should be talking about the real issue, not about politics. I’m not sure what good comes from politicizing the issue, Rick. Both parties were wrong. Full stop.
Quite frankly, as a citizen, I stopped listening to what politicians have to say after Easter. I voted on policy (which, I assure you, was a very difficult task indeed) because I don’t believe a word that comes out of the mouths of most things called politician. As far as the country is concerned, however, I see no victory here, and it troubles me that the politicizing of this issue, like others, has already had the effect of blunting the debate.
Constant references to what the other guys do/did detract from true freedom of speech, quite frankly, because the only discussions that the two sets of guys are having are oppositional: The spin is different but the situation has not changed one whit.
What do we the people think for ourselves?
With regard to your two examples, I think that emphasis has to be placed on two issues: on freedom of a market, and on freedom of speech. You and I differ on economic principles. Surely, though, we must share the same ideas about freedom of speech? The monopoly on the spread of information to the public (and let’s be honest — between them the Tribune and the Guardian dominate the daily market) should be cause for major concern for any thinking Bahamian, no matter how they cast their vote, especially when you consider that the Miami Herald is also included in the mix.
As a teacher of critical thinking, I already know how hard it is to get Bahamians to imagine that there is a truth that may exist beyond stuff that’s printed in the papers (and for them what appears in the Punch is often gospel). Although there was never a real debate in the newspapers on any major issue, at least not in the last twenty years or so, when the two main ones were separate there was always the possibility of such a thing happening. The hope of such a debate occurring has now faded from my mind.
Monopolies of any stripe are bad for business. A monopoly on information, though, is bad for freedom. Let’s keep the focus on the real issue here, and prepare for a future filled with even more spin.
Thanks Nicolette:
I think we do agree on freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
Let’s imagine the worse case scenario and the Guardian folds. We have more ways to express ourselves today than ever before – five radio stations (or more), five newspapers, blogs, web sites etc.
Frankly I am not concerned.
For some good critical thinking please refer our students to http://www.nassauinstitute.org 🙂
One thing for sure, if we continue to encourage freedom of the press instead of locking it down as politicians propose from time to time and allow the economy to be free, if the Guardian goes the way of The Tribune, another paper will emerge.
That we rely on newspapers and media to inform ourselves is worrysome to me period.
After all, if we do not read, as a people and study, question and opine for ourselves, we are subject to all sorts of influence and indoctrination.
Not that fact is presented or easy to find where government activities are concerned.
We read but have not the foundation of critical thinking to employ in the understanding.
Insofar as I see it, the multitudes of media outlets make it more difficult to discern the tree of truth, as the forest is very noisy indeed.
The Guardian will go the way of the Tribune in regards to reportage, and it will be trash reporting until it dies a slow and costly death.
The Tribune was a distant second in the readership race with the Guardian; I wonder how it can be, that Alexiou could not keep a sure slam dunk in operation? In fact, the paper boys used to run out of the Tribune, not because they sold out eqaul to what they bought of the Guardian, but because it was worthless to buy it over the Guardian in some areas; some news paper agents, did not buy it at all, as it just did not sell. With this, in the less dense areas, hehehehehe, you could have given the Tribune away as no one bought it.
Something is rotten in Denmark, and in this case, rotten in the Bahamas; if Alexiou wanted to get out, he should have held it up to a public bid. I am sure someone would have wanted to buy it.
The merger will probably flop, because I feel the Tribune has just added new cost to their firm, to produce the same reporting that no one is interested in en-masse from them. The Tribune has always been second class to the Guardian, and, will probably throw the guardians readers over to the Journal and add more cost to their operation in the meantime. With this, they have said that they want to turn the Guardian into a tabloid type, ala Punch. No one, in this market, can out-do the punch at what it does, and even THEY only sell their garbage on certain days; too much filth can be unbearable at times. So, it is true that the Guardian will just simply die, as Carron, is not about to let the Tribune go under…..THAT my friends, is the sad part.
I think this is just a time where the Carron’s, just got a bit overzealous in their attempt to “tell the news like they see it”…..LOL…trying to force THEIR agenda, down the throats of the Bahamian people. If you deny that Carron and the Tribune, has an agenda of their own outside of the news reporting, you are a liar for saying it, or, just too dumb to know the difference.
The Journal however, the truly only fair and balanced newspaper in the business today (thank God for small favours), will get by the end of next year, at least 10k new readers and the Bahamian people, will buy only one of either Tribune or Guardian and stick with the punch for the filth; especially if they try to run the Guardian as a tabloid/news every day. If they do this, then buying the Tribune and Guardian is worthless as the Tribune is a borderline tabloid in any event.
Bill.
So let me see if I get this right “Bill”.
The Tribune bought the Nassau Guardian so they can put it out of business so they can take the market over?
Wow, what a grand conspiracy theory.
Are you sure you’re not a politician? That’s how some of them think around here.
I’m sure The Tribune would not waste money in that manner.
Good to see that you agree with me that if the Guardian folds another paper will emerge.
Isn’t the free market great!
You work to get a monopoly, or, a sizeable share of the market Rick. That is not conspiracy, that is basic business strategy.
If by hook or by crook, you put to bed the rest, then, good for you.
Working to get more market share is different than a deliberate attempt to get rid of your competition.
Most businesses that I know of around here that wanted it all are no longer around.
The fun in business for me is trying to grow market share in a competitive environment.
We all need the competition to keep us sharp for our customers.
In my not so humble opinion of course.
I think “Bill” & Fred should move to Cuba !!!!!