Editorial Note: The Caymanian Journal (TCJ) is an affiliate of Stingray Media Group, which is owned by Don Seymour, TCJ's founder. This reply concerns Mr Seymour, companies he controls and the Caymanians First Charitable Foundation, which he founded. It was prepared under TCJ's regulatory code. Mr Seymour did not commission, review or approve it, nor did any other reader outside the newsroom before publication.

A reader who has followed The Caymanian Journal (TCJ) since its launch has written to the Editor-in-Chief to ask whether the newspaper is prepared to apply to its own founder, owner and funding the scrutiny it has applied to others. The letter, signed “an interested reader”, is published in full below alongside the Editor-in-Chief’s reply.

The writer praises TCJ’s FOI reporting and its willingness to question political and commercial relationships in Cayman’s media, but asks why the same questions have not been put closer to home. The letter cites a CI$200,000 contribution to The Progressives (formerly PPM) party in the 2025 election, recorded in the Elections Office register under the name “DMS”, and asks which company made it, who authorised it and whether founder Don Seymour was involved. It raises his keynote address at the Progressives’ 2017 campaign launch, the financial arrangements between Stingray Media companies and the Caymanians First Charitable Foundation, which stages the Stingray Raffle, and the question of who funds the newsroom. It asks whether the Editor can commission an investigation into DMS, Stingray or the Progressives without approval from outside the newsroom, and whether TCJ would investigate Mr Seymour if circumstances required it.

TCJ has put each of those questions to Mr Seymour in writing and publishes his answers in full below, including his statement that the contribution came from Central Massive Ltd, a company he controls, and that he authorised it. The Editor-in-Chief sets out who owns and funds TCJ and how stories touching the founder's interests are decided.

The letter was received on 27 October 2026 and is published unedited; it was signed “an interested reader” and sent from an email account displaying the name “Patrick Tipp”.

The letter

Dear Mr Hayat, Editor-in-Chief,

I've been following The Caymanian Journal since it launched, and I think some of the reporting has been genuinely very good and a breath of fresh air for Cayman. The FOI work, particularly around government spending and decision-making, and the willingness to question political and commercial relationships are welcome.

But there's something I've been wondering about, and I'd be interested to hear your response.

TCJ has made media ownership, political access and conflicts of interest a prominent part of its reporting. Your articles on Pilar Bush's move from the Premier's Office to Compass rightfully examined her previous relationship with Dart, Dart's ownership of Compass and what those connections might mean for editorial independence. Your subsequent reporting on Karie Bergstrom went further into her family and business relationships, including her brother's former ownership of Compass.

These are fair questions to ask. You've also been open that Compass is a commercial competitor.

But I wonder whether TCJ is prepared to ask the same questions about the people and businesses behind its own publication.

The most obvious example is the CI $200,000 political donation recorded simply as "DMS" to the Progressives during the 2025 election campaign. The Cayman Compass reported that, after examining Elections Office records and receipts, this was the largest single reported donation to any party or candidate in that election.

Don Seymour founded DMS and also founded TCJ, which is published through his wider Stingray Media business interests.

I may have missed it, but I haven't seen TCJ examine that donation or the political relationships behind it.

Which DMS company actually made the contribution? Who authorised it, and was Mr Seymour involved in the decision? Has TCJ looked into the wider political-donation history of DMS or its founder?

There's also some relevant history. Mr Seymour was the keynote speaker at the Progressives' 2017 campaign launch. That of course doesn't establish his current political allegiance, and there's nothing inherently wrong with supporting a political party. But combined with the 2025 donation it seems relevant background for readers of a newspaper founded by him the following year.

If a Dart-associated company had made the largest reported political donation of the election, would TCJ consider that worth investigating? Would you be asking who made the decision, what relationships existed and whether those relationships had any bearing on the editorial independence of Compass?

I suspect you would, and quite reasonably.

I also have questions about TCJ's funding and the relationship between Stingray Media, DMS and Caymanians First Charitable Foundation. The Foundation's own Conflict of Interest Policy is particularly interesting. It acknowledges that Mr Seymour controls Stingray Media Group and has a direct financial interest on both sides of arrangements under which Stingray Media Ltd and Stingray Raffle Ltd receive payment for services provided to the Foundation.

The policy sets out safeguards, including approval by directors without conflicting interests, independent legal advice and written commercial agreements. I welcome that disclosure. But it also states that the financial terms and pricing remain confidential.

The connection is particularly relevant because the Foundation's raffle arrangements also involve distributing complimentary copies of TCJ.

How much do these related companies receive from the Foundation, and how are those amounts assessed? What is the financial relationship between TCJ and the Foundation? TCJ's own pre-launch material said that proceeds generated by the newspaper would be directed to a charitable foundation. How does that arrangement actually work?

