Editorial | The case for media

Mia Mottley, the Barbadian prime minister, is right that the unchallenged peddling of false news could pose a threat Caribbean democracy.

However, this newspaper looks forward to a fuller explanation of her idea for some kind of regional truth validation mechanism to combat the problem. For there is a potential for overzealous bureaucrats, domestic or regional, to cause greater harm if empowered to assign seals of approval to their definition of truth. The next step could be the Big Brother of 1984, or some other Orwellian form of control of information flows, befitting the likes of Napoleon of Animal Farm fame.

The easiest, and likely most effective antidote to the dangers identified d by Ms Mottley is the creation of an environment conducive to the survival of a free and accountable press, like those that operate in the traditional media space, whose existence is under threat from forces that contribute little to the Caribbean’s economic development, but extract much from the region.

Speaking at this week’s annual summit of the Caribbean Community in Montego Bay, Ms Mottley referenced recent social media posts, apparently by unknown people, claiming that Barbados had banned the US president, Donald Trump, and that the Americans had placed a negative travel advisory on the island.

None of this, of course, was true. Yet, it is possible that gullible audiences, given Miss Mottley’s assertiveness on global developmental issues, may have presumed more than a kernel of truth on the false declarations. And given the slickness with which artificial intelligence (AI) technologies can generate such fakes, it could be hard for even discerning eyes to determine the contrivance.

“It is about time, therefore, that we come up with a CARICOM validation mechanism, in the absence of the providers of those platforms not taking action to validate truth any further,” she said. “If we fail to do so, we put serious at risk the stability of our democracy.”

ACCOUNTABILITY STANDARDS

Ms Mottley is not the first person of consequence to lament the retreat by social media platforms from imposing accountability standards against misinformation, falsehoods and outright lies or other content that can cause harm, if that is indeed what the Barbadian PM alluded to.

In the absence of participation by Big Tech companies it would be difficult for regional governments to maintain a stand-alone ‘blue tick’ truth validation system that Ms Mottley has in mind.

And again we warn of the potential dangers of any kind government-controlled truth and information validation system. Ask Snowball, another or the protagonists in the overthrow of Mr Jones of Animal Farm. Idealism, in the absence of a free flow of information, can morph into ruthlessness and self-serving terror. Which isn’t to suggest that Ms Mottley’s complaint isn’t legitimate or real. Indeed, Jamaica’s prime minister, Andrew Holness, once a strong proponents of “alternative outlets of information”, has echoed concerns similar to Ms Mottley’s.

But the existential threat to serious and structured, truth-telling journalistic enterprise in the Caribbean isn’t solely, or primarily, from the accountable citizen journalist, bloggers, vloggers or influencers peddling unverified information. The greater danger is the Big Tech companies that, for free, vacuum up content from regional and other media, which they, in turn, monetise at the expense of regional journalistic organisations.

BIG TECHS

For instance, the Big Techs, the likes of X, Meta (Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram), Alphabet (Google, YouTube) Caribbean government’s suggest, earn annually around US$11.6 billion from the region, where they have no offices, employ no workers and pay no taxers. When Google places an ad on the digital page of a Caribbean media organisation they retain upwards of 70 per cent of that revenue. From the little that the regional media earn they pay the reporters and editors who report the news as well as for the infrastructure that supports the journalism.

These media organisations have internal systems to minimise factual errors and to correct mistakes. They are accountable. And they pay taxes.

More critically, good, responsible media allow societies to hold conversations with themselves and provide information that helps citizens to hold those with power to account. Put differently, the existence of a free, independent, robust and accountable press is good for democracy.

The real challenge for Caribbean governments, beyond blue ticks, is to level the playfield to give such structured and responsible media a fighting chance of survival. Which would be good for the region’s democracy.