By Abena Rockcliffe
It’s World Press Freedom Day, yay! I wish all my colleagues a pleasant day, one that allows them to bask in the glory of their contributions to Guyana. That wish is extended to all media professionals, be it broadcast, print or electronic media; whether you are attached to state or private media.
My question, however, is directed only to those in private/ independent media. Those who have not been accused of being compromised by Azruddin Mohamed, hands in the air. No hands?
You are obviously not alone. I have had my full share of accusations. I have been accused of taking “large sums” from Mohamed. I had written about this before https://www.guyanastandard.com/2026/02/01/all-eyes-on-lucky-29/.
Further, I have been accused of publishing “distractions” on his behalf especially pertaining to his famous “lesbians in the Masjid” comment. And, I have been accused of plotting against the government for the benefit of you know who. Presumably as a result of these perceptions, I became the subject of several social media posts on a page believed to be operated on behalf of the government, Live in Guyana.
These accusations have affected me in more ways than one. Least to say some government officials hardly wish to engage owing to suspicions that questions posed by me may reek of ulterior motives. Sigh.
Just as I thought this period of torment was over, reality recently hit again. I was conversing with someone who told me of the existence of “proof” that Guyana Standard is on Mohamed’s payroll. I encouraged the person to instigate a release of this proof which I know cannot exist in any authentic form. Some months ago, I noticed a cheque circulating on social media, purported to be from Azruddin Mohamed to “Twinkle”, a popular social media figure known to be of the LGBTQ community. The cheque was obviously fake. The creator did not bother to use Twinkle’s government name. I assume any “proof” that exists will be of a similar ilk. I am not worried.
While I am not worried about the so-called proof. I continue to be perplexed by the perception that Guyana Standard has ties to the Mohameds. I remain at a loss to find REASONABLE evidence to support this claim. On the contrary, any perusal of Guyana Standard’s content dating back pre-2025 election to now, will show that this publication hardly features Mohamed outside of his official post as Leader of the Opposition.
Back in 2025, I asked WPA’s Dr. David Hinds for an interview. He was initially hesitant because of “the slant”. The slant he referenced was one that favoured the government. APNU’s Ganesh Mahipaul had also told me of a perception that Guyana Standard operated for the benefit of the government.
Also, last year Hannah Mohamed posted that Guyana Standard was one of the PPP media houses that set out daily to antagonize her brother, Azruddin. Just a few months later the perception is that Guyana Standard is in Mohamed’s pocket.
I guess my only consolation is that all sides believe Guyana Standard to be for the other side. Such attacks come with the territory.
Traditional media is facing many challenges and it is not just limited to Guyana. In this age, the challenges are Artificial Intelligence (AI), accusations of “fake news”, hostility from officials who have adopted the Trump method, limited financial resources and pseudo- journalists who manage to gain the trust of the masses. The odds are really stacked against us.
Recently, Guyana lost a giant in the industry, Stabroek News. The sheer joy and celebration that emanated from some sections of society indeed spoke volumes. There are some in this country who are not too keen on the existence of independent media houses. Leave it up to them, Guyana’s media space would only feature state media and private pro-government media houses. Those very people like to scream democracy.
Independent journalists were good and proper when they highlighted Guyana’s journey from the time the 2018 no-confidence motion was passed all the way up to the swearing-in of the new government in 2020. That period featured the five-month wait for the declaration of election results. During said wait, Covid-19 was rampant but many continued to report to Arthur Chung Conference Center. The international community indeed had representatives on the ground in the form of election observers. But heavy reliance was still placed on Guyana’s independent media for authentic information. The media served its purpose then.
I am not saying that Guyana is void of anti-government reporters. But not all media professionals who aren’t pro-government must automatically be seen as anti-government. There are still Guyanese journalists who remain committed to the craft, who have no problem highlighting positive government information but also wish to publish news from the other side. Those journalists should not be polarized. Otherwise, the day will soon come when the international community will have no source for independent information. Something tells me that there are those who do not have a problem with that becoming a reality.
