13 Jan 2006 |
|
Story of the week: Running neck-to-neck with the story of Rashidi Ladoja, the latest victim of the politics of recriminations in Africa's most problematic political party, the Peoples Democratic Party, is the explosive "interview" with Gbenga Obasanjo, the President's son in the January 16 edition of The News magazine. It is a straight-from-the-heart, everybody can go to hell, I-don't-care whose-ox-is-gored kind of material. Shot through with defamatory content, it nevertheless provides high entertainment, with the identity of the interviewee, and his declarations lending special significance. The editors of The News must have decided to publish it because of its revelations about what goes on in high places, and more instructively in President Obasanjo's household. Gbenga Obasanjo who is also currently in the news for seeking to divorce his wife, and he has been telling the world about it (she can't cook, her father interferes, she's untidy: God!), has through his lawyers denied ever granting an interview to Omoyele Sowore, the author of the material. Both on the internet and in Nigerian newspapers, Sowore, a famous students' union leader, ex-UNILAG, insists that an "interview" actually took place, and that every word in that publication stumbled forth from the mouth of the President's son. Publishers of The News, also speaking through their lawyers, the irrepressible Femi Falana, have declared that they stand by their story and if the President's son is unhappy about that, they would be glad to meet him and his lawyer in court. This is an interesting face-off. My suspicion is that both The News and Omoyele Sowore, who is circulating the material on the internet indeed have Mr Gbenga Obasanjo on tape. And if that tape is played and Gbenga Obasanjo is heard in his own voice calling members of his father's government including the Vice President and his associates, thieves, The News and Sowore would point to the defence of truth. They would insist also that all the far-reaching details offered by Obasanjo's son about corruption in high places, including the possibility that his own father is lying about his age (!) constitute fit and proper material to be published in the public interest. On the surface of it, this would be a strong argument. When the legal tussle begins, the Vice President, Stella's son, El-Rufai, Jimi Lawal and all others whose integrity was maligned in that interview may also have to go to court to clear their names. I doubt if Gbenga Obasanjo would take up such a challenge from The News. Fighting a media house in the law courts except you are on sure grounds may not be as interesting as filing a divorce suit, or putting down a father-in-law : ("I can't even stay in the same room with my father-in-law"). Poor Alex Onabanjo. Even if Gbenga Obasanjo's in-laws wish to reply and defend their daughter and her honour, it may not be advisable to do so, given the present unfair balance of weight in the relationship. However, could it be that The News and Mr Sowore conspired to take advantage of the President's son? What constitutes a media interview? Is the word "interview" so elastic in journalism practice that it accommodates eavesdropping, invasion of privacy and abuse of privilege? Is there a line to be drawn between a professional interview, and interview in a "road side" sense which covers small talk or any form of encounter? I ask these questions because whereas Gbenga Obasanjo insists that he never granted an interview to Sowore, he admits that sometime in December 2005, he gave him a ride from Seme border into Lagos. This is a journey of close to three hours or more if the Lagos-Badagry expressway, which the Obasanjo government has refused to put in good shape suddenly closes up due to chaotic traffic. We have also been informed in the various reports that Sowore has been pestering Obasanjo, the son, for an interview for a long time, with the latter repeatedly declining. Nigeria and its politics is naturally a subject that anyone would want to discuss with the President's son: He has access to the corridors of power. He is likely to know one or two things that ordinary men would never know. So, if I were in Sowore's shoes, I could also have started a "discussion" along those lines with the President's son. Gbenga is not just the President's son, he has in the past few years been in the news, with the soft-sell publications in particular monitoring his movements and what they present as his dalliances. When they are not hinting at extra-marital affairs, they present him as a man of influence who helps his friends to open investment doors, a celebrity of sorts who owes his pre-eminence to his father's position. Now, did Sowore steal an "interview"? Did he turn on the tape the moment Gbenga relaxed and thought he was chatting with a friend? Did Gbenga's mouth run like a tap with Sowore collecting the fruits with a recorder? Did Sowore abuse his access to the President's son? The News introduced him as an "investigative reporter." I take the use of that phrase seriously. Investigative reporters act more or less like spies; they stretch the freedom of information, where it exists, to its limits; they snoop on you; the beauty of their report is that it catches the target completely off-guard, and projects the truth, and nothing but the truth. But must investigative reporting amount to a violation of the ethics of the profession? It seems to me that this is one issue that the Gbenga Obasanjo interview has thrown up. The basic practice is that in the event of an interview, the interviewee must be properly informed that an interview is taking place and that the material may be published. Usually, people re-arrange