And who funds TCJ itself? Is the newsroom financially supported by Mr Seymour, DMS, Stingray or another associated company? If so, would TCJ consider disclosing the nature of that support?

The Foundation's policy states that TCJ retains editorial independence and that the Foundation has no say in what it publishes. But that doesn't quite answer a different question: what role, if any, does the person who owns and controls the publisher have in deciding what the newspaper investigates?

Is there a written editorial policy dealing specifically with conflicts involving Mr Seymour or his other businesses? Can the editor commission an investigation into DMS, the Progressives or Stingray without seeking approval from anybody outside the newsroom? Would TCJ publish those arrangements so readers can judge for themselves?

There's another example which I think gets at the same issue, although it is historical.

In February 2017 Reuters examined the collapse of Platinum Partners following criminal fraud charges against several of its senior executives. Its reporting identified Don Seymour and David Bree of DMS Governance as directors of Platinum's troubled Value Arbitrage Fund and examined the wider Cayman professional-director model, particularly the number of appointments held by some directors.

I'm not suggesting Mr Seymour participated in the fraud or was accused of doing so. Reuters also reported that DMS had questioned management decisions, resigned and raised concerns with CIMA.

But Reuters considered the circumstances worth examining, including what the independent directors knew and how effectively the governance arrangements had worked.

Obviously this happened nearly ten years ago, long before TCJ launched and I wouldn't expect a new newspaper to revisit every historical controversy involving its founder. But my question is what would happen if equivalent circumstances arose today.

If a prominent Cayman businessperson were identified as a director of a troubled investment fund whose executives faced serious fraud charges, and questions were being raised internationally about the effectiveness of the board's oversight, would TCJ investigate that person's role and professional history?

And would the answer be any different if the person concerned were Don Seymour? That's the test I'm interested in. Not whether every historical matter involving Mr Seymour deserves a new investigation, but whether TCJ is genuinely free to apply the same editorial judgement to its own founder that it applies to other prominent figures in Cayman.

To be fair, TCJ has made some disclosures about its associated businesses and commercial relationships, and you've reported on matters involving people connected to the organisation. I don't want to ignore that. But acknowledging a relationship isn't necessarily the same as independently examining it. TCJ has demonstrated considerable curiosity about the people behind other institutions, particularly where political connections and commercial interests might affect public trust. I haven't yet seen the same depth of examination applied to the interests behind TCJ itself.

And that is what makes the statements at your inaugural Forum particularly relevant.

You yourself, Mr Hayat, said that the real test of independence comes when journalists have to challenge "somebody you like, somebody who supported you, perhaps even somebody you depend on".

You also said: "Nobody is beyond fair scrutiny. And that includes us."

I thought that was a very good point.

So I'd be genuinely interested to know whether TCJ intends to examine its own ownership, funding arrangements, political connections and related business interests with the same curiosity it has shown towards Dart, Compass and others.

Or, at the very least, whether you would publish a clear explanation of the safeguards that allow the newsroom to investigate those interests without interference.

I'm not suggesting TCJ is a PPM newspaper or that Mr Seymour is directing its coverage. There's no basis for me to make that claim. But readers shouldn't have to take editorial independence entirely on trust, particularly when the publication itself has encouraged them to question the independence of others.

I think TCJ has been a worthwhile addition to Cayman journalism, and I hope it continues asking difficult questions.

I'd just like to see the same questions asked closer to home.

An interested reader

The Editor-in-Chief's reply

At the inaugural TCJ Forum this year I said that power is not in our hands but in the hands of our readers, the citizens of this country. I said they're “the boss”. A reader has now taken me at my word, and “the boss” has asked a question of those who serve them. I sincerely welcome the opportunity to respond. The principle I conveyed at the Forum carries a corresponding obligation: a newspaper that seeks to hold others to account must be equally willing to submit its own judgments to scrutiny. It is in that spirit that I offer this reply.

Their letter is well researched and it quotes me accurately. Its central point is also right: acknowledging a relationship is not the same as examining it. We have disclosed our ownership in stories where it mattered. We have not, until today, set the full picture out in one place, and we have not reported on our founder's political giving. We do both today, and publishing the reader's letter, Mr Seymour's answers and this reply is the first test of whether we mean it.

Who owns and funds TCJ

TCJ is operated through its own legal entity and is an affiliate of Stingray Media Group, which is owned by Mr Seymour. It has no outside investors and has received no government money to date.

Mr Seymour founded Waystone, of which he remains a shareholder, and he controls DMS Organization Ltd and other businesses through his family office, Black Unicorn. We asked him, in writing, about his financial relationship with the Government. His answer: “Since leaving the Monetary Authority in 2000 I have been financially independent of government - no contract, no payment, no benefit of any kind. That independence is the point of this newspaper.”

