Misleading lead story

THE EDITOR, Sir:

THE LEAD story in last Sunday's Gleaner set off a few alarm bells in my head and, as a student of content/discourse analysis, a number of critical issues come to the fore when the article is read with an analytical mind.

The first question is, who is the author of the article? While the source is obviously a Bill Johnson poll, no writer has been acknowledged. For the record, is this the work of Bill Johnson, the editorial department, a staff reporter or a contributor?

The second issue concerns the assertion by the author in the first paragraph of the article that "Golding's about-face came too late to change the minds of most Jamaicans" as evidenced by the poll numbers, but in the fourth paragraph it was confirmed "the poll (was) conducted a little more than two weeks before Golding told the nation that the extradition request would be signed".

Analytical reading

An analytical reading of the article reveals opinion on Golding's about-face was never captured by the poll; therefore, to construe that it came too late based on the responses, the poll question is misleading at best.

My third, and perhaps most critical, concern is the portrayal of the prime minister and his administration as a band of historically infamous characters referring to them as "Golding and his band of merry men and women". While Robin Hood and his band of merry men are romanticised by the masses for robbing from the rich to feed the poor, he was an outlaw: dubious company for any prime minister. While no public figure or politician is above ridicule and satire; no matter our personal opinions of the holder of the office, the office of prime minister must be granted the respect deserving of a national institution: the focal point of our democracy.

These three issues detract from what is an otherwise noteworthy and informative article.

I am, etc.,

Phillip Chambers

Greater Portmore, St Catherine