When I was in QRC Chokolingo came to give us a lecture on newspaper business.
He lambasted the established media in those days which was TTT, about 3 radio stations and 3 other newspapers (really 2, evening news was guardian)
Anyhow when asked the question about the veracity of what the Mirror writes he replied that he provides information that sells.
When asked if his newspaper could be a comic strip he said that if that sells then call it a comic strip.
To quote "journalists" from the mirror is like going into an abbatoir and listening to butcher talk, I'm surprised Bakes !!!
The Mirror also printed the most intelligent and insightful commentary on Anand Ramlogan's reaction to the Facebook video posted by that 14-year old girl. I not endorsing them... doh read them enough to know what their standards are, but I have no issue with what I read so far.
In my opinion, this is a very good, well researched and balanced article!
The TnT Mirror is not that bad a newspaper after all if most of their articles are of this standard!!
http://www.tntmirror.com/2011/09/02/new-media-and-old-laws/New media and old lawsBy Maxie Cuffie - September 2nd 2011 11:59 PM
THE overblown rhetoric of Attorney General Anand Ramlogan over the YouTube video done by a 14-year-old girl demonstrates why it is important to ensure our rights are safely protected during this State of Emergency.
We have already stated that as concerned as we are about the crime affecting the society, the TnT Mirror does not intend to jump on the jingoistic bandwagon being propagated by the Government and intends to be extremely vigilant to ensure the rights of our citizens are not abused under the guise of fighting crime. If that causes us to run the risk of being seen as unpatriotic then so be it.
This brings us to the video posted by the 14-year-old girl. The AG, when he addressed the daily media briefing on the SoE, described it as a video which contained a threat to the Prime Minister’s life. In this he was aided by elements of the media who have continued to mischaracterise the nature of the video post and, in the case of the Express, also violated the rights of the child by posting her image on the front page of the newspaper.
Anyone who has seen the video, which is posted all over Facebook and YouTube, knows there is no such threat to the Prime Minister. The video is a crude dramatic performance by the bored teenager, who pretends to be a grandmother upset with the Prime Minister and the PP administration. It uses the old calypso trick of putting controversial views in the mouth of someone else.
What is disturbing about the video is not any presumed threat to the Prime Minister but the fact that it is laced with expletives and contains racial epithets that are generally considered abhorrent even by some of the people who use them. That they could be dispensed so liberally by an innocent-looking teen, even in a make-believe dramatic performance, must be of concern to first and foremost her parents. That she followed it up with a tearful apology is appropriate, but still deserving of whatever sanctions her parents would deem appropriate.
But how do we go from here to talk of Facebook police and laws dealing with incitement? There is no relationship between the local home-made video and those posted in the UK which attempted to incite riots and it is dangerous that under a state of emergency the Attorney General is attempting to use what is nothing more than a schoolgirl prank to introduce legislation to curtail freedom of expression and freedom of the press.
The new media tools available may expedite, amplify and democratise communications but this does not mean that they require special laws to constrain what is essentially freedom of expression. Free speech on the Internet should be as free as that in Woodford Square or in one’s bedroom depending on whether Facebook’s privacy settings are set to ‘public’ or ‘friends only’. And state of emergency or not, the AG has no right peering into anyone’s bedroom or chat-room.
It is also reprehensible that without any charges being laid against her and with the police commissioner struggling to say anything beyond the fact that the matter “is receiving the attention” of his officers, that the Attorney General should use a live television broadcast to tell the young girl to surrender herself to a police station. No warrant has been issued for her arrest and the AG was out of place to attempt to terrorise a child on national television. As despicable as her conduct was, it is important that we recognise that in a democracy, as the late Ronald Williams once said, we have several rights, foremost among them is the right to make an ass of oneself.
These rights are available to the AG as much as they are to misguided 14-year-olds.