The suspension of Walfadjiri’s signal by the Cnra does not seem to us to be an excessive measure that borders on excess of power. Indeed, reproaching a press organ, in particular television, for direct coverage of demonstrations on the pretext that this will constitute a counter-example for young people is, for the media, a serious problem. Because, it is asking them to take feedback into account in the processing of information, that is to say to set themselves up by communicating. Of course, we are familiar with crisis communication and its imperatives, we also know that the press plays a role of social regulator and even of educator, but this must in no way prevail over the duty to inform while respecting the sanctity of facts and the fidelity of their relationship.
Everything else is an editorial issue. Indeed, every media outlet has one. And Walf, it is clear, does not work like Rts or any other local television. The TV created by Sidy Lamine Niass has its way of processing information that must be respected. Clearly, covering protests live is not, in and of itself, professional misconduct. It is therefore the Cnra which, this time, has been overzealous.
In any case, such an approach is detrimental to the freedom of the press and could constitute a serious attack on the constitutional freedom to inform. Because, other events of this kind could still occur in a political context of tension and all the media which will cover them could be sanctioned. This means that it is important for the authorities to pull themselves together in order to allow the media to do their job.
But, if we want to prohibit politicians from carrying out their activities and journalists from doing their work, we will all find ourselves in a State of exception, that is to say a State where everything is prohibited except what is permitted. However, in a democratic State, it is the opposite, that is to say that here, everything is permitted except what is prohibited.
Assane Samb
