Mi Va Ne Mi Le Edze:

Obenewaa on National Politics and Media Morality

I don’t intend to quit writing on Ghanaweb, but perhaps this article will be my last to register my thoughts on the state of our nation’s business. Don’t get me wrong, I am not the “goddess” of knowledge as my amenable personality falsely projects, and my admirers, and adversaries, would think, but a citizen who is committed to exchanging critical ideas built on burly epistemology. Unlike the articles I have authored in the past, this piece will touch on few key issues, and outline my hopes for my nation, and how the media can reposition itself to uphold the values of democracy, freedom and justice. Lastly, I would also like to welcome opposing minds to the debating table to discuss how best some of the nation’s afflictions can be addressed by the nation’s journalists, some of whom have shifted from traditional journalism and become praise-singing pseudo-politicians to fatten their pocketbooks. To some of these journalists, the twenty-first century marks the “Golden Age for Media-Dollarization.”

I must also state herein that, the unscholarly manner in which we reject alternative views in defence of narrow partisan interests is hindering our nation from identifying, and interrogating policies, and attitudes, that get in the way national development and collective prosperity. While some would disagree, the key causality to our nation’s underdevelopment, among other extraneous variables, stems from our choice of politicians who revel in a mesh of indifference, greed, arrogance, incompetence, and fatal ignorance. Some of the nation’s many putrid politicians, among the finest few, have converted their position(s) of trust into a gold mine. They continue to swindle the nation while the leadership of “zero-tolerance” enjoy a snooze from their Scottish booze like a drunken Kamloops moose on the loose. The question that nudges my mind is; where is the nation’s media in reversing the increasing rakishness that have encircled, and suffused our nation’s political space?

While the health of our nation’s democracy is average in relation to other African countries, our nation’s leadership can do better was it not for juxtaposing its performance to past administrations. Not a day goes by without a minister in the current administration rationalize the government’s average performance by citing some isolated imperfections of erstwhile administrations. As history has it, a nation’s progress under any government must be left to the governed to judge, and not political human accessories whose assessment of success is subjective, and based on perverted partisan perceptions. After all, despite evidence of corruption, we are told by a marauding clique of “amanbuo-asikanfuo” to produce proof of their visible thievery to the nation’s court. I am yet to see any Ghanaian court convict any minister, or person who is a member of the current administration. How can a Ghanaian court of law convict the nation’s political “virgins;” a-do- no-wrong subgroup, who have become astute in hiding their sexual escapades, and sing the hymns of glory like the nuns of Canterbury? Not even God’s DNA laboratory can detect their prints of criminality.

In our quest to find a meaningful identity that sets us apart from other nations, we must shed the veils of unjustifiable hypocrisy, and cultivate a conviction that encourages a system of justice that treats our opponents with the dignity they deserve. Fostering an atmosphere of respect, and mutual engagement, irrespective of one’s political leanings, is what democracy stands for. We all stand indicted, in different degrees, over our posturing, and refusal to yield to reason even when existing evidence shows that all is not well with our nation’s systems of government. In Orwellian Ghana, some have taken more than their fair share. They beat their fragile chest with zest like scrounging pests and without any compunction of guilt for those who may not live to see tomorrow. Given the preceding, which humankind’s injustice against fellow beings, the provisions in our constitutional democracy defend the depraved, and leave the upright to their ill-fate.

In recent times, voices of moderation that are simultaneously critical of the government’s performance have been indicted for inciting an upheaval. What upheaval, if I may ask politely? If making few friends in cyberspace constitutes subversion, then I stand guilty as charged. If questioning policies and actions that make little sense to the primary mechanics of human cognition is characterized as an assumption, then I must be institutionalized, resocialized, and reintegrated, at a subsequent time, into the environment of sane-minds. A leadership that professes tolerance and dreads the populist might and appeal of penmanship lacks the credentials of forbearance.

