JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Wednesday, July 9, 2025

'The Displaced' or BBC crap?

by

Helen Drayton
2110 days ago
20190928
HELEN DRAYTON

HELEN DRAYTON

It prob­a­bly wasn’t worth the at­ten­tion we’d giv­en to it but as the say­ing goes, out of evil cometh good—like the new growth of lush fo­liage on the moun­tains af­ter de­struc­tion by fire.

If any­thing, the sham BBC pro­duc­tion en­ti­tled “The Dis­placed” didn’t rise to the realm of the de­struc­tion of any­thing—not our rep­u­ta­tion of com­pas­sion or for­eign pol­i­cy of non-in­ter­ven­tion in the af­fairs of oth­er coun­tries.

What the pro­duc­ers’ agen­da un­in­ten­tion­al­ly re­vealed was the dirty side of their skids, and how the me­dia could ex­ploit vul­ner­a­ble refugees to ad­vance some­body’s agen­da. No one should blame the Gov­ern­ment and cit­i­zens who be­lieved TheDis­placed pro­duc­tion didn’t hap­pen in a vac­u­um giv­en the mis­chief right here sur­round­ing this coun­try’s re­sponse to the Venezue­lan cri­sis and the suc­cess­ful reg­is­tra­tion of over six­teen thou­sand peo­ple seek­ing refuge here. There were those who’d op­posed the pol­i­cy of non-in­ter­ven­tion, and who’d said that the strat­e­gy of reg­is­tra­tion would have failed. They were wrong.

Typ­i­cal of hatch­et re­port­ing, the pro­duc­ers spliced in au­then­tic footage that would have de­ceived any view­er in be­liev­ing that cit­i­zens gen­er­al­ly were against the refugees, which wasn’t the case. No­tably, some of those pro­tes­tors had been seen be­fore un­der the ris­ing yel­low sun at the Par­lia­ment build­ing ex­er­cis­ing their con­sti­tu­tion­al right to protest. Why didn’t the re­porter ask them how like­ly they were to lose their jobs to the Venezue­lans giv­en the view in the very video that some peo­ple wrong­ly brand the Venezue­lans as pros­ti­tutes, aka brass-flutes in British slang and crim­i­nals! The ques­tion would have lay­ered the pro­duc­tion with some depth.

When the ve­rac­i­ty of the re­port­ing got chal­lenged, the pro­duc­ers re­sort­ed to a usu­al tac­tic, “they got no re­sponse” for re­quests for in­for­ma­tion. Such was the an­swer from the world’s old­est and largest multi­na­tion­al broad­cast­ing cor­po­ra­tion that prides it­self as the bas­tion of me­dia con­tent in­tegri­ty. In oth­er words, it’s OK to pub­lish lies rather than the truth. It was a for­gone con­clu­sion that they would have de­fend­ed work pro­duced in their name. All me­dia tend to do that even when their years of ex­pe­ri­ence qual­i­fy them to know when a piece of work is nuffink more than gob­shite. The crap still of­fend­ed many of us since it came across as a de­lib­er­ate at­tempt to slur our coun­try’s re­sponse to the Venezue­lan refugee cri­sis. Maybe we were wrong and the pro­duc­ers gen­uine­ly be­lieved the pro­duc­tion was an ac­cu­rate re­flec­tion from the per­spec­tive of the dis­placed Venezue­lans!

As the say­ing goes, good usu­al­ly comes from evil. If a Span­ish ver­sion was done, then it may have dis­cour­aged more dis­placed Venezue­lans from com­ing here.

The Dis­placed gives us here an op­por­tu­ni­ty to re­flect on how for­tu­nate we are to have a coun­try we call home; to think mer­ci­ful­ly on the thou­sands of ter­rorised peo­ple of the Win­drush gen­er­a­tion whose an­ces­tors fought and died do de­fend Britain and free­dom, and are now dragged from the coun­try they’d served all their lives to places un­known to them. Think of the war vet­er­ans of the USA mil­i­tary who’d fought for its flag and called that coun­try home, on­ly to be hunt­ed and frozen in the cold by ICE.

Our coun­try has its strengths and weak­ness­es. Whether or not we like the gov­ern­ment or the Prime Min­is­ter has noth­ing to do with our oblig­a­tion to de­fend it when peo­ple throw mud at it un­fair­ly.

The Gov­ern­ment’s com­mu­ni­ca­tion team had an ex­cel­lent op­por­tu­ni­ty to im­me­di­ate­ly and con­struc­tive­ly re­spond with facts and show the com­pas­sion of our peo­ple for the Venezue­lan refugees. One can al­ways do bet­ter at any­thing, but in the sit­u­a­tion of the refugees, we have done re­mark­ably well, giv­en the over­all eco­nom­ic cli­mate, the pres­sure on scarce re­sources, and the nat­ur­al, lo­cal and in­ter­na­tion­al forces that are im­pact­ing our tiny is­land. The refugees here have ac­cess to pri­ma­ry health care, school­ing and coun­selling of their chil­dren by re­li­gious and oth­er vol­un­teer groups, and they can work. Are some of them fright­ened and con­cerned? Who wouldn’t be af­ter the hell they’d gone through to get here, and their sta­tus of un­cer­tain­ly? Is the sys­tem per­fect? No.

The com­mu­ni­ca­tion team should have reaf­firmed the Gov­ern­ment’s poli­cies, more so how un­fold­ing events are prov­ing the wis­dom of our po­si­tion on Venezuela and the refugee cri­sis. They should have en­cour­aged every gov­ern­ment min­istry, every per­son who felt ag­griev­ed by the nasty piece of work, to pub­li­cise the truth on their so­cial me­dia pages, the Caribbean and in­ter­na­tion­al me­dia pages where pos­si­ble in­clud­ing the UN­HCR, the UN and BBCs. The Gov­ern­ment shouldn’t take it for grant­ed that be­cause pol­i­cy in­for­ma­tion is in the pub­lic do­main, cit­i­zens and the wider com­mu­ni­ties are aware of it.


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored