Peter Espeut | Needed: investigative journalism
The public’s appetite for reliable information is often not satisfied through traditional media. If all a newspaper or radio/TV station does is carry press releases, then they become the mouthpieces of public relations (PR) agencies paid to project their clients in the best possible light, often stretching the truth, or abandoning it entirely.
I suppose carrying press releases is unavoidable; not to carry them might be considered churlish; but the real value of the fourth estate is getting at the truth, tearing the veil of pretence and downright lies that – sadly – is the stock in trade of many PR agencies and image consultants.
What is the real state of the recovery effort after the devastation wreaked by Hurricane Melissa? If you listen to government PR, it couldn’t be better; but then at the same time the stories from those on the ground – of snail’s pace relief efforts, and corruption in procurement and distribution – contradicts this rosy picture. Who to believe?
This is where the fourth estate with its investigative journalism should step in. The truth – uncomfortable as it might be – is there to be discovered and reported. Maybe the government is doing a stellar job! And maybe not! The job of modern journalism is to separate fact from fiction.
We know that due to Melissa, businesses have closed, and livelihoods have been lost, but then we are told that unemployment is at an all-time low. How can these two incompatible bits of data be reconciled?
Either the metrics are flawed, or the definitions of terms need to be clarified. Academia has a role to play, but one of the functions of professional journalists is to analyse the data, and the claims of the interested parties, and to debunk falsity. The well-known classic How to lie with statistics by Darrell Huff (1954) should be standard reading for journalists.
What is the real state and condition of Jamaica’s health sector? It is in the interest of every government ministry to hire image professionals to market them as world-class highly efficient entities, delivering state-of-the-art services, whether in health or in education, or whatever. When media houses report horror stories told by real people who actually use government services, a different picture might emerge.
WHO TO BELIEVE?
And then the politicians deny the horror stories, and accuse those who report them as being either mistaken, liars, or “bad mind”. Who to believe?
The public looks to the professional journalists to investigate and report the truth. Are the hospitals really overcrowded? Is there really a shortage of beds and nurses and doctors and medical supplies? And if so, how critical is it? Are Jamaicans needlessly dying?
Is it true that the government is purchasing medical equipment and supplies from political cronies and/or connected parties at inflated prices, suggesting kickbacks? Such allegations – if they are made – should not be left hanging and uninvestigated. Internal investigations tend to exonerate all parties concerned. The press – broadly defined – can provide independent external assessments of the facts, so that the public can know the truth.
Of course politically aligned media houses are not independent.
Last year Jamaica had a general election, which was really a battle royal of the PR giants. The big guns came out, shooting reputation management messages (and reputation damaging messages about the other side). Both sides practiced crisis communication strategies, and the targets of these messages (the voting public) were battered from all sides with claims and counter-claims, all of dubious content.
In these situations, maybe it is those with the biggest advertising budgets that win elections. Despite campaign finance legislation (enacted by self-interested politicians), there really is no limit on spending.
And the truth gets lost in the claims and counter-claims, and the plethora of undeliverable promises makes the exercise surreal.
FUTURE DEPENDS ON IT
Elsewhere, the media provides the public with fact-checking services, which exposes lies and obfuscation on political platforms. It is time – I believe – for the media in Jamaica to step up and improve its game. I believe that its future depends upon it.
Media houses depend on advertising revenue to pay the bills; newspapers, for example, cannot survive on the paltry sums they charge for printed copies of their product, and free access to on-line content cannot cover their costs.
Traditional media cannot survive without private and public sector advertising (much of which is public relations), and therein lies the contraryness. If a media house carries stories which are critical of the government, they may find that their public sector advertising dries up. The same will be true if they expose the foibles and short-cuts taken by big business and private interests.
If, on the other hand, the media offerings constantly paint a rosy picture of government (or the private sector), few will wish to consume their cloying content, and advertisers may feel that their advertising dollars will not be well spent there. That is the conundrum.
I suppose there are some who access the media for entertainment and prurient stimulation, and are not interested in news and current affairs; and media houses – really rags – will emerge to meet their needs. But many in the public – maybe most – want to hear what is really going on – locally, nationally and internationally – and they will pay to get that information – from traditional media or elsewhere. And advertisers who wish to reach their markets will place their advertising dollars there.
Responsible media should not – uncritically – carry press releases, whether from the government propaganda agency, or the police, or Jamaicans for Justice, or INDECOM. Carry them, and then analyse them, stripping them of their PR intent and get down to the facts. The public will support you if you do, and if you don’t, well … you will get what you deserve.
Peter Espeut is a sociologist and development scientist. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.