Insidious double standards, and our fear to speak out against evil when, and where, one exists, is a disservice to our nation, and its people. Aside from being responsible for depreciating our constitutional right to free expression, the suppression of humankind’s inner thoughts to speak out against brazen misconducts at the higher-tiers of political power is partially to be blamed for the constant ineffectuality of our nation’s political leadership who mistakes the public’s silence for eternal ignorance and human stupidity. I hope the political-geneticists don’t tell us that our passivessness can be traced back to genetics, and not culture.

There is no greater weapon in a democratic society than the media’s weapon of mass education. The media represents the voice of human conscience; a dominant institution that telegraphs morality to the narrow, and obscured, corridors of power. When necessary, and in the interest of humankind, the media also challenges the state to tamper rigorous governance with understanding and human sensitivity. A militant media, in its unvarnished form, is an agency that leads the people, and demands accountability from the government. From the perspective of political “morality,” the media’s role in defending the rights of society is just, and must be preserved no matter the might of the state, the threat, and the use, of force by the state to curb the media’s functionality in safeguarding human rights in contemporary democratic society.

As to whether the cited qualities are present in twenty-first century Ghanaian journalism is a subject of debate. In one school of thought, the media cannot absolve itself from self-inflicted curbs, and the needless political burdens it shoulders; a condition that diminishes the media’s moral position to constrain policy excesses of the state, and of the unbridled freedoms of the government to do anything without the fear of being held to account by society. On Wednesday, 6th November, 2007, I was shocked to read some of the nation’s news media article with the headline “Anlo Men Have Ran Away.” When did an escape from police brutality by an unarmed civilian population become an act of cowardice? Is the media in the case herein, and given the context, supporting cruelty that came about as a result of the permissive attitude of the state? Despite my reservations with the media’s commitment to defending the values of freedom and justice for all, I think the media still remains the most dependable institution among the ineffectual structures of the state, and can do better in advancing to cause of society’s underprivileged.

Rather than integrate a congenial approach to covering events, and hamstringing itself from stating the facts, the Ghanaian media must adopt the Gramscian model of thought in delivering information that speak(s) to the people, uphold their modest interests, and exude(s) the values of democracy. The media is not a friend of the state, but the people’s. A media that mortgages the trust of society for political privileges, and betrays the cause of societal freedoms, is an enemy of the people. Unlike the pseudo-oppressive machines of a democratic state, the media’s most powerful blade is its fierce defence of societal values, and not the narrow interests of the nation’s politicians some of whom, with “untamed idiocy,” present the commissioning of a public latrine; a basic social service, as a praiseworthy development deserving media coverage. Isn’t this a waste of the media’s time to chronicle the opening of a village outhouse when there are more pressing national issues to cover?

I believe that, our nation’s education, since the 1980s, has not served our nation well. Matter of fact, the dilution of the nation’s quality of education, which was foisted on us by Bretton Woods, took away our pride, and confidence, as a nation. Sadly, it also left us with a thought that accepts the status quo, and fails to challenge policies that demean (our) human dignity, and spirituality. In recent times, the premium placed on educational credentials, without screening the quality of knowledge, has created an oversupply of young intellectuals, some of whom still need reorientation to become competent in meeting the challenges that beset our young democracy. Sometimes, one is saddened to read newspaper articles from some of our nation’s premier journalists without any in-depth analysis on government policies. To reproduce what is already known, especially on matters bordering on politics and policies, does not add value to mass education.

Rather than allowing itself to be caught in the political crossfire, the nation’s media has a moral responsibility to rise above political and ethnocentric meanness. It must educate Ghanaians to accept Ghana as one nation with different people with a cocktail of cultural values. As a nation, our eclectic identities, which are still undergoing an evolutionary phase, are complementary and not divisive as some would want us to believe. In all pluralistic societies, different ideas add to the enrichment of a nation’s political values and development. Nonetheless, Ghanaians must be guarded against off-centered suppositions peddled by the key centres of power that “invisiblize” the contributions of marginalized ethnicities. Here again, the media cannot be a passive actor, as some of them have done, by allowing the state to impose policies that induce poverty, stifle human aspirations, fear of repressive authority, and accepting the inhumane exploitation of society’s subaltern.

I wish my nation well. Hope all is well. Good day and cheers.