Home / Live Wire / Guardian angel lifts skirt again; ad calls Kublalsingh a reptile

Guardian angel lifts skirt again; ad calls Kublalsingh a reptile

The Trinidad Guardian newspaper had observers covering their eyes again when the self-declared “Guardian of Democracy” published a photograph, presumably of activist Wayne Kublalsingh, with the headline: “Trinidad and Tobago discovers a human reptile.”

Under the photograph ran the caption: “The Kub-lal. An unusual human reptile discovered here on the pavement basking in the limelight everyday outside the Prime Minister’s office, defies medical explanation by surviving without food and water for weeks without any sign of health issues.”

It was, according to a footnote, a “paid advertisement” by a group that referred to itself as “Citizens4dhighway” and apparently gets medical advice from the same dark alley as Health Minister Fuad Khan.

Photo: The Trinidad Guardian newspaper published a slanderous attack on Highway Re-Route activist Dr Wayne Kublalsingh.
Photo: The Trinidad Guardian newspaper published a slanderous attack on Highway Re-Route activist Dr Wayne Kublalsingh.

Phew. For a second, Mr Live Wire thought the Guardian newspaper was run by some perverse, soulless psychopaths with less human decency than the Boko Haram, who were happy to bully, slander and vilify a frail lecturer on a hunger strike.

But, no, Guardian did not really think those things; the newspaper was paid to publish it, you see. So that makes it alright. Not so?

It is a defence that would not work in court for a hit man or drug mule. But, for a multi-million dollar media house, who knows?

Mr Live Wire is passing the collection basket around to fund a second Guardian ad, which reads: “This newspaper will screw anyone for money while its owner holds the Order of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago for outstanding contributions to public service. Does that mean prostitution is now legal?”

Or maybe: “Wanted: Human beings with common decency to replace heartless f**ks at Trinidad Guardian who ran Kublalsingh attack ad.”

Perhaps Guardian editor-in-chief Judy Raymond can tell us what it would cost to have the people responsible for publishing that advertisement slap themselves repeatedly. Clearly the Guardian has less concern for what happens between their sheets than the average prostitute.

Photo: At least some prostitutes have standards.
Photo: At least some prostitutes have standards.

And, for those who say the Guardian is entitled to take all paid ads to run its organisation, ask yourself if the newspaper would still have published if the payer replaced the word “Kub-lal” with “Sabga.”

The popular nutsman, “Nuts Landing”, often tells a joke about a supposed shooting on the Brian Lara Promenade.

An armed assailant fired a bullet which flew straight through the arm of a bystander and killed a passer-by. The police arrested the shot bystander.

“But I didn’t shoot him,” said the bleeding bystander. “Why are you arresting me?”

“Because it’s through you the man dead,” replied the policeman.

The made-up bystander obviously had a point. But the Trinidad Guardian, which collected money and then hid its payer’s identity behind a murky, unregistered organisation, has no case.

Photo: Activist and UWI lecturer Dr Wayne Kublalsingh.
Photo: Activist and UWI lecturer Dr Wayne Kublalsingh.

But then who needs to justify their actions in Trinidad and Tobago if they have a million-dollar attorney on speed dial?


Editor’s Note: Click HERE to view the Trinidad Guardian’s apology on its digital paper.

About Mr. Live Wire

Mr. Live Wire
Mr. Live Wire is an avid news reader who translates media reports for persons who can handle the truth. And satire. Unlike Jack Nicholson, he rarely yells.

Check Also

MSJ: The problem with the Rio Treaty; and how gov’t, opposition and media got Venezuela imbroglio wrong

“[…] Central to this entire issue is the United States’ agenda with respect to Venezuela. …


  1. Carson Charles said that no aggregate was being removed from the Northern Range, but reporters have something different to say based on investigations:


  2. O’Conoor is being disingenuous. The HRM disputed the swamp, the discussion went round and round with no resolution.

  3. It says a lot about us as a people that we are now allowing the highway debate to become one on whether Wayne is taking any water. The little boy who tried to gain some publicity just showed how shallow he is. He is being hailed for jumping into something he does not understand – if Wayne could fast, me too!! Serious fasting and self sacrifice is way above merely the physical. Now his ignorance is being accepted as a standard by which to judge the serious actions of a committed leader?? Give me a break. Just as he is reported to be the one who protested the “unbalanced” nature of the UWI seminar when Dr Rowley decided to participate and the others did not even respond to the invitation. But he is following the lead of similar minds who think that PR will overcome honest commitment, keeping one’s word and the principles of integrity and accountability. Let us commit to saving our beloved country – in what ever way we can.

  4. as i was saying the HRM themselves seem to lack ethics

  5. But the Ministry of Works and Infrastructure met with the civil society groups last week and according to O’Connor, who attended the meeting, the following facts emerged, undisputed by anyone: “The route between Mon Desir and Debe does not pass through the swamp as previously claimed. The only place where mangrove is being destroyed is along the Mosquito Creek stretch which is not in dispute. No mountain is being removed from the Northern Range to fill the swamp.

  6. I agree. I don’t think we’re aiming for complete transparency though. But we can certainly insist on transparency on key issues. For me – I want to know if hydrology reports were done. What did they say? Is there a possibility of increased flooding? What’s being done to mitigate it? If you ask the important questions you may not achieve transparency but you could be part of a process that influences some measure of change. Even if the full truth never comes to light publicly, isn’t that worth something?

    I get you. A lot of people don’t like the man. But this is too important to make it about a man, even if you feel he’s trying to make it so. Don’t give him the satisfaction then, and defy him by focusing on the meat of the matter.

