Dear Editor,
The two senior resignations at the BBC have rocked the British Establishment. What could be more about Britannica than the British Broadcasting Corporation, with those well-enunciated cadences hinting of a stint at Oxbridge? Now, director general Tim Davies, and CEO Deborah Turness have tendered their resignations. The charge is institutional bias.
What is that? My definition goes beyond banana and nut editorial prerogative. It is of a consistent tendency to block opposing views, of welcoming content that hews to a favoured line, of tailoring content to suit scurrilous objectives, and of manifesting a distinctive bias, with inbred prejudices, against citizens and ideas found offensive. There are others that easily fall within the definition of institutional bias, but the point is made in spades. A man and a woman at the BBC resigned as a matter of principle. There was some pressure, too; for mistakes were made, and the kind of quick corrective action that had to follow as a matter of hard decisions made, didn’t happen.
I take what happened at the BBC, the lapses, the outcries, the circling of the wagons and, last, the resignations, and think of Guyana, this land of many riches, yet so impoverished in official and individual values. In certain circumstances, resignations when done right and timely can be a badge of honour, instead of a brand that shames. When was the last time someone resigned here, and because it was the best thing to do, circumstances considered? When was the last time that anyone admitted to a conflict of interest here, even when the contents of the situation were not borderline, but blatant? Definitely what more than insinuates that it is better to go than to stay? Two things can be said about Guyana and Guyanese when they are faced with more than the questionable.
First, there is the same dictionary in place that is used by everyone. But all of the key words in that tome are interpreted differently by different people in different contexts; especially by those who want to stay, but know that they have a shadow that blots their existence. Corruption allegations represent one such environmental condition. From where is the evidence to the man is my friend, but I don’t know him, even as business was done with him. Now that there is an inundation of circumstances that cannot be denied, the new talk is of reform, and what should right the ship. The experience of those who take these issues seriously, and rightly so, is the difficulty in extracting substance from the superficial. Words are dirt cheap in today’s political, organizational, and leadership Guyana and, thus, the standard is fixed. There is a sale everyday of verbal goods that collapse under their own weight, and without so much as a whiff of a breeze to topple them.
If the standard (resignation on one’s own volition) of the BBC was followed here, a couple of crises would follow. The governing cabinet would be severely decimated. Next, the State media would be reduced to bankruptcy of quality personnel (something that it struggles with anyway). Then, the leadership cohort would be stripped to the bone, and forced to start over. Not with some quick, slick redux. Not with what or who is a close imitation of what failed before. But with something (a rule, a procedure, a practice) or someone who impresses, because he or she, or whatever is introduced, is distinctive in what had to be replaced.
Oftentimes, when I survey the landscape of what Guyana has as its human assets, to the largest extent, I see not a country with a culture that is so impressive that it inspires; or what commands both discipline and disciples. I see a ghetto with a leading gang and secondary ones. No amount of CXC and CAPE subjects can reduce such a state. Or letters that follow one’s name. There has to be that Inner Light that is in all, and the priority of its cultivation, which is a watchword of all. Not lies. Not subterfuges. Not obfuscations and the disingenuousness of the conmen that reign supreme here. Here men and women hang on, despite a mountain of what is odious haloing their heads. They hang on as if their lives depended on it. In most cases, it is so. Rather than resign gracefully, they stick around stubbornly to continue with more lack of scruples, if that was possible.