The print media in Trinidad and Tobago are groaning about its critics (both in and out of government) calling out their apparent bias in reporting.  There seems to be no standard of conduct to which this segment of the media measures itself nor does it seem that its churlish reaction to its critics have any limits to which it would not stoop to defend itself.  Armed with its constitutional right of "FREEDOM OF THE PRESS", they squeal oppression or suppression of the press each time their bias is pointed out.  Lately the gender of the alleged offending journalist was placed as a shield to protect against criticism of the text, tone and style of reporting.  Those who are the survivors of the print media's alleged bias are deemed not to have the right to point out the prejudice of the reporting.  The survivors silence is deemed to be protective of the "FREEDOM OF THE PRESS" but the collective voice of protest against the prejudiced reporting is not seen as upholding the constitutional right of "FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION".  Shrill headlines speaks of suppression of its rights (no right is absolute) follows but the opportunity to reflect upon the criticism and ensure it is fulling its RESPONSIBILITY is never taken.

In this piece veteran journalist Jai Parasram comments on the situation:

Commentary: Let's not lose focus on the role of media in a democracy