  7. I tell you what i want from govt nicole and ill end it..i want the govt to reduce all state expenditure..even do away with govt quangos…and scrap the fuel subsidy..less central planning and more local planning.. it doesnt matter who is in charge..as long as we have a huge state doling out subsidies and make work projects ..we will never have a culture of efficient transparent govt…

  8. Back to the man again. One could argue Darryn… that your approach is a bit adversarial and not as helpful to moving the discussion toward a solution as it could be. That doesn’t make you a bad person. You just feel strongly about something. Nothing wrong with that. Now let’s get back to issues and solutions. What can we do? Do we just throw our hands up and say that’s life in sweet T&T? How do we hold our government accountable? Ideas?

  9. The issues need discussing by whom? How discussing it gonna help?

  10. But who here has said don’t build the hway? Not even the HRM says that. They have said re route or abide by the armstrong report. They are also on record saying if after abiding by the report the right thing is to build the hway they will stop their protest.
    So….who is saying don’t build? Or are we blurring the issue strategically again?

  11. Those issues are never going to go away..and i agree they need discussing…but that why i was never on board with the hrm…they adopted a really unneccsarily adversorial approah that was nev er going to be helpfull …

  12. Thank you for indulging me btw Darryn. Most people who express strong views against Kublalsingh run very far away when prompted to discuss issues. I appreciate that you have made an attempt to raise an interesting question.

  13. “call for a change”…LOL,,,,this country has way too much apathy…we will continue the foraging of the abyss.

  14. Agreed Troy Roberts I want to know as well!

  15. Yes they would remain, unless we discuss those, raise them to the forefront instead of the man and his method, and call for a change. Is it too late for call for a change?

  16. If the govt reroutes the highway..wouldn’t the issues surrounding cost and transparency remain…how can hrm say they are for the highway when clearly the issues they have problems with affect the very nature of the whole project?

  17. I have little faith in the authenticity of Dr. Kublalsingh and even less in the integrity of the local media.

  18. Wait nah ppl still eh know d difference between Slander & Libel? Smh…

  19. Not a soul is saying the highway shouldn’t be built. Choose an issue on either side for us to discuss and let’s all benefit from the discussion.

  20. I haven’t heard any clear arguments against the highway..the armstrong reports says more analysis needs to be done not that the highway should not be built…and i’m certainly not saying it should be built if most people there want it..but the voices of people in the area are nowhere in this debate..

  21. Oh gorm Alana Morton… Don’t call out the boys so nah! :-/

  22. Any. What is an argument by the people in the area that is not being heard. Name one. Let’s discuss it.

  23. Well Darryn, the clear arguments have failed. . . what do you suggest they do now?

  24. Soooo, if 100,000 people say build a highway that doesnt meet procurement standards, and 15 protest against it, build?

  25. In what way? What is not being heard?

  26. Good. We’ve now agreed this is an extreme act. And it should not have had to come to be. But so be it, it did. What now? What of the arguments? Let’s talk about those.

  27. The issue of CECs, EIAs and Hydrology reports remain clear for me….they were issues since Imbert had oversight of the project…but perhaps that was forgotten…just like the water issue.

  28. Of course not…everyone has a voice…but the voice of the people down there is not getting heard

  29. People never need to turn to extreme acts..and in this issue ectreme acts was never needed ..just clear arguments

  30. I am a taxpayer and I don’t live there. I’m not an expert and I have questions. Do I not deserve to have a voice? Are my questions not valid because I am “from tong”?

  31. Lol..i prefer more expert voices..rationale arguments and people who live in the area being heard. Thats all…not a side show ..that doesnt accomplish anything

  32. In the same way a community that feels marginalized and turns to burning tyres makes it about them? When dialog and reason don’t work, people turn to the extreme. Is it my personal choice? No. Do I feel the need to demonize a man for his choice? No. How does that help the situation?

    Further – how is that not playing a part in amplifying the voice that says “do not question me”? If you have questions, why not promote discussion that brings us closer to a solution?

  33. The man made it so….or the media coverage?

  34. or for “Environmentalism” in T&T for that matter?

  35. So who would you suggest be the spokesperson for the HRM?

  36. I agree nicole..there are issuez..but its disengenuous to say discuss the issues and not the man..when the man has clearly made it about him because of his method..

  37. I find it really interesting that conversations always focus on the method of execution of the protest and who is protesting, and not a lot is said by anti-HRM about the actual issues. Why shouldn’t there be hydrology reports? Shouldn’t we all want to know? Why weren’t there more bidders and if the process was wrong, why can’t it be subject to amendment now? Etc etc. As taxpayers, let’s discuss the real issues instead of the man and his process.

  38. Darryn that wasn’t an ad, that was just a vid shared. (as far as I remember) and also I don’t recall the HRM stating ANYTHING about this ad in question. . . officially.

  39. And yes i do think kubs is a hypocrite ..and really isn’t the spokesman we need on environmental or other issues

  40. Darryn yeah boy, you real hung up on these “rules” but really choosing to ignore the big picture, why is that?

  41. Im 50/50 on it…i agree that mega projects like this need much more transparency and nidco hasn’t handled the project well…but i don’t care for the antics if the hrm..they have been dishonest in their communication…they complain about this ad..but released their own crass ad with an old woman telling kamla to stuck the highway between her legs remember..and some of the things they have isn’t true…so. im not happy with either side

  42. It matters to you…on every thread.

  43. Darryn so to get to the REAL issue. . . do you not support the ReRoute?

  44. So just ignore his hunger strike then?..it doesnt matter and it doesnt matter if hes cheating his own rules..just focus on the issues ..lol ok

  45. Im a supporter of the HRM….let me be clear. I think the questions raised about this project are quite valid.

  46. Well..was just asking your opinon as supporters of him..and i gave you mine

  47. I guess i just thought you would also criticise him on the merits of his arguments put forward on the highway….not whether he really fasting or not…but apparently that is the fashionable angle these days, attack the veracity of the strike.
    I don’t care if he is fasting. I care that state funds jumping up in a questionable project.

