Public Discourse and the Quest for Leadership among Media Practitioners

It is often said that the ultimate measure of a person, and a society, is shown in how they treat the weak, especially the elderly and infant.  At the risk of appearing coarse, and I am not being coarse, even animals are expected to treat the elderly and infant (of their own type) with tenderness and care. 

I have often written about the role of the media (in a democracy), and there are some enduring roles that the media, often referred to as the fourth branch of government, must play. These roles include: protecting human rights, promoting tolerance of differences, providing information to help citizens make informed choices, and presenting diverse perspectives on issues in public discourse.  The first two roles are, in my view, the functions which show the personal qualities of media practitioners and reveal who they are as human beings. The latter two are what may be defined as operational or technical functions whose execution is informed by the prior two.

The first two roles are, in my view, the functions which show the personal qualities of media practitioners and reveal who they are as human beings. The latter two are what may be defined as operational or technical functions whose execution is informed by the prior two.

Recent act of inhumanity

In March 2025, a media practitioner in Jamaica made a post showing two elderly former politicians and ministers of government (both having retired) being helped onto a stage at a political meeting.  One was using a walking aid and the other was carried by at least two men. The one who was being carried apparently has a condition which affects his mobility, more severely. One of the politicians is the father of a political candidate who was to be presented (formally introduced) to the members of the constituency and the other man his longtime personal friend.  Both were there to support the young candidate who was being introduced.

The post by the media practitioner was not about how noble and daring these two men (both in their 80s) were, but the post, with his commentary was mocking and scornful, emphasizing their limited mobility and in addition deriding and almost ridiculing the political party of which they are members.  We do not often get to choose our physical and mental conditions.  Time passes, we get old and many become feeble and non-ambulatory.  How does one, anyone, more so a leader in society, lower himself to the level where, perhaps for political purposes, he engages in acts of intentional ‘savagery’ by holding up for public opprobrium and ridicule the physical condition of others?

How does one, anyone, more so a leader in society, lower himself to the level where, perhaps for political purposes, he engages in acts of intentional ‘savagery’ by holding up for public opprobrium and ridicule the physical condition of others?

One of the many appalling acts of (then candidate) Donald Trump was his mocking a person with disabilities. Most people found that reprehensible.  The underlying reason we do not make fun or a point of criticism another person’s physical condition whether congenital, accidental, or developmental, is that it could be us. So, when we mock or belittle another’s condition we not only show the shallowness of our discretion, we incipiently mock ourselves, and (in religious thinking) we also mock God.

Upcoming Elections

A few Caribbean countries are set to hold general elections this year.  One unfortunate and unacceptable feature of the cut and thrust of political discourse is personal attacks. 

I am expressing the hope that in the course of the campaigns, our leaders (candidates, surrogates, and supporters) will steer clear of personal attacks.  Debates can be intense and arguments acerbic, but we need not be angry at each other or spew bile.  For in the end, such actions destroy us.  It is a gross act of stupidity and recklessness for leaders to engage in vile personal attacks on their political opponents and then “turn around” and condemn violence and aggression in society and appeal to children to be kind to each other.  Words have consequences and, in this technological age, nothing we say can be scrubbed from history.

Words have consequences and, in this technological age, nothing we say can be scrubbed from history.

I am mindful that this appeal may mean nothing to some people, and it is certainly the case that personal accountability, as opposed to the imposition of standards by others, is the more effective tool of self-governance. But I will only ask each of us who speak publicly (or indeed even in the privacy of personal spaces) to ask: “How will I wish to be remembered?” Our answers will determine our behaviours, generally.

But I will only ask each of us who speak publicly (or indeed even in the privacy of personal spaces) to ask: “How will I wish to be remembered?” Our answers will determine our behaviours, generally.

---

Canute Thompson is Professor of Educational Policy, Planning and Leadership, Pro Vice-Chancellor – Undergraduate Studies and Director of the Caribbean Centre for Educational Planning at The University of the West Indies, Mona Campus, a social activist, and author of eight books and twenty journal articles.

Professor Thompson has earned several awards. Among them, are eight UWI Mona Campus Principal’s Awards – two for Best Publication (Article Category) in 2019 and in 2020 for his book, ‘Reimagining Educational Leadership in the Caribbean’; three for Most Outstanding Researcher (2020, 2021, and 2024); two in 2023 on behalf of the CCEP –  for Research Activity generating the most funds and Research with the most Development Impact, and one in 2024 for Research Activity generating the most funds.  In 2022 he was awarded a bronze medal in the Independent Publishers’ Book Awards, for his 2020 book, Education and Development: Policy Imperatives for Jamaica and the Caribbean.