Tweet
The readers of John Maxwell’s column
BY THE SPIKE
I’M still not sure whether to be impressed or angered by the readers of John Maxwell’s very popular column in the Agenda section of the Sunday Observer. Two Sundays ago, the column did not appear and I got a flood of letters enquiring why. I don’t mind that. But I mind that some of them concluded that it had something to do with censoring.
I guess that the fact that all the letters came to my Spike address, instead of my Observer address, suggests that The Spike’s integrity was also in question, something I take very seriously. I’ll share some of the letters which, by the way, are still coming in:
• Dear Desmond, Greetings. I notice that John Maxwell’s column was missing from the Observer on Sunday, December 16. Can you say why this happened? Sincerely, Norman Girvan
• Hi Mr Allen, is the nonpublication of Maxwell’s article last Sunday a case of “He who pays the piper calls the tune?” There is a joke somewhere in which newspaper editors are said to be independent of the owners of the newspaper they edit. I really thought it was a joke indeed, how stupid of me!!! So much for press freedom!! — Winston Gooden.
• Dear Desmond, I read Maxwell’s latest piece and I ask you: Why was it not published? — Peter Abrahams
• Hi Des, Maxwell’s column was likely assessed with same “objective” judgement you exercised to terminate my brief relationship with the Observer some years ago. Congratulations on your consistency. — Fred Wilmot
• Greetings, I searched for John Maxwell’s column yesterday — but couldn’t find it. I look forward to it every week as a muchneeded and informed analysis of our situation — what happened to it? —
Hilary Nicholson
• Dear Mr Allen, as a Jamaican living abroad, I look forward to Mr John Maxwell’s stimulating columns every weekend. He is a wonderful and courageous investigative journalist with a rare and unshakeable strong commitment to the public good. I am writing to find out why Mr Maxwell’s article was not published this week. Please send me your earliest reply. — Honor Ford-Smith, PhD.
Assistant Professor York University, Toronto
• After perusing the columns in today’s (Sunday, 12/16) issue of the Observer, I noted that Mr Maxwell’s column is absent. Because I know it was submitted, I am curious to understand the reason for the omission, primarily because it is one of the columns to which I look forward, expecting to get the truth and facts. I feel certain that many of his readers feel the same way too, particularly after last Sundays (12/09) column. Perhaps there is something the publishers, et al, know, and which the public doesn’t know. Will you please enlighten us? Sincerely — Pernell H McFarlane
• I am writing to enquire why there was no John Maxwell column this Sunday. I am a frequent visitor to Jamaica and while living abroad I have come to rely on Mr Maxwell’s column as a source of reason and truth regarding the important issues in Jamaica today. John Maxwell is the voice of sanity and conscience in Jamaica today and I applaud your paper for supporting his work. I trust there is a valid reason for his column not appearing this week, and I would hate to think that your excellent paper would condone any hint of censorship. I would appreciate a reply or better yet, a printing of the original Sunday column. Thank you. Sincerely, Kurt J Adams
• Dear Sir, why was there no column by John Maxwell in this Sunday’s (16/12/07) Observer? There are many of us who look for this column each and every Sunday. In fact, it might be the only reason some of us buy/download the Observer vs The Gleaner. Mr Maxwell seems often to be the only “voice of reason” left in the Jamaican media. His long experience and sound common sense presents a breath of fresh air and clear perspective amongst the self-serving, subjective, screeching harpies that seem to dominate not only the print pages, but also the airwaves of Jamaica. As I am a resident of Portland and someone with a personal interest in Haiti, his columns on Winniefred beach and the plight of Haiti, in addition to the Jamaican environment, are eagerly anticipated at home and abroad. I am hoping that censorship is not being brought to bear in this case in a country where democracy and free speech and freedom of the press should be cherished above almost all. Yours most sincerely, Donal Callum, Portland