  48. why? Will it make a fart of difference to the real issue?

  49. I never said he didn’t sponge off..but clearly that alone won’t rehydrate him lol

  50. Where did I say it is wrong ? I just think it’s disingenuous to pretend he hides that he wallows in a pool and gets sponge baths….that info was on news and in print media….since 2012.

  51. Im all for focusing on the issue of the highway….is it wrong to critizise wayne ?

  52. So let’s make it clear….he wallows in a pool and he gets sponged off at intervals during the day. That has never been a secret. Why pretend it has been and is the focus?

  53. I wont feel guilty if wayne dies at all..i dont want it to happen..but i wont feel guilty…i think the question of him cheating is important..thst was the basis of this attack ad as well…if hes drinking water, and it doesnt matter..why not just say so?…

  54. Even if he wasn’t fasting…does it make the issue of the public project and public money any less relevant?
    I’m always fascinated by folks who want to make this be about whether the fast is genuine and side step the highway and public monies. Almost as if abusing the Treasury is not a serious issue. Because we are paying for this highway directly from the Treasury, eh.

  55. Rhoda agreed. Trini’s worried he going to dead, and they can’t admit to themselves they may be wrong and a man could die for it, so they blame him for their feelings.

  56. Obviously drinking no water but starving yourself is just as bad as drinking SOME water and starving yourself. . . I think its a matter of certain point of view. I for one recognize courage and you have to admit the man have some big cojones. . . not everyone can do what he doing and at his age. . .

  57. But since 2012 he made it clear he wallows in a pool daily. Funny though how every post comes back to Kublalsingh being a hypocrite but less meaningful discussion about the topic at hand or the important issues surrounding the highway and public monies.

  58. Well thats what im asking..does it matter…remember wayne was the one who set these conditions..hes still insisting he’s following it…if he is cheating..is it unethical ?..i think it is and speaks to his credibility..

  59. Darryn Sooooo does that make his statement any less poignant? So he drinking water. . . the man not eating anything. . . even Ghandi at 75 drank water!

  60. Start a new thread Darryn Dinesh Boodan. That’s a whole other topic

  61. Apart from media ethics anyone care to discuss the fact that kubs is obvioulsy lying about his hunger strike ..hes obvioulsy drinking water at least..does it matter? ..

  62. It’s called passing the buck. Only someone at the highest level could approve this ad. During my tenure as the Advertising Manager at the same Guardian I would not have had the authority to approve such an ad. That directive would have had to come from above. I wouldn’t dare to it as my job would have been on the line and i’m sure it’s the current Advertising Manager who’s going to take the fall if at all.

  63. After 3 days, you need water or you’ll perish.

  64. I would like to know who is bankrolling the HRM personally. Lots of radio and internet presence. Sure as hell isn’t coming out of Uncle Kub’s picket.

    • The longer the debate goes on, the more clearly it separates the shallow and blind follower from those who can discern the real issues involved in this on-going protest (whether or not one agrees with either side.) Next they may begin to question Wayne’s qualifications. How many of them have any questions about the lack of accountability and honesty in the many projects under this govt. As one said in the late 1990’s “at least we get a airport!!”

    • Homeboy, you do realize that it is possible to simultaneously be against Kublalsingh and the state? Just because one is a villain doesn’t make the other a hero.

    • And it is completely legitimate to question his qualifications. Quick question, what is his Ph.D in? Do you even know?

  65. The buck stops outside Guardian front door? Steups. That “apology” come like when yuh man start of saying “if I offended you…” as if he eh sure you hurt and vex tuh buss.

  66. Lasana Liburd I know for sure one thing I cannot accuse you of is being inconsistent. To give you an update, we are taking them to court. I can’t wait to see them try to bully the bench.

  67. I wrote when Newsday published a photo-shop photo of an old woman in Beetham. And when CNC3 was selective about its apology. I knocked Ian Alleyne for his video footage of accident victims. And I published when Garth St. Clair was being bullied by the Guardian.
    I also wrote in response of Judy Raymond during the initial editor walk-out due to political pressure at the Guardian and did a follow-up after the smoke had cleared there.
    And much more besides…
    So whatever you chose to say, I am not inconsistent when it comes to this topic.

  68. It’s called parody and Kublalsingh isn’t immune to it. Do you take exception to the caricatures in the newspapers lampooning politicians? How is this different? He is a public figure now by his own choice.

    If private citizens want to point out the utter farce of a hunger strike he is engaged in, why not?

    Because that’s what this strike is, a farce.

  69. The media in my eyes has been classless for sometime. That’s why I have never written these types of articles. Character assassination to sell papers. Every day. When we going to start giving people hope? Showcase the good instead of the bad. And yeah…don’t tell me it’s the truth! And we as citizens deserve to know what is going on. Just like we are addicted to Olivia Pope and Kim Kardashian. We need to live our lives and stop studying everyone else. How about we find something to die for?

  70. i doh think anybody should be above ridicule..

  71. He can breathe through his skin like a reptiles.

  72. maybe Lasana can answer that Michelle-he himself writes Satirical posts

  73. Nah I would feel the same regardless. I think attacking an individual in this way is classless and should be in the tabloid realm. Not respected press. I wouldn’t agree if it was Jack, Kamla, Patrick, whoever. But that’s a good question Michelle. One worth considering.

  74. Would we feel the same way if this were done to any citizen? Or have we all (WE!) chuckled at ads ran to displace faith in certain characters? I just don’t see what’s the big deal. And if there is a big deal…what are we going to do about it? Lasana Liburd has started his own media platform so he is in control of his media ethics…what about the rest of the voices here? Suggestions please?

