In a message dated 2/21/2001 8:41:07 AM Central Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

<< When it is time for campaign, like this up coming by-elections, all
candidates and political parties will be given equal airtime. We have already
met with the
 IEC on this and our internal guidelines would be publicised soon.  >>
************************************
Tombong,

It would seem from this above statement of yours that the IEC had to request
that other political parties be given equal coverage in the upcoming
elections? Am I correct in this? If I am, then it would appear that this was
not the norm before, otherwise, why would you have to meet with the IEC
concerning this? Surely any media outfit that is dedicated to fair reporting
and the practice of  giving fair coverage to all does not have to find
themselves in the position where the burden of proof that they are doing so
arises. This is called journalistic integrity and professionalism.

Regarding coverage of the President, yes, here in the U.S, the President is
given good coverage. However, there is also ample coverage of what other
political parties are saying and doing, as well as what the general public at
large is doing. In any society, there is an abundance of material in the
everyday goings on of the people, from culture to the opinion of the general
public in regard to what their President and the other political parties are
up to,  as well as the solicitation of public opinion in a wide range of
issues, and the bulk of coverage is not unfairly proportioned.

Turn on any TV station here in America, and you will have a full range of
what is going on in the society as well as what the President is doing, and
it is because they realize that the President would not be president if it
were not for the people, (oop!, but that is in a real democracy where the
president is elected freely and honestly with no threats to anyone's life or
well being if they say something he does not like)

Perhaps I am wrong, but I was of the impresion that it is the business of the
news media to find out what is going on and then cover it, as opposed to
political parties having to "notify you in advance, and you will do your best
to give them coverage". Here, the news media sniffs out the news, and I
believe that is what journalists do ordinarily if they do not find themselves
in a society where they are not free to report what is news because they do
not know where it may land them, even 6 feet deep maybe.

All other things being equal, all political parties should be given coverage,
and not just at election time either. By giving exposure to their views,
regarding what their agenda for the country is in all areas, whether in
rallies, one on one interviews, or even coverage on what programs they have
on the grassroots level, the general public is educated about their
prospective leaders, and are then  able to determine who is better able to
lead them based on what they know from this exposure.

However, if the powers that be are afraid that when all cards are laid on the
table they will not win, then this is where the bias comes in, and  all sorts
of funny explanations as to why the media is not serving those whose tax
money pays for it fairly becomes very much the issue.

Jabou Joh

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
You may also send subscription requests to [log in to unmask]
if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write your full name and e-mail address.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------