• I am a student, a researcher, an online (and occasionally a print) journalist, and have been among the readership of the Jamaica Observer [online] for several years. Lately, I have noticed that John Maxwell’s column is absent. His column is the main reason that I read the Observer, as his columns are a rich source of valuable information concerning Jamaica and the world. Please apprise me of any reason that his columns would not be published, as their discontinuance could be considered to be a form of editorial censorship. This would be a cause for great concern to a global readership. — Malaika H Kambon
• I am wondering why John Maxwell’s latest Observer column has been denied publication. As a friend of Jamaica and Jamaicans since 1968, I am deeply perturbed. — Dr Karina Williamson, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
• Dear Sir, I am eager to know what happened to John Maxwell’s column this week, which we in Canada regularly look forward to reading. Thank you for your kind response. — Ann Buttrick
• Dear Desmond, as a regular reader of the online Observer, I am disturbed to see that John Maxwell’s regular column has not appeared today. As this is one thing that I read the Observer for, I wonder what is happening and whether you have dropped the column. If that is the case, I hope it is restored as soon as possible. Maxwell’s writing is one of Jamaica’s national treasures. —
Fragano Ledgister
• Dear Mr Allen, we are faithful readers of John Maxwell’s columns and notice that it did not appear this week. Would you be kind enough to share this with us the reasons for this, and when the column will re-appear? Thank you for your kind attention to this matter, and best wishes for a peaceful and safe holiday season. Sincerely, Hazel and Randall Robinson
Non-appearance of column
I’m tired of replying individually to say that the column did not appear because it missed its deadline and arrived too late for publication. I hope this takes care of it. And please, John, with readers like these, try to ensure the column reaches on time!
How could you,
Sunday Herald reader!?
Dear Spike, The Sunday Herald’s work, effort and consistency makes it worth reading. However, the paper exercised poor judgment in publishing the picture of a dead woman, lying in a pool of blood on the cover of its Sunday, December 23rd–29th edition. For what reason(s) did the paper make this decision?
Did the Sunday Herald want to ensure that its readers believed, and accepted the report that the woman was dead?
Was the photo meant to confirm to the family that their loved one had died? Are the woman’s children or grandchildren expected to keep a copy of the Sunday Herald’s front page for posterity?
Was the photo meant to shock readers into awareness that there is a crime problem? Was it a protest or cry aimed at the authorities?
Was there a paucity of worthwhile newsworthy shots?
Was it simply recording, as is the newspaper’s right, a current event, as gruesome as it may have been?
Was it that the striking contrast of gore in this “season of goodwill” too irresistible?
Was the story of this barefaced, daylight murder in a busy shopping area any more gruesome, disheartening or potent because of the picture?
I’m sure the Sunday Herald can justify its decision. It prides itself on being conscientious. Note though, that a core purpose of the paper is to engage, not repel readers.
Despite the seeming ease with which dead bodies can be captured and put on display via the media, I urge the Sunday Herald to seize the opportunity for leadership by protecting the dignity of victims, being empathetic to their families, and refraining from contributing to the impairment of its readers' humanity and moral sensibilities.
I’m sure the Sunday Herald would prefer to maintain its reputation of courageous, investigative journalism rather than attain one of purveying the ghastly.
— Klao Bell Lewis ahfiminame@yahoo.com
That turn of phrase
Dear Desmond, I enjoyed the Observer’s recent editorial “Does Dr Vasciannie want to be Solicitor-general?” Wondered about your turn of phrase though at the end “… to attain the highest nonelected position in the Attorney-General’s Office.”
Apart from the fact that a minister need not be elected (could be appointed from the Senate) also wondered whether it would be accurate to describe any ministerial position as “elected”. Currently, the Attorney General is a member of the Senate; do we still refer to that position as elected?
