Sunday, December 12, 2010

POSITIVE vs NEGATIVE

If our elected and appointed leaders do not meet the minimum standards, should they receive kudos and praise from the public and a pass from the media?

In recent months, the IMPACT program and to a minor degree, the local paper have been criticized for being negative in some of the reporting they have done. Is such criticism justified? Would it be necessary to report the negative activities if those elected and appointed were following just the minimum standards?

Reasonable people believe some of the minimum standards are transparency, openness, fairness, law abiding, accountability, honoring of the law and the codes, and doing all the business of the public in the open.
If our leaders follow the minimum standards, should they be given kudos and praise for doing what they said they would do and what is expected?
If they exceeded the minimum standards, then praise and kudos would be in order.

When they fail to even execute the minimum standards, their actions must be made public, and to the uninitiated, they mistakenly believe that such reporting is negative and unnecessary and certain ones are being picked on.

The need for openness in government trumps the criticism of those who believe otherwise and end up complaining about the media. Citizens have the right to know what is going on. They have a right to know who follows the minimum standard or exceeds it. Likewise, they also have the right to know about those who thwart reasonableness, openness and try to cover up being accountable.

Until all of our leaders, both appointed and elected, follow just the minimum standards and practice the principles of open and accountable leadership, the media will continue to report their actions and its outcomes.
Perhaps it would pay to mention once again, there is no need to criticize the messengers because such reporting will stop as soon as the leaders do what they contracted to do.