Business and Economic Commentary by Christopher Ram
The impending closure of Stabroek News marks the end of one of the most significant institutions in Guyana’s modern media history. For nearly four decades the newspaper occupied a central place in the country’s public life and was widely recognised as one of the voices that helped sustain the struggle for democratic restoration, culminating in the return to free and fair elections in 1992.
This is not to suggest that Stabroek News represented the entirety of Guyana’s independent media. Other private newspapers, including Kaieteur News, as well as a growing number of online platforms, continue to operate and contribute to the country’s information landscape. But Stabroek News distinguished itself in several important respects. It developed a reputation for editorial independence, it functioned for many years as a kind of newspaper of record, and its letters page provided perhaps the most open and democratic public forum in Guyana. Over time that column became something of an informal national meeting place where academics, trade unionists, political figures, public servants, businesspeople and ordinary citizens debated, as equals, matters of public importance. In a society where structured spaces for civic and civil discussion are limited, that platform allowed citizens to speak directly to each other, and to those who govern.
Yet as the newspaper prepares to close its doors, the Government has uttered not a single word acknowledging its contribution. That silence is striking. Governments have often had difficult relationships with independent media. That is neither unusual nor necessarily unhealthy. But when a publication with such a long and consequential history disappears without even a word from those who exercise public authority, the silence itself becomes part of the story.
The conduct of the Government towards the Stabroek News over several years has been less than healthy for a fledgling democracy. This makes that silence all the more troubling. There is something distasteful when, following the closure announcement and the passage of a $1.5 trillion budget, the Government pays a mere $7.5 million towards a debt of approximately $90 million owed for advertising services going back a year. To compound matters, with more than a fortnight before closure, the Government stopped all advertising in the paper. That is beyond distasteful.
Yet, none of this should be misunderstood as suggesting that government advertising is the principal reason for the newspaper’s demise. Like newspapers around the world, Stabroek News has been confronting the structural challenges facing print media in the digital age. Readership patterns have changed dramatically, and fewer readers are willing to purchase printed editions – or even pay for electronic versions – of newspapers. Those economic realities have affected the entire industry, Stabroek News included.
The Government’s posture toward the newspaper nevertheless sits uneasily alongside the substantial public resources devoted to the State’s own media operations. The 2026 Estimates show that significant public funds continue to be directed to Government media entities. Under the Office of the Prime Minister – Programme “Government Information and Services”, the National Communications Network (NCN) is allocated $490.192 million for 2026. In addition, the Public Sector Investment Programme provides $75 million in capital funding for upgrading and expanding the NCN network. The Guyana National Newspapers Limited, publisher of the State-owned newspaper, also receives millions towards its capital expenditure, and the lion’s share of the government’s advertising budget, out of the Department of Public Information.
That entity will this year be receiving $480 million from the Treasury. By the most conservative measure, the Estimates show that well over one billion dollars in public funds is devoted annually to the Government’s information and media apparatus.
No one seriously suggests that governments do not have a legitimate role in communicating information to the public. The question is not whether government communication should exist. The issue is whether the allocation of public resources reflects a healthy balance between state communication and the survival of independent media.
There is another dimension that should not be ignored. The Auditor General has repeatedly reported that several state-owned enterprises are behind in the preparation, audit and tabling of their financial statements, limiting timely parliamentary scrutiny of entities supported by public funds. The accounts of the National Communications Network have historically reached the National Assembly years after the period to which they relate. The Department of Public Information, meanwhile, operates not as a separate corporation but as a department within the Office of the Prime Minister and therefore does not produce a distinct set of publicly tabled financial statements.
The contrast is therefore difficult to overlook. An independent newspaper that has played a significant role in the country’s democratic evolution now faces closure amid official silence, while substantial public resources continue to sustain the State’s own media institutions.
The disappearance of an independent newspaper also raises wider questions about the future of public discourse in Guyana. Democracies depend not only on elections but on the existence of institutions capable of facilitating informed debate and holding power to account. Newspapers historically performed that function not only through their reporting and editorials but also by providing a structured space in which citizens could exchange views on matters affecting the national interest. When such institutions disappear, the loss is not simply commercial. It alters the universe of public discussion. The challenge for any democratic society is to ensure that independent voices – like Stabroek News and Kaieteur News – remain part of that national conversation.
Interestingly, while the Government has remained silent, Guyanese society has not. In the days since the closure was announced, the letters pages have been filled with tributes from across the country. Writers from every segment of society – academics, trade unionists, political figures, professionals and ordinary citizens – have expressed their sense of loss, mourning not only the passing of a newspaper but the disappearance of a national institution.
One voice alone has been conspicuously absent.
The silence speaks for itself.