This week two opposition officials made damning accusations that the local media, including this newspaper, are biased in their coverage of political activities geared towards next month’s general election.
A moment was spared to attack New Era and its senior management, but while criticism could sometimes be better than praise, such criticism must be informed by facts. Only then will such criticism qualify as fair.
The two politicians – from Nudo and NEFF respectively – allege that we are biased towards Swapo.
The world over, there is a general perception that public media institutions are biased towards the ruling elite. Lazy politicians have swallowed this notion hook, line and sinker.
They never really spared time to critically look into such perceptions and form their own independent opinions.
This inept approach and reluctance to zoom into facts is one of the reasons why elections in this country are disputed every year because many political leaders spit out irresponsible statements that often cause despondency and distrust among the citizens.
The past nine editions of this newspaper – excluding this one – have carried 16 news articles from the opposition’s press conferences, press releases or rallies. We challenge anyone with a better record to come forward.
Ironically, no opposition party has provided us with any of their campaign programmes despite our courteous attempts to get such.
Yet, it is not even our responsibility to approach the parties. In countries with serious political dispositions, the opposite is true.
Parties have to market themselves, their candidates and their political programmes.
Now suddenly, even those that are snoring deep into their slumber are complaining that their events are not covered. But what events when there is often none.
It seems to us that these attacks were staged theatrics by politicians gasping for fame, and who sabotaged the ECN election symposium to enjoy the limelight of the media present.
Or why else would anyone unleash a barrage of unsubstantiated claims in full view of journalists?
True, there could be bias out there but including this newspaper in the group of whoever is practising such bias is a huge misrepresentation of facts.
Independent research by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) endorsed New Era as having been hugely fair in its coverage of the 2009 elections, to the shock and dismay of our detractors who wished nothing good should be said about us.
But we are convinced this year’s assessment will even be better. Our conviction is not based on the mercy of anyone. It is based on the commitment we have made to afford everyone space in this newspaper and how we have practically implemented that commitment.
Anyone with an iota of honesty and integrity would know the basis of our confidence in this regard, based on what they see in this newspaper on a daily basis in terms of political coverage.
But preaching sermons of hate and spitefulness, including personal attacks on the management of this newspaper, cannot go unchallenged.
It is a low blow, but one which we can stomach because we have facts to defend ourselves with.
The lies being spread about us show the degree of lowness on the part of those who would do anything to justify their own weaknesses.
It is sheer laziness and unwillingness to do research that has resulted in the spread of lies, slander, manipulating the public and this covert attempt to accumulate public sympathy ahead of a crucial election.
As for us, our determination remains intact. We will not be bullied into intimidation because we owe our existence and loyalty to our readers as a collective and not political groups and their leaders.
Fairness, integrity and impartiality will remain central to what we do, and that’s a commitment.
This week two opposition officials made damning accusations that the local media, including this newspaper, are biased in their coverage of political activities geared towards next month’s general election.
A moment was spared to attack New Era and its senior management, but while criticism could sometimes be better than praise, such criticism must be informed by facts. Only then will such criticism qualify as fair.
The two politicians – from Nudo and NEFF respectively – allege that we are biased towards Swapo.
The world over, there is a general perception that public media institutions are biased towards the ruling elite. Lazy politicians have swallowed this notion hook, line and sinker.
They never really spared time to critically look into such perceptions and form their own independent opinions.
This inept approach and reluctance to zoom into facts is one of the reasons why elections in this country are disputed every year because many political leaders spit out irresponsible statements that often cause despondency and distrust among the citizens.
The past nine editions of this newspaper – excluding this one – have carried 16 news articles from the opposition’s press conferences, press releases or rallies. We challenge anyone with a better record to come forward.
Ironically, no opposition party has provided us with any of their campaign programmes despite our courteous attempts to get such.
Yet, it is not even our responsibility to approach the parties. In countries with serious political dispositions, the opposite is true.
Parties have to market themselves, their candidates and their political programmes.
Now suddenly, even those that are snoring deep into their slumber are complaining that their events are not covered. But what events when there is often none.
It seems to us that these attacks were staged theatrics by politicians gasping for fame, and who sabotaged the ECN election symposium to enjoy the limelight of the media present.
Or why else would anyone unleash a barrage of unsubstantiated claims in full view of journalists?
True, there could be bias out there but including this newspaper in the group of whoever is practising such bias is a huge misrepresentation of facts.
Independent research by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) endorsed New Era as having been hugely fair in its coverage of the 2009 elections, to the shock and dismay of our detractors who wished nothing good should be said about us.
But we are convinced this year’s assessment will even be better. Our conviction is not based on the mercy of anyone. It is based on the commitment we have made to afford everyone space in this newspaper and how we have practically implemented that commitment.
Anyone with an iota of honesty and integrity would know the basis of our confidence in this regard, based on what they see in this newspaper on a daily basis in terms of political coverage.
But preaching sermons of hate and spitefulness, including personal attacks on the management of this newspaper, cannot go unchallenged.
It is a low blow, but one which we can stomach because we have facts to defend ourselves with.
The lies being spread about us show the degree of lowness on the part of those who would do anything to justify their own weaknesses.
It is sheer laziness and unwillingness to do research that has resulted in the spread of lies, slander, manipulating the public and this covert attempt to accumulate public sympathy ahead of a crucial election.
As for us, our determination remains intact. We will not be bullied into intimidation because we owe our existence and loyalty to our readers as a collective and not political groups and their leaders.
Fairness, integrity and impartiality will remain central to what we do, and that’s a commitment.