I have a nagging concern which I think should be of interest to the Institute of Public Relations, Ghana (IPR), too.
It’s about an anomaly I believe IPR can help rectify, what I term ‘orphan’ news releases and public notices – an example being the curious case of a recent petition by hundreds of concerned citizens, without a single petitioner named!
Before I go into details, there’s another issue that has been bugging me for a long time: how news releases from the Presidency are signed off.
Every time I see a news release from Jubilee House, signed off with “Felix Kwakye Ofosu, MP, Spokesperson to (emphasis added) the President, Minister, Government Communications”, the question that comes to mind is: why “to” and not “for”?
Is a presidential spokesperson not a bridge between the President and the country or people? Thus, does that post-holder not communicate a President’s messages to the country for him/her?
Anyway, I sought views on the matter and the ubiquitous Artificial Intelligence (AI) source readily gave guidance:
“A spokesperson is a person chosen to make official statements and speak on behalf of a group, company, organization, or government. They act as the public voice for others” (Cambridge Dictionary).
“The correct phrase is ‘spokesperson for the President.’ We use ‘for’ to show who the person represents …
“Why ‘for the President’ is correct:
“Use ‘for’: A spokesperson speaks for an organization or a leader.”
And an award-winning writer and native speaker of English adds emphatically:
“It’s FOR. Because the person is speaking for the President”.
Of course, an establishment can create its own terminology. Nevertheless, what is right is right! So, the Presidency and Mr. Ofosu may want to take another look at the “to” sign-off.
Regarding my coinage, ‘orphan news releases’, it refers to the increasing trend of frustrating absence of the essentials of a published public communication. These include: the name of the person issuing on behalf of an institution and, for the media, a reliable contact number; also, in some cases, background information about that institution.
Again, it’s important to have someone taking responsibility for the information by adding their name. A news release or public notice, should not be issued without a name, even if it’s on a letterhead.
A communication on letterhead which has just the standard, general organisation address but nobody’s name or a direct telephone number is what I call ‘half-orphan’, the address being the other, ‘half-parent’.
Furthermore, when the communication is as important as a published petition meant to address an alleged wrong, the identity of the petitioners is surely necessary. At least the names of the leaders should be stated, for record purposes; especially as its publication makes it a public document.
For instance, earlier this month, there was a widely circulated news item about a petition by some women members of the ruling National Democratic Congress to Attorney-General Dr Dominic Ayine, seeking the release of Ms Sedina Tamakloe-Attionu from Nsawam Prison. Dated August 3, 2026, the media reports said:
“A coalition of 1,152 female market traders and NDC organisers filed a petition demanding freedom for ex-MASLOC boss Sedina Tamakloe-Attionu Tamakloe-Attionu remains in Nsawam Prison despite a Court of Appeal acquittal, as the state pursues a Supreme Court appeal” (YEN.com.gh).
However, strangely, there was no name cited in the petition! None of the numerous media reports I checked mentioned a single name out of the 1000+ as having signed, or put their name on that intriguing petition.
Yet, this was a petition by members of the ruling party, not an opposition party, so why would they not be bold enough to identify themselves as Ms Tamakloe-Attionu supporters? So, I’m wondering, whose initiative was it? On what letterhead was the petition written, if any?
To my mind an orphan, or half-orphan, release or public notice, seems to indicate that nobody wanted to be associated with it, or wanted their identity to go on the record.
Anyhow, the following are examples of some recent ‘half-orphan’ public communications:
1.OFFICE OF HIS EXCELLENCY DR MAHAMUDU BAWUMIA, FLAGBEARER, NEW PATRIOTIC PARTY
PRESS RELEASE
WEDNESDAY, 22 JULY 2026
DR BAWUMIA CALLS FOR THE DISCONTINUATION OF PROSECUTIONS UNDERTAKEN IN HIS NAME
It ends:
Signed
Communications Directorate
(No named representative of the Directorate!)
2.PUBLIC NOTICE, RELOCATION OF TERMINAL 3 CAR PARK AT ACCRA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
16 JULY 2026
Ends:
MANAGEMENT
GHANA AIRPORTS COMPANY LIMITED.
(No identified Management member who issued it.)
3. ECONOMIC AND ORGANISED CRIME OFFICE
NEWS RELEASE,THE MEDIA
EOCO STATEMENT ON THE CONVICTION OF ASANTE BERKO CASE AND RELATED INVESTIGATIONS
Ends:
ISSUED BY CORPORATE AFFAIRS AND PUBLIC EDUCATION UNIT
For AG. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
DATE: AUGUST 10, 2026.
(It is nearly two and a half pages, but no signature, name or direct contact number!)
4. GCB
NO ROBBERY INCIDENT AT GCB BANK LABONE BRANCH – CUSTOMERS ASSURED
Accra, 13 August 2026
Ends:
GCB, your bank for life
Corporate Affairs.
(No identity of who issued it on behalf of Corporate Affairs.)
In 2024, I drew attention to this peculiar communication problem in an article with the headline “Of a baffling Police news release, ‘half-orphan’ communication and other issues”.
Excerpts from that article:
“(The release may be) on a on letterhead, with all the new media details: email, Facebook, Twitter, etc. But how useful will such contacts be to a news desk needing to clarify something in the release, but rushing to meet a production deadline? Will the news desk have time to go through all those contacts, trying to find somebody to answer some questions?
“In my view, a release with no name, only a departmental identity is an indication of somebody not wanting to be associated with the release, or its subject. No accountability!
“Of course that might be a wrong conclusion, but that is the impression created. Why would an institution expect the public to trust such a publication?”(Published online, February 27, 2024.)
But how can the trend of unprofessional, incomplete public communications be tackled? Has the IPR not noticed it?
Website information indicates that this issue deserves their attention:
“The Institute of Public Relations, Ghana (IPR) is the sole professional body for Public Relations practitioners in Ghana. Among its roles, IPR exists to provide a professional structure for the practice of Public Relations.… IPR, Ghana … regulates Public Relations practice and sets standards for the profession in Ghana.”
Conceivably, most of those orphan releases and public notices are the handiwork of supposed communication professionals, public relations officers or managers; corporate affairs officers or managers.
Even if they are not members, I believe that they would benefit from a diplomatic IPR intervention and professional guidance, for the sake of maintaining necessary sector standards.
My 2024 article concluded with:
“In a country constantly swirling with rumours, misunderstandings and suspicion, establishments issuing press releases, news releases or media releases, owe it a duty to make them as informative and authoritative as possible, authenticated by a name and reliable contact details.”
Evidently, that conclusion is still relevant. So IPR, Ghana, please come to the rescue; no more orphan and half-orphan public communications!