  75. “unethical advertising is murky” Darryn Dinesh Boodan Yup.

  76. im surprised you are this concerned about issues of hypocrisy though Lasaana ,,when i tried to explain why I think wayne and David addulah are both hypocrites, you seemed to brush it aside ..:)..

  77. You know hypocrisy is my word! Lasana Liburd

  78. yes they do play the free speech card when it suits them..

  79. That’s the point i keep trying to make…how can they be saying they didn’t approve the ad’s content but then say they usually approve advertorials, but didn’t apparove this? Is a crock of shite.

  80. Media houses like to talk about their special perks under the constitution when they are under fire.
    But when they shaft their readers and/or citizen, it becomes a business with only survival as a goal. That is textbook hypocrisy.
    An unnamed person used the Trinidad Guardian to call a citizen a liar, a fraud and a human reptile.
    Like I said, those who can’t see the issue there don’t want to see it.

  81. so often, editorial goals are passed down to you at point of contact when you become hired. if you disagree, leave. or wine and hush

  82. Ok. Thank goodness they have been called out on it then.

  83. the publisher OWNS the media house…the editorial staff are usually hired. so yeah, you balance that thin line about “ethics” vs “groceries”

  84. Do all realize that the Guardian is claiming that it did not approve the “content” of the advert? The Guardian approves and/or disapproves content all the time and chooses to run ads, or not, as it sees fit, depending whether they believe the ads are politically correct, or not.

  85. in today’s climate..the goal of any print media house is to stay in business

  86. ^^ meet the publisher’s requirements without compromising your editorial goals

  87. For the record…what do you think are the responsibilities of a media house?

  88. no..that’s something i think about a lot as well Fayola…what makes bad and unethical journalism .is straightforward…there is not much debate there..but ‘unethical advertising is murky..for some people alcohol and tobacco advertising is unethical ..lottery advertising is unethical the use of sexual imagery is unethical.. playing to racial or cultural stereotypes can be unethical //I did ads for CHGOM and pitched campaigns for the Smelter–my friends called me unethical.and i felt i was…..for me personally i wont work for clients that want me to lie or make spurious claims ..but even so..should they be stopped from advertising..? ..its a grey area with no easy answers….thats why for me,, i can sympathize with the Guardian a bit ..if their policy says : we will allow groups to take out ads that look like editorials…then..thats what you do.. as long as they are not lying or engaging in anything criminal I am not sure the Guardian could have really objected to their content as a way to not run it.

  89. I hear you Darryn Dinesh Boodan. So maybe the question is what responsibility, if any, do newspapers have re unethical ads. Are you saying none? Print whatever? Genuine question, not a pong

  90. lotta trolls on this thread yaw. Lasana boy, me ain envy you nah. they peltin and there ain no umpire to call them out. when you gotta deal with all these trolls and they mess, is how yuh does have time to write the quality reporting that Wired868.com has become synonymous with?

  91. well i commented on that -they certainly have a right to publish it..i don’t think it incites any kind of violence .and the are certainly wrong to act like it was a mistake now

  92. But the thread isn’t about whether it is the most crass ad ever. It’s about the responsibilities of a media house. Or maybe I’m on the wrong thread…

  93. i wasn’t suggesting that at all…im just saying i make ads for a living..and this is hardly the first or only example of crass /unethical advertising…

  94. Darryn Dinesh Boodan, are you suggesting I should have left this topic alone and written on quack medicine instead?
    I’m a media man. I worked for the Guardian and the Express. I served very briefly on MATT. This is a topic that I have strong feelings about.
    But feel free to do that blog on quack medicine.

  95. but wait didn’t ian allyene destroy whatever reputation CNC3 and the guardian had a long time now anyway lol

  96. lol ..this is certainly crass and in poor taste..but i don’t think it would qualify as incitement to violence and I think people know its proposing the idea that Kubs may not be going without water as he stated….its a crap ad that will do the opposite of what it intended…like i said..the only reputation thats damaged is the Guardian..

  97. Targeting an individual and inciting like this could get somebody killed too eh. I hear you, but not sure I agree.

  98. the only people who seem to have been injured by this ad is the Guardian themselves

  99. to me yes..telling people that youve got the cure for cancer can get people killed

  100. Quack medicine is worse than a personal attack on a citizen at this level?

  101. Paid advertisements… Advertorials that were approved by the media house. The issue here is the media house claims it didn’t approve the ad… An ad they published.

  102. Lassna i have actually seen far worse than this in the local press.from .religious groups and people selling quack medicine

  103. the question to ask now maybe ..if they somehow really did int mean it..are they going to return the money ..and given the mistake..is anyone going to get fired..?..

  104. So you apologise and keep the money. There are many ways to earn a dollar Darryn Dinesh Boodan. And I know a thing or two about needing ad revenue to survive.

  105. well there is no way a full page ad that looks like that could run without first being approved by a lot of people..so obviously thats not true..

  106. I hope this conversation continues when election season opens the door to excessive mudslinging.

  107. Your point is they can advertise what they want to. Agreed. The EIC is saying they didn’t approve the ad… In short they didn’t mean to publish it. Sooooo… Why apologise if they can?

