Freedom of the press, free speech have to be defined more clearly

Editor: Voters in St Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG) are represented by a small percentage of the island’s electorate. This electorate should be actively engaged or involved in the voting process to balk against unethical over- reach by some known public figures. To combat these problems, the whole island must become more politically literate, knowing the value of their vote, because you are the one that is hiring that public figure, although that is not the case with Mr De Freitas. {{more}}But talk radio has evolved as a potent outlet for information, so those behind the mike should be scrutinized. Some will try to skew public opinions against their political enemies. Also, lots of things happen before and after an election; for example, there are the fear mongers; the all givers – those who will offer free land and house, and those who want to fan the flames of contention.

So, is it critical to know the difference between a sheep and a wolf? I think yes.

I think over the years SVG has become politically divided and polarized and the problem will be more acute as political junkies use talk radio as part of their weaponry. An informed voter will know issues that are important to him or her, and will not fall victim to Influential figures on radio, TV and social media who are vehicles to disseminate partisan ideologies.

I am impartial in my judgment with the case against De Freitas because I do not know all the facts. However, the story shed light on a tool (radio) that if used incorrectly, it can cause irreparable damage to the integrity of our democracy. Furthermore, it is intellectual laziness if policy makers do not implement guidelines to discipline rule breakers. If there were guidelines on what a public figure can and cannot say, I don’t think this problem would have risen. We have to be also clear that shock jocks are protected by free speech, because SVG is a democratic country. That does not mean freedom from extremes should not be enforced. It only means the Government cannot punish him because of arbitrary or capricious charges. Also, Nice Radio might be a privately owned company, and if that is the case, unless he is inciting tyranny or national unrest that constitutes an egregious act, I don’t think much will come out of it.

I guess freedom of the press and free speech have to be defined more clearly by an arbitrator who is impartial from the political bickering. It is not hard to see how anger can spill over in the post election because of suspicious improprieties.

For a fair trial, all actors who are tainted with political stain should recuse themselves, for the interest of fairness. I would like to hear your comments.

K Coombs

villabuck@gmail.com