1. You have agreed that there's a line to be drawn between what is acceptable journalistic practice and what is not. But you have failed to define where that line is to be drawn! As it is, you lump all of Anas' investigations ... read full comment
1. You have agreed that there's a line to be drawn between what is acceptable journalistic practice and what is not. But you have failed to define where that line is to be drawn! As it is, you lump all of Anas' investigations on ONE side of the line - the side that everybody must approve (or endure). In so doing you have not sufficiently problematized the issue. The simplistic conclusion is drawn that Anas is serving the public interest therefore "he cannot do any wrong".
2. You have narrated the numerous successes of Anas all obtained through some method of dissembling. But this has not led to ask if what Anas is doing is "Journalism" or "Investigaton". You assume that it is both. But it is becoming obvious that Anas is doing more investigation than journalism. He is doing more Investigaton than the professional bodies charged to do that. I haven't read Sidney's piece but I suspect he may have been thinking more as a journalist than as an investigator. This is a delicate point. Perhaps you should be arguing that Anas should be called something else than "investigative journalist or that he is redefining the contours of investigative journalism.
3. I see that you are also coming to the facile conclusion that a person who raises eyebrows against Anas' methods is, by so doing, defending the fallen justices and, by extension, their wrongful actions. This is unfair.
4. Similarly, you cite the awards Anas has received and the nods given him by prominent citizens as evidence of the justness of his methods. But this cannot be so. The awards and the approvals cannot justify the methods. The methods must be judged on their own merits!!!
5. You have also repeated the refrain we have heard since Anas' latest revelations that corruption is so endemic in our society that drastic methods need be used. If this is to suggest that there should therefore not be any further debate on the issue, and that any methods at all can be justified as long as they catch a few people, then it's unfortunate.
6. Your look into the future of the fight against corruption is a bit narrow. You seem to think that if more and more journalists wear masks and play pretense, corruption will be dealt a huge blow, if not eradicated. Really?
7. No right thinking Ghanaian will argue that Anas has not done a great service to the nation or does not deserve our gratitude. But there's a huge BUT left with the whole issue which you don't seem to appreciate. Today Anas is going about in a mask (for which I pity him). When he appears in court, he will be in a mask while those he has accused are open faced. He will have to find more ingenious ways to continue fighting corruption by dissembling. How long can he go on without the prey finding even more ingenious ways of escaping the hunter?
There are more issues and questions than can be taken up here. This debate will not end here...
Let me add, notwithstanding, that your piece is well written.
Altruism 8 years ago
Anas success means his failure, that is why he is criticising him. Anas confronted him with his fawls.
Anas success means his failure, that is why he is criticising him. Anas confronted him with his fawls.
Concern 8 years ago
well done.
well done.
tinmaramdi 8 years ago
Why has Anas never, to my knowledge, tackled the bigger corruption cases against politicians? Giving money to judges and exposing them later is very beneficial to society, of course.
But what about inflation of the costs o ... read full comment
Why has Anas never, to my knowledge, tackled the bigger corruption cases against politicians? Giving money to judges and exposing them later is very beneficial to society, of course.
But what about inflation of the costs of imports to Ghana, for instance? Aeroplanes allegedly bought in Brazil.
Power barges.
Even the Ameri deal was brought to our notice by Norwegian journalists, and they did not wear facial masks.
Of course Anas cannot do everything. But where people are using their offices to rob the nation, in alliance with their relatives, it becomes of public concern.
After all, journalists are suppose to
employ their judgement to sift news-worthy from non-news stories. This means some aspects of life are more important than others. If a dog bites a man, it is not news because it can be expected. But if a man bites a dog?
Anas must sit down and analyse Ghanaian society seriously and try to expose the reasons why we cannot keep ourselves supplied with electricity or water; how GYEEDA and other frauds were possible (not forgetting the recent bus rebranding scandal.)
I said before that no man can do everything and I applaud Anas for what he has already done. But I think he is attacking weak links in the society. The big guns will shower him with honours and filthy lucre. If he wants to become a real hero -- first to HIMSELF and then to the nation --
he should invest seriously in cutting the roots of corruption out of our nation at the highest levels also.
Meanwhile, Merry Christmas, Anas. You can ignore those who are jealous of you, but please remember the greater duty your talents call you to carry out. Protect yourself well,too, for as soon s certain money-choppers realise you are becoming interested in attacking not just the weak links but also the tough nuts, they will try to silence you.
Godd 8 years ago
Yes, Anas has done a great job.
But the problem is that the issues are bigger than can be solved by Anas alone with his methods.
You are right when you say that he is attacking the weak links in society. The case of t ... read full comment
Yes, Anas has done a great job.
But the problem is that the issues are bigger than can be solved by Anas alone with his methods.
You are right when you say that he is attacking the weak links in society. The case of the judges is the highest he has come so far as we know. That is why it is bringing some controversy that is directed at his methods, which is what the discussion here is about. This is the first time that his "victims" are fighting back even though those victims have done wrong things - very wrong things.
Anas has done a lot but he can only do so much with the methods he is employing. Bringing down corruption in our society will require more than wearing masks and infiltrating work places. It requires more drastic action than that. It requires other things in our society to change too.
But the argument here is how right Anas is in using deception to catch the culprits. We agree that some deception can be tolerated but it cannot go beyond a certain level. The present writer is seeming to suggest that any deception at all to catch offenders is ok. We disagree with this view, especially since corruption cannot be uprooted in our society by the work of masked men (deception).
1. You have agreed that there's a line to be drawn between what is acceptable journalistic practice and what is not. But you have failed to define where that line is to be drawn! As it is, you lump all of Anas' investigations ...
read full comment
Anas success means his failure, that is why he is criticising him. Anas confronted him with his fawls.
well done.
Why has Anas never, to my knowledge, tackled the bigger corruption cases against politicians? Giving money to judges and exposing them later is very beneficial to society, of course.
But what about inflation of the costs o ...
read full comment
Yes, Anas has done a great job.
But the problem is that the issues are bigger than can be solved by Anas alone with his methods.
You are right when you say that he is attacking the weak links in society. The case of t ...
read full comment