By Ken Ali
The Express newspaper wrote a moralising editorial on government minister Phillip Alexander’s decision to park in a handicapped spot.
You would think there isn’t an issue in Trinidad and Tobago of a former ruling regime erecting a $100 million edifice after being financially broke a few years earlier.
Or the opposition party pulling apart over a clandestine effort to overthrow the leader.
Not surprisingly, the Express and Guardian did not editorialise on either of those issues.
Neither did they scold Dr. Keith Rowley for his obscene remark about Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar.
Instead, the Express shamelessly sought to build momentum against Alexander, by drawing an organisation representing disabled into the matter.
Then, the daily paper went full throttle, scolding Alexander’s decision as “a disheartening masterclass in how leadership fails the people it is sworn to protect.”
The Express’ spewed righteous indignation that is typically reserved for a culprit in a major criminal or civil crime.
Yes, it is wrong for any abled person – especially a public official – to utilise a parking spot assigned to the handicapped.
Alexander apologised and proffered an explanation.
An objective observer may consider the matter to be worthy only of minimal media coverage.
But, high on its moral pedestal, the newspaper intoned that Alexander’s action “insults the dignity of every citizen with a disability who is navigating the world.”
Not to be outdone, the opposition PNM did not miss a chance for some cheap shots.
And other pious commentators also jumped on a high moral horse.
The media’s treatment of the storm-in-a-teacup further exposes the duplicity in the national discourse and the special interests served by their principals.
The issues championed and those ignored by the daily press unmask their obvious political and economic agendas.
Interlocking directorships in high society is part of the problem.
The Fair Trading Act and other legislation have not prevented the incestuous governance issues associated with powerful business people with common and shared financial interests.
Several years ago, the Express, then headed by Ken Gordon, wrote editorials on partisan Caribbean politics which were also published in several regional newspapers.
When Gordon was confronted by some of his own journalists about that dubious and monopolistic conduct, he doubled-down and pledged to write more joint editorials.
The plan was clearly to cultivate thought and prompt action on the matters they deemed to be vital to Caribbean people.
Under the PNM administration, monopolies were permitted to develop in the pharmaceutical and other sectors despite laws on anti-competitive practices.
People who headed the relevant State agencies came from the same upper-crust business class, thereby having collective interests.
The Securities Exchange Commission has reported on the high number of directors who serve on the boards of other prominent organisations.
The sanctimonious editorial against Alexander ties into an insidious media offensive on behalf of their proprietors to deligitimise the ruling regime.
History is repeating itself.
We could anticipate more attempts to make a mountain out of a molehill, to engineer controversy, and to uphold and advocate anti-government interests.
Fortunately, there is Sunshine Today and other digital platforms where there is purposeful dialogue on the essential matters impacting society.
But shoddy editorials and self-serving media crusades remind us of the schemes from high places.