  108. No newspaper in Trinidad can claim to be reputable or without agenda.

  109. Mel, yuh mean they like to boast

  110. well look Im hardly a defender of the press/media..in Trinidad..would the Guardian run an ad attacking the PM or some other powerful person? ..of course not..do they use the fear of libel to evade stories that could cause them problems ..? sure i think so…but the reality is Lassana is that newspapers are dependent on advertising revenue ..and are run with politics and self interests as much as anybody or any other company..i wouldn’t put the blame squarely on the editor, or even the upper management ..and if its any consullation ..bad advertising like this always backfires..which seems to be the case here

  111. We will know who placed the Ad eventually…Trinis can’t keep a secret for long
    Just watch and see

  112. When Jack Warner attacked the Soca Warriors and called them greedy mercenaries who were in the pocket of the PNM, the players pooled money to respond in a full page ad that rebuffed those claims. All three newspapers refused to publish it because they claimed it was libellous. It wasn’t. The papers just didn’t want to upset a senior Government minister.
    But, on Saturday, Guardian published an ad that called Wayne Kulalsingh a human reptile. Think about that.

  113. Lol. Not Gov’t party per se… Just the group, body or what have you.

  114. That question has been answered several times on this thread Darryn Dinesh Boodan. You might agree or disagree but I cannot think of a different way to say it.
    When Jack Warner attacked the Soca Warriors and called them greedy mercenaries who were in the pocket of the PNM, the players pooled money to respond in a full page ad that rebuffed those claims. All three newspapers refused to publish it because they claimed it was libellous. It wasn’t. The papers just didn’t want to upset a senior Government minister.
    But, on Saturday, they published an ad that called Wayne Kulalsingh a human reptile. Either people get it or they don’t oui.

  115. What do you mean by the ‘Party’ that paid for it Lasana?

  116. as someone who works in advertising..the only thing i find surprising is that the mock editorial seemed to co op the Guardian branding..which to me is unethical…as for the message itself…people/groups have a right to say what they want .no matter how moronic .as long as it doesn’t break the law .why cant the Guardian publish it? ..

  117. How it reach in the first place? Oh right I know Guardianunc.

  118. Fayola Bostic, if Wayne Kublalsingh paid Guardian for an ad that called the Prime Minister a human reptile with a drinking problem and then offered a very weak defence of that claim, would the Guardian have run it?
    I think it is very obvious why the paper should have run that ad once we believe that all people deserve the same protection and respect from the media.
    Remember when CNC3 spoke about that incident with Asha Javeed, Phelps and John Jeremy? The next day, they apologised to Phelps and Jeremy but not to Javeed.
    Or what about Garth St. Clair’s case?
    I say Kublalsingh and everyone else should get the same respect as the people with million dollar lawyers.

  119. Rhoda Bharath. Thanks. Understood

  120. Fayola Bostic, my point is the company must have a criteria for the type of advertising it accepts. If it didn’t have a criteria then the EICs comments about approval would be redundant. This is not me saying they have to like the ads. This is me saying that any business has standards and procedures. Media houses have codes of conduct and ethical issues that must be addressed. Does the Guardian have a policy on advertorials and their content. If so, how is the entity taking out the ad more responsible than the newspaper for it being published?

  121. At any point in today’s paper did the Guardian indicate that it was going to apologize, retract and explain what evidently went wrong here? Because that headline is bollocks…

  122. And that comment is a general media ethics question and not about whether this particular ad should have been printed ok. There must be some guidelines about the type of ads accepted (slander, hate speech, etc.), right? It doesn’t just boil down to do we agree with it does it? Genuine question for media people on the thread.

  123. *reads this thread..LL and RB….don’t you just love Cognitive Dissonance?

  124. I don’t know Rhoda Bharath. I find the ad distasteful but at the same time I don’t know if I can get behind a newspaper only printing ads they agree with.

  125. If a senior columnist at the Guardian can argue that the fault lies with who placed the ad, and not the newspaper that accepted it then my decision to boycott the newspaper entirely os justified. How on earth can an advertiser force the Guardian to publish an ad it doesn’t agree with?

  126. To clear the air Lasana Liburd, I have no pity for the media, nor do I have any for Kubs in this specific instance. As a citizen I am free to pick and choose what I support.

  127. The point Jason is we are not discussing Kublalsingh’s court case or the Armstrong report here. Of course it is a debate worth having. And there were threads dedicated to that as well.
    But this conversation is really about media ethics.

  128. Well if there are laws, Kubs should use said laws and lay some law suits. But then again Kubs himself does not respect the law. He lost 3 consecutive cases in Court and is still making himself a security threat outside the Office of the Prime Minister. So laws are only mentioned conveniently when someone other than Kubs should respect it. Lasana Liburd you seem to only welcome people who agree with you to make comments. That is a poor sign. I offer my exact feelings on the matter. I alone do not have these views so if you want to ignore my views and bury your head in the sand you are free to do so.

  129. That’s the last guardian I buying.

  130. Lasana Liburd… If those with the responsibility of checking the newspaper before it goes to bed playing Pontius Pilate, should I expect Abdullah to pressure the right people?
    I’m expected to turn off my brain and accept that the entire editorial dept went home Friday evening and say the newspaper same time as Joe/Jane Public.
    Mr Live Wire is now my EIC.

  131. The Guardian’s follow-up story headline today:
    “Probe source of anti-Kublalsingh ads-Abdulah”
    And the editorial: “Planning for Petro-Caribe final”

  132. Rhoda Bharath, this the Guardian’s follow-up story today:
    “Probe source of anti-Kublalsingh ads-David Abdulah”
    Because the problem is the person(s) who paid for the ad you see. Not the company that took the money and fired shots at Wayne Kublalsingh’s reputation.
    Everyone knows hitmen never go to jail right? It is just business for them.

  133. “You can’t tell private citizens what to spend their money on”?
    You would be surprised to know that there are a whole bunch of things called laws and they actually point to quite a few things people cannot spend their money on.
    And saying that to speak about something is the same as promoting it; thereby Wired868 has done more to the anti-Kublal cause than the Guardian…
    Well, I really think I should just sidestep that one. That is straight out of Inception 2.
    I feel your intention was to wreck this conversation. There is a word for such behaviour online. But I’m trying not to be rude.

