COMMENTARY: Do not discourage the messengers

Politics is intimately connected to dispute, debate and some notion of self-government. In essence we can conclude that deliberation, rather than simply voting, provides the key aspect of democratic decision-making.

As an example, the many talk shows on our radio stations are welcomed fora for the public to ventilate and punctuate point of views. However, we would like to see an improvement in the reasoning, tolerance and civility currently exhibited on these shows. In so-doing, we should never crucify a messenger because we disagree with his/her point of view.

For if we pick only to expose ourselves to opinions and viewpoints that are in line with our own, research suggests that we will become more divided and set in our ways. But if we choose to actively seek out information that tests our assumptions and our beliefs, maybe we can appreciate where the people who disagree with us are coming from. There is also the need to go beyond what we hear but to listen, research and to look at both sides of a story before we come to a conclusion. In addition to that, we must be aware that there is a cost for failure to instigate and sustain quality press conferences, discussions and debates.

The submission is that when we fail to demand answers from our leaders for reasonable questions or to accept senseless answers to critical questions; when we choose to turn a blind eye to light or fail to accept education about critical issues of the day; when we choose to be silent or to stifle our voices and opinions; then we know that real democracy is unhealthy. When we allow our own understanding and knowledge to be deactivated thus allowing politicians, interest groups or leaders to judge and reason for us, then we are in trouble! The consequences of this include deception and abuse of power to name a few. Therefore we should appreciate the effort of those who expose the wrongs and substantiate the rights, understanding that this results in divergent views.

As a matter of fact, people with varying perspectives, experiences and ideas are time after time found to be more effective at solving problems and creating visions than groups with homogeneous opinions. We should also realise that incessant discourse in the intellectual space facilitates discoveries of corruption, dishonesty and deception which are most abundant in murky governance.    Therefore, as a nation we must encourage public discourse, thereby demanding more answers and encourage public fora.  We could embolden Lion Club among others to foster more debating and reading clubs in schools aimed at creating a new environment of civilized public discourse.

As an example, if we consider the constant accusations about our leadership, an objective person would be happy to get to the bottom of what is relevant and meaningful as in- keeping with law, commonsense and national development. But with the nonchalant and sometimes arrogant reactions from our captain as per questions to certain national issues, some of us are tempted to conclude that this is an insult to the crew of intelligence and objective thinking.

We have a duty to be circumspect in our social engineering, because our acceptance of shallow reasoning and conclusions may hurt us somewhere in our history. As a nation we must avoid an image that we do not value truth and the process of seeking truth. We should show that we accept responsibility to articulate a position as close to the truth as one can make it, using to the best of one’s ability, available evidence and the rules of reason, logic and relevance. We should listen openly, recognizing always that new information may alter one’s position. We should do our utmost best to promote discourse in civility, even in our most passionate disagreements.

The machination of this process-debates and discussions- necessitates the continued existence of a free press; i.e., news services and broadcasters that are free to constructively criticize or encourage the government of the day, drawing attention to its achievements as well as its misdemeanours. A truly free press would therefore keep the populace adequately informed to participate in meaningful discussions.

Accordingly, let us hope that we move from appearances, slogans and image and seek and thirst for substance and content. We should show that we appreciate empirical data, statistics and truth, and to call a spade a spade. For the improvement in our educational attainment should not only be reflected in our certificates on our walls, but a manifestation of reasoning, knowledge and vision.

It is true that we do not have the material wealth as a nation, but we can pride ourselves on reason, logic, truth and dignity- qualities which we can develop without formal education. Therefore the next time you hear the messengers, remember they have an important place in our society!

J.F.

Copyright 2012 Dominica News Online, DURAVISION INC. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed.

Disclaimer: The comments posted do not necessarily reflect the views of DominicaNewsOnline.com and its parent company or any individual staff member. All comments are posted subject to approval by DominicaNewsOnline.com. We never censor based on political or ideological points of view, but we do try to maintain a sensible balance between free speech and responsible moderating.

