---

There's a peculiar balance between being open and (for want of a more dignified expression) being a complete slut.

For the media in Bermuda, it's probably an impossible task. As election time draws near, enthusiastic columnists suddenly appear and the Letters To The Editor columns start bursting at the seams.

In a way it is welcome. Newspaper editors are always looking to present an array of opinions.... They want their papers to reflect what the community is doing and thinking.

Too often they depend on a small handful of tired old columnists like this one, whose views, however sincere, can hardly cover the full cross-section of opinion in Bermuda.

But much of this pre-election inundation is blatantly biased and written with a very specific motive of pumping up one political party and trashing the other.

Much of it is based on facts that are either untrue or highly suspect, or so twisted and distorted that they might as well be complete fiction.

History is routinely re-written, sometimes completely invented, and almost always interpreted in a one-sided and self-serving way.

Current events, facts and figures are subjected to similar abuse. And almost always, there is a complete failure to put events in perspective.

Even worse, these pre-election distortions are used to generate something close to hate: To persuade readers or listeners to despise and fear somebody who happens to be in an opposing political party.

Some columns, letters and talk show opinions come from a clearly identified political source -- let's say the columns UBP Senator Bob Richards churns out, or the musings of the Premier's consultant on race, Rolfe Commissiong.

It would be nice if they weren't biased in favour of their political parties, but nobody really expects anything different.

Indeed, if they tried to be balanced - for example, by discussing the strengths of their opponents from time to time, for example, or the failures of their own party - they'd probably lose their jobs.

But at least we know where they are coming from.

It's far more confusing when dealing with anonymous people - those nameless voices on talk radio, letters with pen names in The Royal Gazette and Mid-Ocean News, or the semi-anonymous letter-writers with one first initial and a common last name.

Who are they?

Who are these guys and where are they coming from?

Are they expressing well-thought out, sincerely-held opinions? Are they helping to enlighten and entertain their fellow citizens?

Or are they mindlessly spouting a party line, or part of the pool of letter-writers and talk-show callers that political campaigns try to assemble?

What are editors supposed to do when faced this stuff?

If you try to separate it into two piles - legitimate opinion, which you print, and biased political claptrap which you throw away - you will immediately be attacked as biased yourself.

You certainly open yourself to charges that you are censoring political opinion.

An editor ought to be confident enough to cut out the garbage, and stand up to the criticism that follows.

But Bermuda is a small and divided place.

Besides, some of the worst offenders are our highest-ranking political leaders. It's difficult for an editor to ignore political claptrap when it comes from a Premier or an Opposition Leader at a well-attended press conference.

If an editor tries to correct any but the most serious and blatant errors or distortions - meaning those likely to provoke major controversy or legal action against his newspaper - he's overwhelmed with work in a heartbeat.

If he tries to cut out the offending passages, and print just the key portions of a letter in the way that magazines routinely do, he's he will be be savagely attacked by the letter writers and columnists. (Trust me, I've tried and I still bear the scars.)

Bermuda's newspapers are small and chronically understaffed for the work they have to do. They have a lot of blank pages to fill, mostly in a mad rush at the last minute.

And so the Bermudian public is subjected to a torrent of opinions on political subjects, the likes of which the residents of most small communities would never face.

It's good and bad at the same time. It's a remarkable expression of the diverse views of the community. And it's also the public spewing-up of bias and hate and untruthfulness.

It's an effort to expose readers to the full range of opinions in Bermuda.

But it's also a deliberate effort, by some writers of letters and opinion columns, to create a false and self-serving alternative to reality.

Somebody's got to sift through it all, weigh the arguments and the evidence, keep the gems and throw away the garbage.

For better or worse, dear reader, that person is you.[[In-content Ad]]

---