The independent media and its role in facilitating public debates

Dear Editor,
The independent media plays an important role in a functioning democracy like Guyana. In particular, its role is pivotal in holding the Government of the day to its constitutionally mandated duty towards accountability and transparency to the people. In this regard, I would venture to say that the media has been doing a far better job than the political Opposition combined, which is especially important when the Government of the day has to contend with a weak Opposition. For this, the independent media must be commended.
Equally, the Government must be commended because, in respecting the independent media’s role in a functioning democracy, it has subjected itself to the highest degree of public scrutiny from the media. This is evidenced by Vice President Dr Bharrat Jagdeo, often in his capacity as General Secretary of the PPP/C, holding a weekly press conference to address editorialised criticisms and a series of articles, letters and column promulgated by the independent media.
Further, at these press conferences, the Vice President entertains all sorts of questions, regardless of how repetitive they are, week after week; thereby subjecting himself, and by extension Government, to intense public scrutiny.
Independent media houses have a corresponding obligation to operate in a manner that conforms to the highest ethical standards. This, however, appears to be lacking on the part of a few media houses. For example, it would appear that SN is collaborating with the likes of Mr Lalbachan Chris Ram and Elson Low, an intern turned economic adviser to the Leader of the Opposition.
This media house has published two of my essays, in which I challenged both individuals. Both individuals have responded, and their responses have been published. However, when I put forward my rebuttals to both of them (Ram and Low) – rebuttals that were largely technical and grounded in empiricism to the extent that it was almost impossible for them to credibly counteract or debunk – SN did not publish those rebuttals of mine. Observably, SN did this on several other occasions in the past, when debates between the undersigned and the said individuals were involved.
Notably, Elson Low is on record in a Globespan WhatsApp forum stating that he will respond to the undersigned only if Stabroek News publishes my rebuttal. Unfortunately, it was never published by SN, hence Elson Low was saved from the embarrassment, and more so from unashamedly defending his own arguments and proposals.
So, here’s the million-dollar question: Is it reasonable to assume that SN may be consulting with the likes of Mr. Lalbachan Ram, a once prominent but now discredited controversial public commentator; and Mr. Low, paid by taxpayers to be an adviser to an important constitutional office-holder, before SN decides to publish rebuttals by the undersigned?
If they are unable to cogently defend their arguments, would SN protect these two individuals from embarrassment by not publishing rebuttals of the undersigned?
I am eager to say that this seemingly unethical practice by an independent media house – whereby they facilitate a debate, but then, depending on how the debate unfolds, it becomes a one-sided debate – can be transparently characterized as propagandization.
I, the undersigned, therefore wish to remind the independent media and the named individuals (Lalbachan Ram and Elson Low) that in the respective capacities they hold, from which they publicly write, speak, pontificate and criticize public policy, they are not only obligated, but duty bound to defend their positions and proposals robustly and plausibly.
In other words, in the same way that they enjoy criticizing – while making a living out of doing so at the expense of taxpayers, under the pretext of holding the Government to public scrutiny – they are subject to penetrating public scrutiny.
I wish to add that anyone with any degree of credibility, professionalism, and competence of substance, who is performing the role of these two individuals, will never cede any opportunity to hold themselves to public scrutiny of the highest order.

Yours respectfully,
Joel Bhagwandin