  134. You are right Jason Lewis. A girl can still wish though…

  135. You can’t tell private citizens what to spend their money on.

  136. Exactly Fayola! Of course some will suggest we are expecting way to much. In fact they will insist on it. Basic courtesy? Decency? Laughable.

  137. I wish instead of spending money on calling someone a “human reptile” they had sent in an ad with counter-arguments supporting the highway being built as planned, and the good reasons for considering, but not following the Armstrong report (if there are any. I don’t know enough to say either way). All I see is a frail man fighting for a cause, a dismissive gov’t basically saying we know best, dead if you must dead, and then bullies attacking the man. If this is not the correct narrative, I wish someone would shed some light without all the vitriol.

  138. Ms. Prem I can assure you that it was not people of the ilk of Kubs that made sacrifices for our progress. I repeat if innovators were like Kubs we would be bareback in the bush shitting in a hole. Kubs wrote a pamphlet and calling it a book. That is his innovation in a nutshell.

  139. But no steups for the man pretending to fast. It is typical that we believe the trained actors.

  140. I saw that ad and thought to myself..”wow, that is childish” paints us all in a very very silly light. And the letter to the Medical Doctor from the boy Ravi was as pathetic. But I do sympathize with this child Ravi; anytime a human being attempts something as difficult as conquering mind over body it really is best that you have a solid peaceful focus over your mind BEFORE attempting to add pivotal pain like fasting, thirst and such. I imagine that starting this thing with a highlighted “spite” factor would make it very hard to handle AND by virtue of starting on the wrong footing, renders the effort quite useless to deeper thinking minds. Certainly elicits a big ol fashion STEUPPS from me in any case. Sorry son.

  141. Mr Liburd, you do journalism proud although all of your efforts cannot undo the damage done by the stuff you expose in here.

  142. #haddakeepthe…well, some of yall know the rest.

  143. Oh no. Wow. What do we have here. Don’t be disrespectful to our past boy. There were many people who fought to have the comforts you are having now. And this machine you writing on, many of the parts are from digging Mother Earth. Even the electricity, the gas for you to sit in your air conditioned car, for you to cook without smoke in your face. Don’t degrade those who died fighting.

  144. I have to laugh sometimes yes. If we all went extreme like Kubs, we would be still bareback in the bush shitting in a hole.

  145. How sad. He is getting help from the divine. How long, god knows. His cause is for the truth. People would not understand this strength.

  146. Kubs already won the war. He got NIDCO to fix a lot of deficiencies, He just does not know when to call it quits.

  147. I have a lot more understanding of the situation than most. This is a lost cause.

  148. Of course. Let us all sit in the comfort of our house (and limited understanding) and determine which cause we think is worth fighting for and which is not. I like that approach..

  149. Why do you place an ad in a newspaper? It is to get the message circulated. Isn’t it being circulated here? Only difference is that it is for free.

  150. You are also right about me not caring about Kubs. When Kubs pick up a cause worth supporting I can back him. Why didn’t he go and protest against the Muslimeen illegal quarries? Where was he when they mash up San Fernando Hill? He seem to have lost his way with this one. First it was because people were being displaced, now is because of a swamp that people built houses in and reduced the size of the swamp. Next it will be about good governance and transparency. After that it will be because Kermit like tea.

  151. For as far back as recorded time, people and entities have been called out on perpetual shortcomings and stupidity. You can call it free advertising. Some people see it as calling out. On perpetual shortcomings and stupidity..

  152. I think you all are missing the bigger picture. This post is free advertising for the Guradian and even more free advertising for the people who placed the ad.

  153. You couldn’t care less about media code or anything resembling ethics I am sure Jason. As your very first comments stated you also couldn’t care less about ‘Kubs’ and his cause. I admire your attempt to hide your true position behind the media lack of responsibility though..

  154. There is no code. Only agendas and revenue.

  155. Well I guess if you don’t know of the code it doesn’t exist.

  156. I don’t know of any such code in the media. The only code I have observed is push the limits and hire good lawyers when those law suits start to come in.

  157. Yes yes. Business as ususal why bother to complain right. If that consoles you why you even commenting? We hotting we head why you bothering?

  158. Actually hookers have morality. Sex workers have a code and stick to it. Guardian has a code.. Much touted during walk out Wednesday. It also has a chain of command and protocol on editorial… And didn’t follow it. I’ll thank you to give sex workers some respect.

  159. Which world you live in? Media sensationalize for profit. You seem to be looking for morality in a hooker.

  160. You totally missed the point I was making. A media house has a responsibility to it’s readers. To compare those expected practise to that of social media makes little sense. Still, even Facebook has lines it won’t cross and things they won’t tolerate, a concept it seems that is lost to some media houses.

  161. Kirk somehow you believe people read the news from the newspapers more than they get information from social media. I am sure most people would have actually seen this article on social media like this post. As a matter of fact, this is the first place I saw it.

  162. Stopped buying guardian since the editors all resigned because of alleged Political Interference.

  163. I find it amusing that the operations of a daily newspaper with it’s own expected responsibility can be compared to a social media website. In related news, there are still some things Facebook will not tolerate or stand for. Imagine that if you can..

  164. The best way to kill some propaganda is to ignore it totally.

  165. Jason Lewis, like yuh still ent read de copy of de HRC Report dat ah give yuh.

  166. As a matter of fact you are helping spread the same message you are disgusted with.

  167. Money talks Rhoda! Trust me this is nothing compared to what will be seen come election time 2015. ENT?

  168. I don’t have any high expectations from any media these days. While we buying all the shit they are selling, they laughing all the way to the bank. You simply mentioning the ad is giving them more visibility.

