Ħu l-online editor ta’ The Times jispiċċa ġurnalista mat-Times
Neville Borg daħal jew aħjar ġie impjegat ġurnalista ma’ The Times. Min hawn nawgurawlu. Imma forsi dak li ftit nies jafu huwa li Neville Borg jiġi ħu Bertrand Borg. Bertrand Borg hu l-online editor ta’ The Times. Forsi wieħed jgħidli x’hemm ħażin li ħu l-editur jispiċċa ġurnalista fl-istess gazzetta ma’ ħuh? Xejn.
Imma dawn ta’ The Times għajtu bit-trasparenza. Immaġinaw kieku xi ministru jimpjega lil ħuh fil-ministeru. Kieku artiklu daqsiex fuq quddiem tal-gazzetta The Times kienu jippubblikaw u jgħajtu bi skandlu politiku. Ibqgħu żguri li kieku lil Neville Borg kienu jibgħatu fuq fact finding mission!
Hawnhekk wieħed jistaqsi lil The Times fejnha t-trasparenza u l-kontabbilita’ ta’ din il-gazzetta li tridha tal-għassies tal-moralita’ ġewwa pajjiżna? Min jaf, forsi Neville Borg stess jitħajjar jinvestiga kif hu ġie mpjegat ma’ The Times. Fuq kollox, hu stess qalilna li xogħlu ser ikun dak ta’ local fact-checking initiative, jiġifieri fuq missjonijiet ta’ tfittix u verifika ta’ fatti lokali. Dawn jgħidu għal-Lejber li all in the family!
You are forgetting one thing. The government operates with taxpayer’s money while ToM is a private company. A ministry is accountable to the public since its budget is public i.e. coming from the public’s pockets. Therefore, no a minister cannot just employ his brother without justifying it with the public. Is that clear enough Prof? I am sure you know all that but how can one say no to some populist bait right? Also this is an EU funded project. So your comparison is utterly flawed at best and downright idiotic….also at best.
How often do ministers employ friends of friends, partners, and so forth, and giving them huge salaries, from taxpayer’s money, without justifying their choice? How often do ministers employ people they know, through nepotism, who sometimes are not fit for purpose or who would have attended a “sort of ” interview, but knowing already that they will be chosen, vis-a-vis those who apply, but who do not get the job because they are not in the ministers’ friendly list? And if this is an EU funded project, so from all people, was the editor’s brother “chosen”, if there was any call of application whatsoever? Also, so because TOM is a “private company”, if you say so, so with which money does it operate? Who pays and funds the Times? And why all this hatred and attacks towards Profs Simon Mercieca?
The Times is not a private company. It is run by a Foundation and receives money from Government.
It is. It’s Allied Newspapers Ltd. Strickland Foundation is a majority shareholder of the company. Also even if it was just run by a foundation, its standing is completely different than that of ministry. I know that nowadays it is normal to assume that a government should be run like a business, but in the end all ministries are run by taxpayers’ money. A private company or a foundation are not. And if they get government support, they are liable to the government but they still remain a private entity.
There is no hatred. It is just that such arguments work with people who have no inclination to think critically (unless it benefits their political needs) which is the majority of the people here. Such comparisons are futile as they take two completely different contexts with different obligations and legal infrastructure and cherry pick something that sounds like it is a major argument when it’s nothing. I am sure it is much more worrying knowing that public entities and ministries attempt all forms of recruitment acrobatics to employ mediocre idiots in positions of power than this amazing findout which Prof would like to celebrate and twist around for some unknown reason. The obligations of a private entity’s practices are not the same as those of a public entity – and if one suspects malpractice, a serious journalists can always investigate and ask for evidence rather than attempt to start a rumour.
We do investigate here. And we are here practising critical thinking in our pieces so that then, it is up to the readers to come up with their opinion. We do not force people to agree with us. In fact, many, like yourself, comment the opposite. I think if you would like to pinpoint at those who want to celebrate other stuff and twist around the masses’ brains, with lack of journalists who do not investigate and start many rumours, you are pointing at the wrong writers! Speaking on my behalf, I will continue to practise critical thinking which is only reached via questions and through the art of reading in between the lines, to give the public the other side of the story. Then, it is up to the public to decide, if it wants to decide and form an opinion. All I can say is that my blogs were always proven right later. The truth takes long to feature in the surface at times. And one day it will shine in its bright armour and after that day, people can point at those journalists who truly gave the public the truth.