Alagi Yorro Jallow
Fatoumatta: The media are at the heart of democratic life in contexts such as ours, where disinformation, misinformation and propaganda, fake news, and intellectual terrorism of the minority over the majority and intellectual populism on social media over national issues of critical and sober voices not amplified by the press amid the building of a new Third republican constitution, the role of the media becomes more crucial despite the recurrent unprofessionalism and lack of ethical standards to the activity of journalists and other media practitioners. These are the works of the powers that adapt poorly to a free press and, therefore, need to be more relaxed in searching for and disclosing information of general interest. That said, it is not only governments that threaten the press, money powers, and citizens, mainly through social networks, compete with journalists to distort information, manipulate, defame, and disseminate fake news in the name of their interests. These dangers that assail the press everywhere cannot spare the Gambian media, caught in the crossfire and some of which have lost the fight against the new aggressors of the time. Under our skies, political politics are uninterested because they are stripped of the imperative to serve citizens. They also affect the press with false accusations, physical and economic threats, and verbal aggressions.
It must also be recognized that the crisis affects the Gambian press through the quality of the work provided, the precariousness suffered, and the fact that part of this press no longer cares about accurate and actual information but serves as a launching pad for politicians’ ambitions. Upholding ethical journalism practices is crucial for the press to maintain its credibility and trust with the public. This is essential for a healthy democracy, as it ensures that citizens are well-informed and can make informed decisions about their governance.
In this debate concerning the press, it is worth mentioning the tribune of the hundred or so Gambian journalists, media practitioners, and foreign guests living among us who say they are “standing up against and others for the 2024 Draft Constitution”. I know some protagonists and courteous journalists exercising their profession professionally. They have the right to have an opinion on the progress of our country and to share it with the general public, especially if the subject has been at the heart of all the controversies for the past two years.
As if a curse had struck our country and that the only debate worthy of being raised by journalists, intellectuals, politicians, and other activists was not about the poor quality of our schools, poor quality of health care delivery, lack of constant and consistent supply of electricity and clean water, culture, agriculture, tourism, but about a potential 2024 Draft Constitution being either better or worst than the 1997 constitution crafted by the military and later bastardized by despot Yahya Jammeh, a constitution without a term -limit but having a Draft constitution that has a clause of a term -limit that has been a social and political demand of the silent majority of the Gambian people. The politicians and journalists masquerading as human rights activists and constitutionalists have been engaging the press and social media platforms, intoxicating and spreading falsehood and misinformation, among others; the diplomat is concerned with everything except serving his country with dedication, reserve, and professionalism; the politician whose desire to sit on the Perchoir was met with failure. This whole nebula claims to be the victim of the misfortune of its fierce opposition to the homegrown constitution building the “Draft Constitution.”
How good the press has a back! So, I was saying that a journalist has the right to be concerned about national issues and our democracy and to want to be an orthodox guardian of it. The press is at the heart of a nation’s political convulsions; it is an essential part of the engine of democratic progress. Here in the Gambia, it has inevitably become the judge of the peace of democracy by sharing information with citizens, viewers, listeners, and now Internet users; the Gambia it is not in the country of Dickson Colley, Baboucarr Gaye, Deyda Hydara, Amadou Barry, and Malick Jeng and others of blessed memory that journalists are going to be blamed for being bitten by the virus of politics and intellectual terrorism and intellectual populism. The difference is that the latter were or are impeccable in their work, and they were or are still seasoned professionals concerned with accurate and factual information, ensuring balance in the treatment of information and especially its integrity. This is not the case for the signatories of the recent op-ed.
Among them are people who do not hide it and have put their media, reputation, honor, and personality at the service of a man’s political ascension for years. They are the sounding board of his anti-republican, violent, and seditious project with leaflets, accustomed to fake news, lies, and all excesses and in the service of the ideology of populism advocated by politicians and some religious populists.
However, in a democracy, a journalist can give his opinion. To call the hundred or so people corrupt and to be sold out does not seem to me to be an appropriate attitude. We should not quickly anathema people because we do not share their opinions. It is borrowing the shortcomings of populist politics, lying, smearing, and insulting citizens because of their views. It is to resort to the fascistic methods of a party that pushes intolerance to the point of attacking decent and great people on the grounds that they are militant or sympathizers of a different party. These populist, in their undertaking, have decided to discredit, or even dehumanize, anyone who would be opposed to its orientation. Let us leave them on this sinister path that only leads to a dead end. Being a Democrat requires you not to give in to the sirens of intolerance that lead to violence.
On the other hand, two sentences worry our Gambian journalists and challenge my conscience. The first relates to the request for the press not to “participate in amplifying the debate via its channels.” The second is more explicit: “So, how could we accept that journalists convey your elements of language through us to make the public accept your contradiction?” Isn’t it the journalist’s duty to give a voice to all sensitivities in the context of a democratic debate? In the name of what, would those who publish an opinion on a constitution-building process want to censor any contrary opinion because they own the airwaves and columns? In a democracy, it is open to any Gambian citizen to say that he or she is against any issues of democratic governance or even a Draft Constitution. Those considering the 2024 Draft Constitution nonsense or heresy can exercise this right. The role of the press, contrary to that which some mainstream media journalists give themselves, is to guarantee each idea’s audible nature and allow the expression of all sensitivities.
As early as 2020, these same journalists, intellectual terrorists, and intellectual populists gave the floor to some politicians and activists who, although majority members, expressed their opposition to the 2020 Draft Constitution before being rejected.
These same journalists handed the microphone to populist politicians and intellectual terrorists and populists, who had more respectable opinions than those encouraging a Draft Constitution. Are threatening and accusing the people of attempted assassination opinions to be amplified? Are these interviews and threats more respectable and diffusable than a point of view, whether or not argued, on a possible new constitution?
We have the tradition of a strong press, with highly trained journalists of quality and great virtue, who have contributed, alongside the unions and other social forces, to the tremendous democratic conquests. The press has weakened despite media liberalization and plurality. However, for our democracy to finally reach a final level of maturity, the press must make its aggiornamento and conform to democratic and republican standards that call for more responsibility and height, quality, and professionalism.
Fatoumatta: This strong press will play its role as judge of the elegance of Gambian democracy, which, like all others in open societies, is going through troubles. A divided press, trailing behind social networks, between clans and coteries, and where the cult of disorder and organized disinformation reigns, in addition to its economic fragility, inevitably contributes to the savage nature of society and the end of democracy.
