General News of Thursday, 20 July 2017
The Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA), engaged in the promotion of press freedom has questioned why some key media, especially Accra based Radio Gold which was one of the ten best radio stations in Ghana was not invited to Tuesday’s media engagement with President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo.
In a post on Facebook on Wednesday, the Executive Director of MFWA,
Mr Sulemana Braimah said some media houses had more than two representatives and so for such an important media event, “you cannot leave out a major station like Radio Gold.
“Yes Radio Gold is Pro-NDC, so what? In fact, that is precisely the reason why they ought to have been invited even if it was only 10 media organisations that were invited.
He therefore criticized the criteria used by the Information Ministry to exclude some media organisations from the programme and challenged them to come out with better explanation.
Read Sulemana Braimah’s post below:
WHY WERE SOME KEY MEDIA HOUSES NOT INVITED?
Why were some key media houses not invited to the Presidential encounter while others had more than one, even more than two representatives? I have read what is said to be an explanation by Deputy Information Minister, Perry.
But the explanation just doesn’t wash.
For such an important media event with the President, you cannot leave out a major station like Radio Gold.
Yes, Radio Gold is Pro-NDC, so what? In fact, that is precisely the reason why they ought to have been invited even if it was only 10 media organisations that were invited.
According to latest figures for first quarter 2017, Radio Gold is Number 6 in Accra in terms of listenership and number 10 nationally.
So what were the criteria for selecting the media organisations that were invited? Was it out of fear, malice or discrimination? Such a poor judgment!!!
WE NEED TO KNOW
The Ministry of Information needs to explain the criteria used in selecting media houses for the Presidential Encounter.
Not every media house could have been invited. Yes that’s true. So there must have been a criteria.
That special criteria allowed for some media houses to be represented by three people while others could not even have a single representative.
So what was that special criteria? Was it based on audience share, political correctness or what? There should not be such a bad start to further polarise the media landscape.
Past errors must not be repeated but corrected. I CAN’T STOP WHINING.