RE: “Rwandan media can’t have it both ways” (The New Times, June 14).
I want to believe Mr Songa’s comment was not about letting journalists defame and walk away free. I believe it is about who handles defamation cases. Should it be criminal or civil courts?
At the moment in Rwanda, defamation is largely handled by the self-regulatory body which is way more convenient for journalists than the courts of law and it demonstrates remarkable progress. Defamation should be a civil matter, let us have faith in our systems.
That said, our concerns should be more about defamation in the era of fake news, social media and the anonymity the internet provides. I would rather we have debate on how to deal with defamation in this technology era.
Which media is perfect anyway? Even if what the critic said was true, which is definitely not. I personally would rather have a media that is not active in influencing policy and lack of investigative reporting than have one that is serving the interest of large corporations against the interest of the ordinary people.
We have some media in the West that are fomenting wars all over the world and, to the critic, such media, whose hands are soaked in blood, are the ones doing the right job.
Why should the critic expect our media to work like those that are tearing countries and the world apart?