the royal gazette has never been about repping the interests of the avg. bdan - it is a money making venture with the added bonus of being the media arm for a very anti plp/anti labour pov. there is a reason that the staff is made up of white brits as opposed to a melange of writers from the US and the caribbean - a group who would have a better understanding of the nuances of bda.
THe ROYAL gazette is one of the the last bastions of colonial rule - the name and insignia of the paper says it all. the last gasping dregs of a bygone colonial era tries to live on in articles that talk as if it's still the 1950s.
Free speech is commendable. However in the case of the gazette in Bermuda it is the newspaper who has been the obstacle to free speech. by speaking to everyday people one can see that the gazette has never adhered to any concept of journalistic integrity. it's also being quite hypocritical recently in it's "all of a sudden" interest in the support of caribbean newspapers (in regards to PATI) considering that the gazette has always and purposely avoided even the idea of bermuda being considered a part of the caribbean not to mention that it rarely if ever covers caribbean news unless it's negative.
and in re; to govt. axing of it's ads - the rg itself admitted that it did not even attempt to be competitive in bidding for the govt. contract- that's just bad business - and the rg is in the business of making money - it's not a public trust - why should taxpayer money go to a company that takes it's revenue streams for granted - is it fair that any company take govt. contracts for granted - that smacks of nepotism - in this day and age where newspapers, record companies and tv broadcasters are no longer the key way in which the world recieves info and entertainment it is imperative that these companies do more instead of less - i think that the premier's response said it all - i live in canada, and i don't believe that any of the daily newspapers take any revenue stream for granted - the rg did and it paid for it - sounds like business to me.
and there is a reason why there has been no major public outcry over this action - that speaks volume about the situation - after all it is the public's money - and if they felt strongly about this they would be up in arms and showing support for the paper - nothing doing - so if the people of the country whose interest the rg is supposedly representing see nothing wrong with this govt, action - and it's the people's money that we're talking about - isn't that democracy?
gazette editor Bill Zuill is the latest in a long line of anti labour/ anti plp editors (in the 1940s editor ss toddings refused to refer to labour leader dr. gordon as DR - much the way that zuill is refusing to reveal that dr. brown's son is a medical DR in their biased coverage of the playboy fundraiser)
zuill is also being disingenuous at best when he suggests that the the people of bermuda and it's govt. are somehow playing payback because of his papers push for transparency (something I might add that he never pushed for during the white govt. reign)
- the truth is that the gazette is behaving no different than the atlanta dailies did during MLK jr.'s time - back then those papers where often used to suppress rather than enlighten - they only reported on MLK's shortcoming while refusing to write about his positives like his receiving the nobel prize - as I said the Rg has historically been the voice of the minority racist elite and it still is - unfortunately it has now used something as noble as sunshine week to continue it's vendetta.
finally - if in the early years of the mandela and the ANC rule in south africa, that govt. ceased to give ad contracts to a paper that was created during apartheid soley to rep the interests of the small white minority - could u blame mandela and the anc?
Friday, May 30, 2008
Posted by bermuda:str8nochaser at 9:08 AM