  169. The media is not supposed to hold Facebook up as a template. Not that I would argue with you there.

  170. We have the OCM group who seem to thrive on propaganda and slander, then we have the syrian media that sway from side to side as the wind blows.

  171. I see all kinds of slander on facebook and people doing it for free. There is nothing moral about Trinidad’s media.

  172. Here’s a tip Jason Lewis. People cannot publish anything they like about someone else. Ad or not.
    Look up: “slander.” And while you’re at, look up: “red herring.”
    This is about the operation of the media and its moral and legal moorings.
    One’s opinion of the highway re-route movement is irrelevant to this topic and the HRM’s fight was not even mentioned in the article.

  173. Also Lasana, unlike you I was there. I can verify what is in the article as the truth. The JCC also agreed that the government never agreed to abide by the findings. They agreed to consider it. I saw first hand how these people calling themselves impartial and civil society, only have one goal & that is to frustrate the government. Nothing else.

  174. It is an ad. People pay for ads and the newspapers place them. By the way, media houses don’t need any help being vile and disgusting.

  175. “This newspaper will screw anyone for money while its owner holds the Order of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago for outstanding contributions to public service. Does that mean prostitution is now legal?”

  176. Jack good good pardner? Why all yuh so?

  177. Wrong thread Jason Lewis. We are discussing the morality of a media house allowing itself to be used in a vile attack on a citizen for money.
    I wouldn’t even comment on the columnist you chose to put your faith in.

  178. I have seen open contempt and disgust towards Dr. Kublasingh position on one hand, later masked by a pathetic attempt to appear concerned after the fact..

  179. Peter O Connor is a consultant on the project?
    Is he refuting the Armstrong Report?

  180. I would like to introduce some logic from Peter O’Connor. “The Ministry of Works and Infrastructure met with the Civil Society groups on Wednesday, I attended the meeting because I wanted to learn more, from both sides. I learned the following, and none of this was disputed by either side:

    The route between Mon Desir and Debe does not pass through the swamp as previously claimed. The only place where mangrove is being destroyed is along the Mosquito Creek stretch which is not in dispute. No mountain is being removed from the Northern Range to fill the swamp. The revised proposed HRM re-route had not been assessed by any engineers for the HRM. So the work and the protests continue.

    It would be interesting to visit the area and southwest generally in two years time, to see for ourselves what the highway has done for the people and for business, and what problems it has brought to the communities there.” http://www.newsday.co.tt/commentary/0,201816.html

  181. Kubs may have started in the right place, but I think he is only trying to remain relevant now. This is his only claim to fame and logic and sense is trying to take that away from him.

  182. Sometimes the people who sympathize with a particular cause are not tree huggers, eccentrics, axe grinders, elitists or political toters. Sometimes people sympathize because they have this little thing called sympathy. And understanding. Even in it’s basic form it’s still a human condition, not a disease..

  183. Lasana Liburd you are calling Kubs voiceless? LOL. I would have assumed you would reserve that label for abused children etc. not on a man whose only claim to fame is protesting. Without protesting Kubs is as invisible as a vagrant in Woodford Square. I think he is afraid to go back being a virual nobody if he stops.

  184. LOL. The normal whose who of who can get attention off of Kubs are assembling.

  185. It is amazing that the people who seem to sympathize with Kubs are tree huggers, eccentrics, axe grinders, elitists and generally political toters.

  186. The EIC is adamant that her team didn’t.

  187. The ad was laid out to look like a newspaper story. Is Judy saying that someone in advertising used a Guardian editorial template to build the ad? Or is the Guardian editorial template used by Independent ad agencies to build advertorials? This. Makes. No. Sense.

  188. Level slackness. Dehumanising, distasteful, disgusting. The Guardian can’t even be considered a rag at this point. Stop patronising that kennel liner. Don’t buy it, don’t subscribe to it online and don’t share articles from it. Send a message. Exercise your purchasing power and decline to buy the Guardian Newspaper, or watch CNC3 or listen to any GML radio station.

  189. The ad is distasteful, but does the editorial staff see ads before they go to print?

  190. The Chickens are coming home to roost. Many a newspaper worker would lose their job.

  191. As expected from any ANSA Company

  192. Didn’t cross my desk is the new meaning of Turning a blind eye I guess!!

  193. As in Genesis 18:26, I wonder if Abraham would find ten righteous men in T&T to save us from God’s wrath….

  194. As a member of the reading public it’s personal for me. The media house is taking me for an ass. I’m unimpressed.
    On what grounds do their critique state bodies and agencies for corruption and inattention to standards, process and procedure and then produce work like this?
    Quite frankly, I’m tired of the pretence at balance and integrity.

  195. The sad stranglehold of the puppet masters of this country, this is the status quo that the Highway reroute is challenging… also the status quo a former PM challenged…but got voted out…sad is our portion.

  196. I should point out this kind of stuff is never personal for me. I worked alongside many of those persons in the media and rarely ever had a fall out on a personal level.
    But the media is supposed to be the voice of the voiceless.
    Then, the media would leverage the respect and following earned in the community by selling space to businesses who can sell their wares to readers.
    But some of the work in the media is alienating or insulting readers and thereby violating that three way relationship.
    For me, it is morally wrong and, from a business standpoint, it is short sighted.

  197. Correct, Asha Javeed… A member of staff at the Guardian is saying editorial staff never saw the ad.

  198. I don’t know why you think that the mainstream media has any real commitment to ethics, protocols or decency. If you actually believe that, then you are naive in the extreme

  199. That was so disrespectful and inhumane. I couldn’t believe what I was seeing.

  200. Ads such as those, in my experience, are usually sent to the editor of the day to look through before publication. The newspaper can say no. Newsday recently refused to publish an ad (which was a statement) from the Central Bank after the bank filed an injunction to prevent a story from publication.