We will delete comments that:

  • contain any material which violates or infringes the rights of any person, are defamatory or harassing or are purely ad hominem attacks
  • a reasonable person would consider abusive or profane
  • contain material which violates or encourages others to violate any applicable law
  • promote prejudice or prejudicial hatred of any kind
  • refer to people arrested or charged with a crime as though they had been found guilty
  • contain links to "chain letters", pornographic or obscene movies or graphic images
  • are off-topic and/or excessively long

See our full comment/user policy/agreement.

12 Comments

  1. Gary
    November 12, 2010

    @Truth, Justice, Love, Peace and Unity:

    Everyone has a right to voice their opinion, be it hateful, truthful, what ever, but they should be able to
    accept criticism, and ridicule. I will say there is nothing extraordinary in this article, as you proposed, it is long, and repetitive.

    It is time that we get back to the basic inquisitive types of questions such as Who, What , When .Where, how and why when we receiving information, sadly to say some of these things are not being used. The statement that “messengers should not be discourage” is very ludicrous, sure we all love to boast of having freedom of speech and how we should respect other people views, but we should remember the same freedom of speech should come with some kind of responsibility, and so called messengers should be aware that they should and can be dealt with when they show irresponsibility, It is not about discouraging the messenger, it is about challenging the messengers to make sure their facts are correct and truthful and that what ever messages they convey using the various mediums they can and should held responsible for accuracy and truth. The last sentence of the commentary shows how naive you J.F is, thinking and
    believing all messengers should be trusted and believed.

  2. Reasoning
    November 12, 2010

    @ Anit-hate,

    I got your point, but your could have conducted your critique a little more reponsible and therefore Truth, Justice, Love, Peace and Unity, would have appreciated it for what its worth. We’ve seen a lot of articles and discussions on DNO that included and includes the average person and those who a beyond the average person in construction of perception, shows tolerance and understanding of our diversity in the population.

    We appreciate construction and meaning and if someone has no clue in the meanings of this article and is interested in clarity am sure someone will shed some light where necessary. Lets use this medium for waht it is; diversity in our reasoning.

  3. Truth, Justice, Love, Peace and Unity
    November 11, 2010

    @Anti-hate:

    You say you are Anti-hate. Really? :) I am amazed that your comments were retained on DON. They are really fair and just, giving you the opportunity to voice and vent your opinion and your frustration.
    This is an excellent article which reminds Dominicans how to act/conduct themselves before, during and after the election. In other words, act civilly. Eyes are on you and through the Media. :-)
    It is an On Line Website. Do you expect some silly writing and comment which will do nobody any good? This is excellent vocabulary written by an educated person. It is too bad you had difficulty reading it. If you wish to progress, you could try taking a course, higher education and to learn the vocabulary and cease being negative.

  4. MANCHAT!!!!
    November 11, 2010

    Brilliant Article….Substantial in essence and content,and very timely in it’s delivery.
    It seems to address the very core of one of the main problems affecting Dominicans today.
    It’s a matter of perspective……..Quite stimulating to ones consciousness…….
    Best Article(commentary) ever on D.N.O.,…….. by far!!!!!!!….A must read for all………….
    Thank you J.F.,you are a genius.
    All the best to you…………

  5. Anti-hate
    November 11, 2010

    @The Medium: U and this JF dude y’all would do well to STFU!! Yeah I said it!

    This ain’t some phd dissertation its freakin DNO where people drop in to find out what’s going on in d/a and go back to their hustle.

    Y’all educated yes but have no clue what is communication. The transference of shared meaning. Notice only 7 comments? Tell ur buddy this ain’t the place to try to impress peeps wit ur vocabulary, write so the average reader can understand. Freakin clowns..

  6. The Medium
    November 11, 2010

    I was wondering when Dominican intellectuals were going to reclaim this medium, and now someone has, I am forthwith pleased to inject that this article is a perfect diagnosis of reason embroidered within the confines of a post-modernist context and the overcoming of its ambiguities and limits through sociogeny- i.e. the instrumental fibre that combines theory with ethics and politics; thus providing the foundation for the conception of the intellectual as a radical humanist.

  7. Anonymous
    November 11, 2010

    Very good article J.F.

    Here is my concern: when the messenger has called “a spade a spade” and made everyone believe that he has evidence that a “spade is a spade” then turns around and “come to a amicable resolution of the matter” how can I believe anything that messenger has to say and all the other messengers like him.

