Express - September 17, 2000
By Raffique Shah
If patriotic people in this country do not awaken to the dire threats to our freedoms that have been exposed over the past week, then I fear for the future of our democracy. Never before have we faced such subversion of our rights and freedoms as we do today, not even during the worst days worst days of PNM abuse of power. I refer, firstly, to the decision by the board of directors at Power 102 radio station to ban all political advertising until after the general election, and secondly, the even more outrageous infringement of cable television viewers' rights by Intercomm Holdings, when that company decided to deny its customers access to CCN TV6's live coverage of the Olympic Games.
At first blush, the actions of both companies may seem to be insignificant. One may argue that if the owners of Power 102 want to forego more than $1 million in election advertising revenue from parties contesting the election, then that's their private affair. After all, it's their losses, not ours. And in the case of Intercomm, the sole cable television provider in the country, many might argue, "So what? The Olympics are just one sporting event, and in any event viewers could look at the delayed telecast at nights!"
On both counts, though, one needs to understand the devious machinations that were orchestrated in high political circles to ensure that the voice of one political party is silenced (at least on the airwaves), and in the case of CCN, that the company be made to pay for perceived sins against the Government. Behind it all, for those who have eyes to see, there is fast emerging a kind of fascism that reminds me so much of what transpired in Germany well before Adolf Hitler plunged that country-and the world-into the bloodiest conflagration of the 20th Century.
What is more worrisome is the common thread that runs between the two: the majority shareholders at Power 102 are members of the Gillette family, and in the case of Intercomm, they happen to be the minority shareholders. Lindsay Gillette was plucked from the PNM fold a few months ago and was elevated to a UNC ministerial position. In fact, so intent was Prime Minister Basdeo Panday on winning over Gillette, the PM dumped his friend of many years, John Humphrey, to have the former act as PM when he was out of the country.
Gillette is learning the hard way that such political frills do not come without a heavy price tag. It must have hurt him to have to forego $1 million-plus, but he will have been under such enormous pressures from above to rein in 102 and its seemingly pro-PNM programming, he could do nothing but persuade his brother, Peter, as well as shareholder Peter Pena, to bend to the wishes of the Bas. For some time now I have been hearing about the proposed clamping down on Power 102. About six weeks ago, I learned that one UNC financier had told certain announcers there that major changes in the station's programming format were underway. And more recently, a minister in the Government expressed similar sentiments.
I need add that I do not agree with much of what I hear on Power 102, that I find amateurism is rampant among its announcers, some of its talk shows' hosts woefully uninformed on the subjects they are discussing, and one of them particularly obnoxious. It is true, too, that most callers to the station's various shows tend to be anti-government, and some of them are openly pro-PNM. It is also true that the station's manager, Louis Lee Sing, is a known PNM supporter. But when I find the station's fare to be drivel, I simply switch off my set or change stations.
By similar token, I sometimes listen to Radio 103 during call-in programmes, and there the callers are almost 100 per cent pro-UNC, and invariably very hostile to the PNM and its supporters. So should that station also adopt the advertising stance taken by Power 102? Worse, how many people brand the station "ah UNC mouthpiece"? What uninformed and partisan people fail to understand is that except when callers become abusive or say things that could land the stations in trouble, the hosts correctly cut them off. And one cannot blame the stations for people's personal views.
So while we may not agree with much of what hosts, guests or callers may say on radio (or television) stations, once they do not commit or border on slander or libel, they must enjoy the freedom of expression that is guaranteed under our Constitution. And that right we must all defend, because once we allow any abrogation of the same, we expose ourselves to being trampled upon by people who may harbour dictatorial tendencies.
Mercifully for me, I do not have cable television, and, left to me, I'll never subscribe to it (though my children may want to so do). I've always said that outside of news, sports and a few good documentaries, reading good books is far more valuable and entertaining than watching the dumb tube! That notwithstanding, surely it must be a breach of cable subscribers' rights to be denied access to a local station that Intercomm Holdings committed itself to making available to its customers when they signed up for cable. Worse, this high-handed action has been imposed on local viewers by someone who is not a citizen of this country, and by a company that is owned in the main by Americans.
In any other country where nationhood is valued, the foreigner will have been kicked out post haste, and the riot act read to the company. But here we find a government that must be in its glee over the sanctions imposed on CCN by Intercomm, only because of the row between CCN's chairman Ken Gordon and the Prime Minister. And what's the motive behind all these seemingly harmless machinations? To attempt to stop the PNM from regaining power, to allow only the voice of the UNC to be promoted via the state-owned NBN and other sympathetic sections of the electronic media.
Last Thursday night, speaking at a PNM meeting in San Fernando and touching on the subject of the Power 102 advertising ban, Patrick Manning said: "We shall show them that we will win this election, Power 102 or no Power 102!" Panday should throw his mind back to 1975/76 when, under directives from the PNM Government, the boards of the state-owned Radio 610 and TTT had banned the voices and images of the three ULF leaders-Panday, George Weekes and myself. That was a grave injustice, but it did not stop us from winning 10 constituencies.
Muzzling Power 102 will in no way affect the PNM at the polls. And rather than help the UNC, it will hurt the party in the eyes of those who see it as waging war against the free press, not to add the freedom of expression. As for Intercomm Holdings' outrageous violation of its subscribers' rights, I hope some of the affected persons have the guts to challenge the cable company in court. It is imperative that all patriots join this battle to save our democracy before we lose our basic rights.
Previous Page
Copyright © Raffique Shah
