Truth Cannot Be Selective

592 GUARDIAN♦ACCOUNTABILITY♦INTEGRITY IN JOURNALISM♦GUYANA

Truth Cannot Be Selective

As a journalist who has built this platform on accountability, integrity, and the duty to hold power to account; regardless of whose story is being told—I believe it is necessary to intervene in this latest tit-for-tat between competing political factions. I was present at the event in question, not as an advocate for any party, but to observe and report fairly, accurately, and in the public interest. Too often, Guyanese are being misled by politically driven social-media narratives, selective footage, exaggerated claims, and partisan interpretations of events. The public should not become collateral damage in a contest for political advantage. There is an old saying: when elephants fight, it is the grass that suffer . In this case, ordinary Guyanese; the people seeking facts, accountability, and trustworthy leadership—are the ones most harmed when truth is sacrificed for propaganda. This intervention is therefore intended to set the record straight about what actually occurred.

There is a basic standard that every political party seeking public office must meet: tell the truth about what the public can plainly see.

WIN is entitled to organize, protest, criticize the Government, challenge President Irfaan Ali, and raise serious questions about corruption, public spending, the MV Barima, public services, accountability, and the administration of justice. Those questions are not only legitimate; they are necessary in any functioning democracy.

But the right to criticize does not include the right to manufacture a version of events that contradicts the evidence.

Thursday night’s presidential outreach in Queens was, by any fair reading, among the strongest diaspora events held by a Guyanese President in recent years. The room had an FDNY capacity of approximately 350 persons. It was full. People were left outside because the venue could not legally accommodate everyone who wanted to enter. Others left after waiting for an event that started later than planned. Those departures should not be falsely repackaged as proof that there was no support for President Ali.

The President’s late arrival is fair ground for criticism. People gave their time, travelled across New York and beyond, and deserved a prompt start. But it is intellectually dishonest to use the delay to deny the obvious: there was overwhelming interest in the event, a packed venue, and a significant crowd outside.

A Small Protest Is Still Legitimate

The protest was lawful and legitimate. Every Guyanese has the right to raise a placard, ask questions, criticize a political leader, and demand accountability.

But a protest involving fewer than approximately 20 people cannot credibly be presented as the defining story of a gathering that drew an estimated 2,000+ people over the course of the evening. Nor is there credible basis to claim that a small group of protesters caused a delay of nearly two hours or that the President was somehow afraid of them.

The question is not whether the protest should have happened. It had been permitted, respected, and covered. The question is whether its size and political significance were honestly represented. They were not.

A political party weakens its own moral argument when it condemns the Government for spin, concealment, and manipulation while using the same methods in its own public messaging

The Chapter-Launch Precedent

This is not an isolated concern. At WIN’s recent New York chapter launch, there were public claims portraying the occasion as a “sold-out” or historic gathering. Those claims were challenged by the 592 Guardian, which reported that the attendance had been overstated. The public challenge drew an immediate response, but the misinformation was still circulated through several media outlets.

The exact attendance figure is less important than the wider lesson: political organizations should not confuse ambition with evidence.

A young party has a right to celebrate modest beginnings. There is no shame in starting small. Every consequential movement begins with a handful of committed people, builds trust, develops policy, recruits credible leaders, and earns support through consistent work.

The problem arises when a party tries to create momentum by misrepresenting it. Inflated attendance, exaggerated claims of political impact, and selective descriptions of public events may create a brief social-media impression. But they eventually damage the organization’s credibility—especially among people who were present and know exactly what occurred.

A Mandate Is an Exchange of Trust

When a party asks citizens for a mandate, it is asking them to make an exchange of trust.

Voters are effectively saying: We will give you authority over public money, laws, institutions, national assets, and the direction of the country because we believe you will act honestly and responsibly. That trust cannot be demanded while truth is treated as optional.

A party cannot call for transparency while obscuring basic facts. It cannot condemn alleged Government deception while engaging in exaggeration and misinformation. It cannot demand that public officials meet high ethical standards while excusing those standards within its own ranks.

That is not principled opposition. It is duplicity.

Several early WIN supporters have reportedly become disillusioned and stepped away. Their concern is not that the party criticizes the Government; Guyana needs vigorous criticism, organized civic pressure, and a credible opposition. Their concern is that the party may be repeating the same political habits it claims to oppose.

That is a warning WIN should take seriously.

Opposition Must Be Credible

Guyana needs a vibrant opposition. It needs political organizations that can examine contracts, challenge questionable spending, demand answers over allegations of corruption, defend citizens who face discrimination or abuse, and put forward workable alternatives.

But an opposition cannot acquire credibility merely by being loud, confrontational, or anti-government. It earns credibility through facts, discipline, policy, internal democracy, ethical conduct, and the courage to correct itself publicly.

If WIN expects to be regarded as a government-in-waiting, it must embrace a basic principle of leadership: tell the truth even when the truth is inconvenient. If it wants to be taken seriously as a party capable of governing, it must hold itself to the same moral and ethical standards it demands from the PPP-C Government.

Political credibility cannot be built by dismissing large crowds as staged, minimizing public enthusiasm, or transforming a small protest into a national awakening.

That means:

♦ Correct exaggerated claims when they are identified.

♦ Distinguish opinions from verified facts.

♦ Acknowledge the scale of events honestly, whether the crowd is 20, 350, or 2,000+

♦ Stop treating every disagreement as proof of conspiracy or political persecution.

♦ Welcome hard questions about its own leadership, financing, structure, conduct, and public statements.

♦ Build support through credible policies and sustained community work rather than manufactured narratives.

The Record Must Be Honest

Thursday night’s event was not proof that the PPP has no problems, nor was it proof that every Guyanese in New York supports President Ali. It did, however, demonstrate that he retains considerable support and political appeal within the diaspora.

The meeting was sold out. The venue reached its permitted capacity. Many people were unable to enter. There was visible enthusiasm among attendees. There was also criticism, questioning, frustration over the late start, and concern over unresolved national issues.

That is the honest account.

For an observer who has consistently scrutinized the PPP Government and held its feet to the fire, the level of support seen at the event may be surprising. But journalism is not about reporting only what confirms one’s expectations or political preferences. It is about recording what happened.

And what happened in Queens was that President Irfaan Ali drew one of the strongest diaspora crowds seen at a presidential outreach event in years—while WIN mounted a small but legitimate protest that should neither be demonized nor exaggerated.

This intervention is not an endorsement of the PPP-C nor an indictment of WIN. Its an honest assesment of the facts. The Government must continue to answer for matters that concern Guyanese: allegations of corruption, public procurement, debt, cost of living, the MV Barima, infrastructure delivery, health care, water, electricity, public safety, institutional independence, and equal opportunity.

No government should be insulated from scrutiny.

But neither should an opposition party be exempt from the standards it insists everyone else must meet. The first obligation of anyone asking to lead Guyana is honesty with the Guyanese people. A party that distorts the size of its own events and minimizes crowds it does not like is not merely engaging in political spin. It risks betraying the public trust before it has even earned the opportunity to govern.

Guyana deserves better than political deception dressed up as change.