— David Geddes, Director — Consumer & Public Affairs, Office of Public Utilities
Journalists who did well in 2007
It’s time again to send in your picks for journalists who did well in 2007, for publication in the last column of January. E-mail your selection to desal@cwjamaica.com
John Maxwell
BY THE SPIKE
I’M still not sure whether to be impressed or angered by the readers of John Maxwell’s very popular column in the Agenda section of the Sunday Observer. Two Sundays ago, the column did not appear and I got a flood of letters enquiring why. I don’t mind that. But I mind that some of them concluded that it had something to do with censoring.
I guess that the fact that all the letters came to my Spike address, instead of my Observer address, suggests that The Spike’s integrity was also in question, something I take very seriously. I’ll share some of the letters which, by the way, are still coming in:
• Dear Desmond, Greetings. I notice that John Maxwell’s column was missing from the Observer on Sunday, December 16. Can you say why this happened? Sincerely, Norman Girvan
• Hi Mr Allen, is the nonpublication of Maxwell’s article last Sunday a case of “He who pays the piper calls the tune?” There is a joke somewhere in which newspaper editors are said to be independent of the owners of the newspaper they edit. I really thought it was a joke indeed, how stupid of me!!! So much for press freedom!! — Winston Gooden.
• Dear Desmond, I read Maxwell’s latest piece and I ask you: Why was it not published? — Peter Abrahams
• Hi Des, Maxwell’s column was likely assessed with same “objective” judgement you exercised to terminate my brief relationship with the Observer some years ago. Congratulations on your consistency. — Fred Wilmot
• Greetings, I searched for John Maxwell’s column yesterday — but couldn’t find it. I look forward to it every week as a muchneeded and informed analysis of our situation — what happened to it? —
Hilary Nicholson
• Dear Mr Allen, as a Jamaican living abroad, I look forward to Mr John Maxwell’s stimulating columns every weekend. He is a wonderful and courageous investigative journalist with a rare and unshakeable strong commitment to the public good. I am writing to find out why Mr Maxwell’s article was not published this week. Please send me your earliest reply. — Honor Ford-Smith, PhD.
Assistant Professor York University, Toronto
• After perusing the columns in today’s (Sunday, 12/16) issue of the Observer, I noted that Mr Maxwell’s column is absent. Because I know it was submitted, I am curious to understand the reason for the omission, primarily because it is one of the columns to which I look forward, expecting to get the truth and facts. I feel certain that many of his readers feel the same way too, particularly after last Sundays (12/09) column. Perhaps there is something the publishers, et al, know, and which the public doesn’t know. Will you please enlighten us? Sincerely — Pernell H McFarlane
• I am writing to enquire why there was no John Maxwell column this Sunday. I am a frequent visitor to Jamaica and while living abroad I have come to rely on Mr Maxwell’s column as a source of reason and truth regarding the important issues in Jamaica today. John Maxwell is the voice of sanity and conscience in Jamaica today and I applaud your paper for supporting his work. I trust there is a valid reason for his column not appearing this week, and I would hate to think that your excellent paper would condone any hint of censorship. I would appreciate a reply or better yet, a printing of the original Sunday column. Thank you. Sincerely, Kurt J Adams
• Dear Sir, why was there no column by John Maxwell in this Sunday’s (16/12/07) Observer? There are many of us who look for this column each and every Sunday. In fact, it might be the only reason some of us buy/download the Observer vs The Gleaner. Mr Maxwell seems often to be the only “voice of reason” left in the Jamaican media. His long experience and sound common sense presents a breath of fresh air and clear perspective amongst the self-serving, subjective, screeching harpies that seem to dominate not only the print pages, but also the airwaves of Jamaica. As I am a resident of Portland and someone with a personal interest in Haiti, his columns on Winniefred beach and the plight of Haiti, in addition to the Jamaican environment, are eagerly anticipated at home and abroad. I am hoping that censorship is not being brought to bear in this case in a country where democracy and free speech and freedom of the press should be cherished above almost all. Yours most sincerely, Donal Callum, Portland
• I am a student, a researcher, an online (and occasionally a print) journalist, and have been among the readership of the Jamaica Observer [online] for several years. Lately, I have noticed that John Maxwell’s column is absent. His column is the main reason that I read the Observer, as his columns are a rich source of valuable information concerning Jamaica and the world. Please apprise me of any reason that his columns would not be published, as their discontinuance could be considered to be a form of editorial censorship. This would be a cause for great concern to a global readership. — Malaika H Kambon
• I am wondering why John Maxwell’s latest Observer column has been denied publication. As a friend of Jamaica and Jamaicans since 1968, I am deeply perturbed. — Dr Karina Williamson, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
• Dear Sir, I am eager to know what happened to John Maxwell’s column this week, which we in Canada regularly look forward to reading. Thank you for your kind response. — Ann Buttrick
• Dear Desmond, as a regular reader of the online Observer, I am disturbed to see that John Maxwell’s regular column has not appeared today. As this is one thing that I read the Observer for, I wonder what is happening and whether you have dropped the column. If that is the case, I hope it is restored as soon as possible. Maxwell’s writing is one of Jamaica’s national treasures. —
Fragano Ledgister
• Dear Mr Allen, we are faithful readers of John Maxwell’s columns and notice that it did not appear this week. Would you be kind enough to share this with us the reasons for this, and when the column will re-appear? Thank you for your kind attention to this matter, and best wishes for a peaceful and safe holiday season. Sincerely, Hazel and Randall Robinson
Non-appearance of column
I’m tired of replying individually to say that the column did not appear because it missed its deadline and arrived too late for publication. I hope this takes care of it. And please, John, with readers like these, try to ensure the column reaches on time!
How could you,
Sunday Herald reader!?
Dear Spike, The Sunday Herald’s work, effort and consistency makes it worth reading. However, the paper exercised poor judgment in publishing the picture of a dead woman, lying in a pool of blood on the cover of its Sunday, December 23rd–29th edition. For what reason(s) did the paper make this decision?
Did the Sunday Herald want to ensure that its readers believed, and accepted the report that the woman was dead?
Was the photo meant to confirm to the family that their loved one had died? Are the woman’s children or grandchildren expected to keep a copy of the Sunday Herald’s front page for posterity?
Was the photo meant to shock readers into awareness that there is a crime problem? Was it a protest or cry aimed at the authorities?
Was there a paucity of worthwhile newsworthy shots?
Was it simply recording, as is the newspaper’s right, a current event, as gruesome as it may have been?
Was it that the striking contrast of gore in this “season of goodwill” too irresistible?
Was the story of this barefaced, daylight murder in a busy shopping area any more gruesome, disheartening or potent because of the picture?
I’m sure the Sunday Herald can justify its decision. It prides itself on being conscientious. Note though, that a core purpose of the paper is to engage, not repel readers.
Despite the seeming ease with which dead bodies can be captured and put on display via the media, I urge the Sunday Herald to seize the opportunity for leadership by protecting the dignity of victims, being empathetic to their families, and refraining from contributing to the impairment of its readers' humanity and moral sensibilities.
I’m sure the Sunday Herald would prefer to maintain its reputation of courageous, investigative journalism rather than attain one of purveying the ghastly.
— Klao Bell Lewis ahfiminame@yahoo.com
That turn of phrase
Dear Desmond, I enjoyed the Observer’s recent editorial “Does Dr Vasciannie want to be Solicitor-general?” Wondered about your turn of phrase though at the end “… to attain the highest nonelected position in the Attorney-General’s Office.”
Apart from the fact that a minister need not be elected (could be appointed from the Senate) also wondered whether it would be accurate to describe any ministerial position as “elected”. Currently, the Attorney General is a member of the Senate; do we still refer to that position as elected?
— David Geddes, Director — Consumer & Public Affairs, Office of Public Utilities
Journalists who did well in 2007
It’s time again to send in your picks for journalists who did well in 2007, for publication in the last column of January. E-mail your selection to desal@cwjamaica.com
John Maxwell
Comment