On New Year’s Day 1998, the Independent newspaper, where I was a columnist, published a front page photograph of the decapitated head of Thackoor Boodram, a line of policemen standing behind, one grinning for the camera.
Thackoor was the brother of Nankissoon Boodram, the infamous Dole Chadee, who had been kidnapped for a $5 million ransom which was never paid. The night before, at the Caroni Cremation site, police had tipped out the grisly head from a Black & White Scotch Whisky carton, letting it roll onto the ground before the startled photographer, apparently enjoying the impact.
I objected on the grounds that despite widespread interest in the murderous activities of Chadee and his gang, the publication of the image was tasteless overkill, more in the interest of sensationalism than the right to publish for the sake of public information.
I have never been comfortable with the idea of front pages of newspapers being given over to criminals or politicians. I support press freedoms and the discretion to decide on what constitutes newsworthy matters. I do not take issue with reportage arising from the activities of the aforementioned parties, but I have never been convinced that the way in which they are covered is appropriate.
Even the way we are kept abreast of the tally of murders has the capacity to render a surrealistic quality to the reality that a human life has been extinguished, that someone’s son or daughter will never again enter a room. It becomes a numbers game, and like a countdown, we eagerly anticipate the next figure that changes the equation. Maybe that helps to cope with the depressing reality, but it can coax us into a state of imperviousness that makes us passive and helpless recipients of violence.
Corporations invest a lot of money in the realm of marketing and communications. I often feel that when a newspaper carries, let’s say, a report on a murder that has been deemed gang-related, it is taking on the communications portfolio for gangsters.
If the public is provided with the anatomy of the killing: the circumstances surrounding it, you know, it was in retaliation for the shooting of X last week that Y’s home was fire-bombed, or his car was destroyed, or his family was shot, or Y himself was shot ten times in the head, execution-style, and graphic photos accompany these details, then the criminals are sending their chilling messages to their counterparts as much as they are terrorising bystander citizens.

Who knows if this is not as effective a way of building their own brand of terror as carrying out the acts themselves? Are we aiding and abetting then? Even if there is outrage in the reporting, does that not encourage even more horrific behaviour? Humans like to outdo each other, like to compete, like to be the best or baddest; what could be more titillating than to find an even more excruciating way to exact revenge or assert one’s supremacy?
Whatever the motive, these performances mean little without an audience. Even if you go back to the age defined as the Terrible Two’s, when toddlers experiment with throwing tantrums as a way to get attention; if you ignore them, they soon realise its futility as a communication method. I simply feel that even as we have the right to know what is the situation regarding crime, we have to consider these aspects of the way we are informed.
An addiction to the front page can so easily be formed that a lull may provoke the need to stir something up. Politicians are easily the group to which this malady applies most readily. It comes to the point that an absence from the cover for a day or two generates enough anxiety to orchestrate “photo opps” without regard for appropriateness, just to satisfy the craving for coverage.

An unfortunate and misleading measure of success, criminal or otherwise, becomes the number of press appearances.
Freedom and responsibility often dilute each other; expediency conniving to water down any commitment on either side. The press can and should examine more closely its role as conduit of information, because we have to take responsibility for our actions, inadvertent or not, which may be contributing to a general malaise.
Psychiatrist, Prof Gerard Hutchinson, says the steady diet of crime-related news articles contributes to a feeling of despair and invokes crippling fear within the population. This carries its own implications for mental health and the levels of stress that permeate and direct people’s management of their day to day activities.
He recommends greater focus on stories of success, of triumphs over adversity, of the benefits of hard work and commitment to honest goals.
I don’t know if such an idea will find traction within the media community. It has been tried before, but the sad reality is that bad news sells and there is an understated pact between advertisers (and their agendas) and media houses, which affects decisions on what and how to publish.
Yet, at a time when the spirit is so oppressed by the unending violence and gloom, it is worth considering creating a new diva of the front page.
Email: vaneisabaksh@gmail.com