Patrick Manning has been dreaming again or maybe heading to the Twilight Zone.
|"Our country has done well, I am not saying that we're perfect because we're not perfect, but let us not be caught up in all the negativities to which some of us are prone, let us be able to look at the facts and recognise...that the country is doing well"|
You hear all this talk of Manning being a dictator but I don't really know. I think the actions regarding Valley, Rowley and Hinds make him look autocratic and controlling. But even though people don't like him, what alternative is there? Panday? Dookeran? Ramesh or Kamla (that's if Panday's case doesn't go his way)? I don't know what to make of these prospects!
What is Manning going to do with the new allocation money for entertainment that grew from $1.5 million in 2008 to $11.1 million in 2009? Seems like someone will be holding very expensive parties when the rest of the population struggles to buy a loaf of bread. What can I say, Trinis love it.
Manning enters a radio station to complain about how they are 'bad talking' his policies. What do you think, is he out of place? I came across this quote today that reminded me of this...
|QUOTE (Henry Steele Commager - (1902-1998) Historian and author)|
|Men in authority will always think that criticism of their policies is dangerous. They will always equate their policies with patriotism, and find criticism subversive|
When people in power do things, there is always some who would look at the negative. Now I do not listen to the radio because too many DJs (are they still called that?) talk nonsense and flap their opinion onto listeners out there. On many times I know they are not quoting fact but what they feel to say and what listeners may want to hear. So I am not surprised to hear that Manning had some complaints. As I said I don't know what was said but if it was a normal person, wouldn't he have to right to voice his opinion too? I have heard it before, these DJs say let Manning or Panday (or who ever they feel to ridicule) come to my face and tell me I'm wrong. Well it seems to me that Manning called his bluff and now there is uproar about freedom of the media and all that nonsense. Yes you have the right to say what is your opinion but you also have the responsibility to face the consequences. A lot of people forget that last part and when their facts or opinion is challenged they cry blood and say they are being wronged. I guess people out there will tell me that Manning was supposed to turn the other cheek and take the slap. Oh please give me a break people and grow up.
Edited: lordryoko on 13th Nov, 2008 - 6:10am
Lordryoko, you're failing to see the bigger picture. As a journalist myself, what Mr. Manning did was unacceptable. What was his real purpose on "visiting" that radio station to complain about what some DJ's said? Does he has the right to be upset and complain? Yes, he does. Was the right approach? No, it wasn't!
It its common knowledge that politicians around the world (including Prime Ministers and Presidents) have sometimes issues with the Media but they're resolved in a court of law and in close chambers. Can you imagine the uproar if the now elected President of the United States, Obama does something similar?
Mr. Manning's approach to this whole issue shows that he intended to intimidate and use his position as a Prime Minister to influence those in authority in that radio station. He knows better than that. If what these DJ's said was untrue and defamatory, then he could have chose the right channel...the one that all politicians use with the media: Sue them! But the fact he chose this approach sends a lot of warning signs about the freedom (not only of the Media) in Trinidad and Tobago.
So what we are saying then is that as a journalist you can say whatever you want about anyone and hide behind the freedom of speech clause in our constitution but as Prime Minister he is not allowed to defend his opinion because he should know better? As I said, yes you have rights but you also have the responsibility that goes with it. You said he should have sued them, yes that too is an option but that would have taken months to finalize and the issue would have been forgotten by then. We also talk of freedom of speech, last time I checked when you are reporting news, your opinion is not wanted, your facts are. If you want to criticize the government or Manning, do it on a talk show and flap your gums away, then people can decide if it just the ramblings of a radio dj or if it is indeed fact.
Edited: lordryoko on 14th Nov, 2008 - 2:28am
|QUOTE (lordryoko @ 13-Nov 08, 10:27 PM)|
|So what we are saying then is that as a journalist you can say whatever you want about anyone and hide behind the freedom of speech clause in our constitution but as Prime Minister he is not allowed to defend his opinion because he should know better?|
|You said he should have sued them, yes that too is an option but that would have taken months to finalize and the issue would have been forgotten by then.|
|We also talk of freedom of speech, last time I checked when you are reporting news, your opinion is not wanted, your facts are. If you want to criticize the government or Manning, do it on a talk show and flap your gums away, then people can decide if it just the ramblings of a radio dj or if it is indeed fact.|
We rest Patrick Manning to share learning from past years:
Today is: 24th April (GMT), in history on the 24th of April, 1929 AD the following event happened:
1st non-stop England to India flight takes-off