    Case and point: how can the country believe Messenger Matt ever again after his Padlock to Lips Resolution with the Prime Minister. How can Messenger Lennox say anything credible enough to gain the nation’s trust after the Matt fiasco?

    What we are afraid of right now is not so much the message or even the messenger but can we believe the message/is the message/story true and can the messenger be bought for money, power or gain!

  8. Truth, Justice, Love, Peace and Unity
    November 11, 2010

    Well stated. I could not have stated this better. I do hope every one pays heed and learns from it, whatever we say and do. Dominica, a nation of pride, dignity and maturity.

  9. lol
    November 11, 2010

    Whilst many messengers may have messages that are worthy of true reflection, they have in one way or the other dragged themselves into the wrestling ring of political battle.

    This does not only bring the reader to question motive but the message in itself. Hence the rush of unappreciative, ‘blind’, ‘ignorant’ comments thrown at the message.

    By simply failing to maintain balance, and seemingly tending to sway to one side much more than the other, a degree of credence is automatically lost, simply because of what in the minds of a significant portion, red, green, yellow or blue, will inevitably be considered as biased.

    How does the messenger therefore, ensure and shield the credibility, sincerity and value of his message? Even if illegally obtained or manipulated by legal jargon and technicalities?

    There are key figures who automatically assume the role of messengers. Not because of who they are but because of the positions they hold. One is the Head of State. But even his credibility has, in the minds of many, eroded.

    With regard to messengers… in Dominica… it is tough. But… I leave it up to the people who ultimately exercise the power of sending out a true, unquestionable message… in many ways.

    When the time comes.

  10. Shallo
    November 11, 2010

    Satan brought a proper message of good to Eve and look what happen to the human race; sin entered the world and took front stage. A man should be judge by the words he speaks and to worth his salt he should stand by it. Some messengers are high kings of lies, half truths and untruths. Others are false prophets of only doom and gloom. I would be nuts to listen to them. On the other hand I would listen to a messenger of peace and good will, or one who is true and honest as the words he speaks.
    Action speaks louder than words and if we check out all the kings of messengers in Dominica we will find out that the only action they possess is their big mouth. Actually they have done absolutely nothing worth mentioning to help improve the living condition of their brothers, sisters, communities, nation, etc., except open their big mouth with messages of doom and gloom.

  11. Anti-hate
    November 11, 2010

    So what about when the messenger has a personal axe to grind and masks their true objectives and motivations under the guise of patriotism/nationalism?

    As far as I’m concerned if the messenger has credibility issues that makes him fair game.

    Credibility issues include: -undeclared political allegiances.
    -the propensity to use quotes out of context and twist words
    -skeletons in their closets
    -use of illegal and unscrupulous methods to gather information

  12. Messenger
    November 11, 2010

    Let us be objective in every way. The messenger is as important to the effective delivery of the message – no matter how good he has packaged the message. Every messenger has his subjective opinion. it doesnot matter how well Tony or Lenox or pere Lapin package their message, each of them have their subjective view of the issue they represent.

    In Dominica we have many messengers – particularly on the talk-shows. They talk doom and gloom, lamentations after lamentations. All they see for Dominica is disaster and bad news. No matter what the situation. when in 2001, Dominica underwent its austerity program, the messengers saw a Dominica that was doomed. There message was packaged to make you cry and to shout Ah Las!Most of them have development ideas galore, to the sky. The speak with authority like specially selected messengers on every subject matter. They can be emotional, can make you cry, but when it comes to examining their record or action on what they promote, there is a wide chasm.

    When for example during the temptation of Jesus, the devil, the god of all evil quoted scriptures in support of his his case. Should Jesus have believed him even if he quoted scriptures? Shouldn’t Jesus have rebuked him. I am not at all referring to our leaders in the same vein as the creator. Certainly not. My beef is that some messengers simply subjective. Can any operative of the UWP no matter how well crafted their message be taken seriously. Should we examine their purpose.

    Judge my message in the same vein as well

Post a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

:) :-D :wink: :( 8-O :lol: :-| :cry: 8) :-? :-P :-x :?: :oops: :twisted: :mrgreen: more »

 characters available