  201. Ask advertising? That’s it from the editor in chief?


  203. If vilifying, demeaning and insulting a cause doesn’t work, try the next best thing; vilify, demean and insult the man. Seems very logical..

  204. Agreed Lasana Liburd. And the very nature of the ad calls for some discussion among the decision makers within the media house itself, at the very least. There had to be one person in the entire Guardian who possess even basic understanding. Maybe a Panadol Multi-Symptoms ad doesn’t need much clearance. But this right here requires a better excuse..

  205. It may appear confusing but they are all cut from the same soiled moral fabric where MONEY could easily sway someones moral pretense.

  206. And we all know about the stories in the Guardian walk-out that were later revealed to be nonsense. That makes me more skeptical.
    Say someone high up ordered them to take the ad. But no way the head of advertising can make that call. That is a preposterous suggestion to anyone with experience of a media house.

  207. So the head of advertising has more weight than the editor-in-chief? That sounds bizarre even for Guardian. I find it hard to swallow that.

  208. Integrity is dead, whoring oneself and certifying yourself to be self centered, crass and morally degenerative are the new heights so called professionals aspire too. I have stopped buying newspapers a long time now and it would appear that I am doomed to continue this practice.

  209. If only you got the quote from the editor I got. Boy!

  210. There is this wild free reign within media circles, that seems to be void of even basic consideration. Ask Ian Alleyne. Head hotting seems useless..

  211. Plenty newsprint sold to political parties.

  212. This was real? Grounds for a lawsuit if so:)

  213. I don’t think you can get lower than that, I’d be ashamed if I was a cleaner working in The Guardian’s Office right now, this country never fails to show its true 3rd world colours, smdfh and absolutely disgusted

  214. There are times when common decency should trump money. And freedom of speech should still allow for some manner of respect..

  215. Well Therese and Suzanne not coy about their bias.
    One of the editors at Guardian is saying editorial was unaware of the ad. That the advertising dept okayed the ad and sent it down to the print room. One wonders about the editorial procedures and standards at GAML… But Ik sure there is no political interference there.

  216. And that is a tragic state of affairs.

  217. The Newsday is not behind either. Poor taste is normal business:(

  218. It was laid out to look like a story, not an ad. Further, its thrust is personal. It isn’t attacking his ideology but his person. We really going down the road of the US does do it too? Then can we get a KamlaCare Bill?

  219. And remember the test, Kendall, would they have published that ad if you took Kublalsingh’s name out and replaced it with Raymond or Sabga?

  220. If that were an article, the Guardian would have vetted closed for slander and be sure to check the medical qualifications of the person giving the opinion.
    Wayne Kublalsingh would have been asked to rebut as well.
    But, because someone paid enough, they put in news section and cover identity of source.
    That is one of the most despicable things I’ve ever seen in the local media. From the time they read “Human reptile” they should have binned it.

  221. Kendall look at the masthead of the ad – it’s made very much to look like a Guardian piece. I’m curious how that was allowed to pass.

  222. If we get the government, media and police that we deserve; then God can’t possibly be a Trini.

  223. And the worst part is, it wasn’t even funny. Just came across as v bitter and crass.

  224. In the USA, politicians are subject to far more critical ads questioning their integrity etc. Difference is though that said ads are usually endorsed by the opponents of the ad’s focus. There are those attributed to some vague amorphous organisations purporting to represent the public.

    Much as I personally dislike the ad, I am not sure I will vilify the Guardian for publishing same. It’s a nasty satirical piece that is meant to obfuscate the real issues and probably a sign of how low they are willing to go. The lawyers will have to advise if this constitutes libel or any other actionable offense.

  225. That is par for the course with them….classless

  226. Yes. It has. And i suspect this approach has become par for the course now.

  227. The Guardian has lost its prominence for years now! ’nuff said.

  228. Even if the Guardian was paid for this it is still classless!

  229. It’s the whole GML group, they advertising on radio too. Is this part of the $20M awareness campaign that each Ministry has been allocated?

  230. With this ad in mind, it is gloves off in the next election campaign. Imagine the most despicable attack possible on your opponent… The Trinidad Guardian would probably publish it.

  231. No paper should have sunk so low.

  232. A couple years ago, the current editor in chief of the guardian was working as a columnist at the Express and functioning as editor from time to time. The Express published the photo of three men who were suspected of a crime, but the Express’ headline assumed their guilt and used it in the headline along with circling their pics in bold red. I raised the issue of judging the men in the court of public opinion before they had actually faced trial and why a leading newspaper needed to be more responsible. I talked about how the need for accuracy and objective reporting should be the priority. The columnist/editor responded on the thread by asking what was wrong with a newspaper publishing a headline and frontpage that would help to sell papers. Shortly thereafter came the Guardian appointment. This approach by the newspaper doesn’t surprise me.

  233. unethical and disgusting coming from one of T&T mainstream media houses

  234. I’ll give a TT$ 100.00 for yur ad, when you ready…. agree with you but they may turn you down for moral or legal (slander or so…) reasons…

  235. Scotty Ranking

    Clearly The Guardian does not heed Chrisley’s motto … Class, not ass!

  236. Nicole Philip Greene

    I’m shocked they allowed the ad artwork which so closely resembles their own masthead. If they wanted to, they had an excuse to reject on those grounds alone, no? Quite interesting…

    • Nicole, as far as i see it, they can refuse a business proposal (that what the request for publishing a add ultimately is..) anytime with no specific reason….