their thoughts once they are aware that they are on a public platform. They observe the usual courtesies. They are a bit more careful, depending on the orientation of the interview. Besides, it is simple courtesy to disclose intentions. But if journalists were to go about recording every private discussion that they have or any bit they eavesdrop on, they will destroy society. If Gbenga Obasanjo had said in that "interview" that he slept with someone's wife, all in the spirit of a frank discussion with a friend, would The News have reported it, and insist that since it came from his mouth, it is the truth? The danger of the reporter behaving like a local gossip is that journalists will no longer be trusted. We will lose the confidence of friends. Once a journalist shows up, everyone will be under pressure, not knowing what they will say and it will be reported. If it is the truth, publish it. Fine. But the power that the media holds must be exercised with responsibility. Those nasty things that Gbenga Obasanjo said in that interview could easily earn him not just law suits, but the assassin's bullet. He dismissed his late step-mother as if she were a concubine, her son he presents as an imbecile. His own father, he ridicules as a liar, the man's campaign against corruption, he lampoons, his fight against AIDS he dismisses, his American friends, he presents as insincere. President Obasanjo must be angry and unhappy. That interview is actually about him. People like us have been presented as over-criticising Obasanjo. I can't count the number of ignorant persons who still upbraid me for example for being "too hard" (their opinion) on the President. But here was the President's son on the marble rubbishing his own father. We have said that the President's anti-corruption campaign is selective and that only the "stupid" ones get caught. His son has confirmed it. The President has been criticised for not being very strong on family values. His son, by his conduct and utterances, including putting down his stepmother, brother and father-in-law simply confirms to the whole world that the President is not in control of his home. And this is a man who seems to know everything that should be done about Nigeria! The President and his Deputy have been having a running battle with the President accusing the poor man of disloyalty. Gbenga Obasanjo has now confirmed that the animus between both men runs deep. It is not just between Obasanjo and Atiku. It is a "family affair". You see? Like father, like son... The Atiku camp has not helped matters by insinuating in its reaction to the young Obasanjo's statements that the masquerade behind him should remove his mask. Obviously, the Atiku group holds Obasanjo responsible for his son's conduct. Even the Americans did not escape: Gbenga Obasanjo announces that they are in support of a third term agenda for Obasanjo! President Obasanjo has boasted publicly about his love of "absolute loyalty". I believe he should start that search for "absolute loyalty" inside his own home. If an interview actually took place, however, what The News has done is to sacrifice Gbenga Obasanjo. But maybe that serves him right. After all, he throws group libel in the direction of journalists whom he calls bribe-takers and a hungry lot. ("The moment they were served food, they left their scrap papers and rushed the food. Of course, the next day, their reports were very shiny (sic)...The press boys are a hungry bunch, but I have refused to bribe them".). The sad thing about journalism is that all kinds of persons have ideas about it, since in any case it is a profession into which anyone can dabble and start claiming authority. There is a lesson here for everyone. Too many public persons take their positions for granted. When they are in the public eye, as men or women of importance, they overlook the fact that members of their family are invariably also in the limelight. All over the world, the media keeps an eye on the close relations of public persons. What they say or do could either affect the polity or provide useful information about the leadership. Such persons need to be educated about their special status in society. Someone else could have said all the things that Gbenga Obasanjo said, it wouldn't have mattered. The News would not have gone to town to make good money. But if Obasanjo's son starts commenting on governance and political issues, of course it is news. But if the young man had been well-tutored about the dangers of loose talk, he would probably have been more restrained. He should have kept his tongue in check. We are talking about the President. In fact if the son or daughter of the chairman of a company were to talk too loosely in the staff canteen or to a member of staff, he or she could say things that could damage the company. Gbenga Obasanjo is having to learn his lesson, the hard way. If he decides to take up the challenge by The News, does he know whether there are more damaging things he said which could now be used in a sequel? The News is not lacking in courage, its publishers made that very clear during the Abacha years. But since they are insisting on the truth of their investigative journalism, I now challenge them to go a step further and investigate the allegations made in that famous interview, and check whether Gbenga Obasanjo is also covered by the defence of truth. The public will like to know more for example, about the Pentascope deal.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
# 
# 
Your Comments
Please make The Square an enjoyable experience for everyone by refraining from gratuitous ad-hominem contributions, defamatory comments and off-topic posting. Such posts will be removed.