The CI$200,000 contribution

The Elections Office register of campaign contributions records a CI$200,000 contribution to the Progressives during the 2025 election campaign under the name “DMS”. We put the writer's questions to Mr Seymour. He told us: “The contribution recorded as 'DMS' was made by Central Massive Ltd, a company I control, and I authorised it. Central is the part of George Town where I grew up, and 'massive' is how we described its people. I still have strong ties there and invest there. The Progressives' deputy leader is from Central, and I support people who come from Central and work for it, whatever their party.”

On political allegiance he was categorical. “I am not, have never been and will never be a member of any political party. My allegiance is to the Cayman Islands. I have contributed to every party and to independents, as I have to many philanthropic and other causes, because good governance deserves support, and I expect to continue.”

The writer is right that Mr Seymour was the keynote speaker at the Progressives' 2017 campaign launch. Where his record of contributions to other parties and independents is on the public register, we have checked it; where it is not, we have asked him to release it.

The Foundation and the raffle

The Caymanians First Charitable Foundation is a registered non-profit organisation founded by Mr Seymour, who is one of its directors. The Stingray Raffle is staged by the Foundation; Stingray Raffle Ltd is its operator and Stingray Media Ltd its promoter, and both are owned by Mr Seymour. Complimentary copies of TCJ are distributed through the raffle arrangements, as the writer notes.

The Foundation's Conflict of Interest Policy, which the writer quotes, is public. The services are provided on written terms approved by the directors who have no conflicting interest, on independent legal advice.

Who decides what we investigate

The writer’s question is fundamental to the credibility of our editorial independence and deserves an unequivocal answer. Mr Seymour is an active publisher. He proposes stories, as readers and sources do, and reviews content before publication for legal and editorial standards risks. Readers are entitled to a candid account of that involvement and of the limits placed upon it.

The central issue is whether that involvement extends to reporting on his own interests. As of today, it does not. That restriction applies to coverage involving Mr Seymour personally; DMS Organization Ltd; Stingray Media Group and its businesses, including eCay; FundBank; IRACE; the Meridian Institute; Central Massive Ltd; the Caymanians First Charitable Foundation; and, because of the 2025 contribution, the Progressives.

For any story touching those interests, the publisher is recused from commissioning, review and approval. Editorial authority over that coverage rests solely with me as Editor-in-Chief. The only pre-publication review permitted outside the newsroom is by independent legal counsel instructed by me. A reporter approaches the subject for comment on the same basis as any other subject, and every such story carries a disclosure identifying the relevant relationship.

Mr Seymour's own account of his position is the last line of his statement. “I have no role in what The Caymanian Journal publishes about any of this; the newsroom put these questions to me and will report the answers as it sees fit.” This reply was handled under that documented editorial code.

Would we investigate him

Yes. The writer cites Reuters' 2017 reporting on Platinum Partners, which named Mr Seymour as an independent director of one of its funds and reported, citing a person familiar with the situation, that DMS had questioned management, resigned and raised its concerns with CIMA. That reporting forms part of the public record, alongside the scrutiny his career has received from international publications over two decades.

We will subject that record to our own scrutiny, with our reporting governed by the Editors' Code of Practice, enforced by IPSO. We will apply those standards without fear or favour. I said at the Forum that personally I fear nothing but God, and that as an editor fearlessness does not release me from responsibility, it increases it. I meant both. I believe we will be held accountable for everything we do in this world, and after years deployed in hostile environments around the world, I am never afraid of the consequences of asking a question. What I am answerable for is whether the question was fair, the facts were right and the person concerned had a proper chance to reply. Ownership confers no immunity from scrutiny, and neither does fear excuse silence. If equivalent circumstances arose today involving any prominent Caymanian, we would report on them. If they involved our founder, the editorial decision would rest with me alone as Editor-in-Chief. If I could not exercise that independence and uphold the ethical obligations it carries, my position would be untenable. That is non-negotiable.

What we will not claim

Our ownership is explicit; our independence must be demonstrated. The test is whether readers can see how editorial authority is exercised and whether the newsroom can follow the evidence, including where it is adverse to the owner's interests, without seeking his permission. We have set out those arrangements here. Their credibility must be earned through the journalism we publish. Publishing the reader's letter and this reply is the first test. It will not be the last.

Readers who believe our journalism falls short of the IPSO Editors’ Code of Practice can hold us to account through our complaints process.

The writer closes by asking that the same scrutiny be directed closer to home. Today, we have done so. Our answers are now on the record, and our commitments are there to be tested. You, the Caymanian people, are the boss. The judgment on whether our journalism honours those commitments belongs to you.

Joseph Hayat, Editor-in-Chief