Discussion about this post

User's avatar
IPNTS's avatar

Hi Olumuyiwa,

I'm a regular reader of your work and you do some interesting expositories which I have said are worthy of high praise.

Having read through this piece however, I feel though that it is somewhat invidious. Yes, you highlight the need to avoid sensationalism which David does to great effect. But much of your piece centres on what he does wrong and barely makes any mention of what he does right. And if there's one tenet of journalism it is the need to seek balance.

David is a self-described one-man army; an alarmist. In a different time his writings may not hold much appeal. However, and except you want to play the ostrich, these are very strange times.

When one is teetering close to the precipice the appropriate response is to raise the alarm. The methods may be flawed but they work. There is a reason people are drawn to his work and for all his misgivings you cannot deny that it is for the greater good.

You questioned some of his other work and pointed out flaws, but you interestingly fail to mention the great things he's done. It is thanks to his penchant for 'sensationalism' that he was able to get the Nigerian government to get that poor lady languishing in an Ivorian prison for a crime she knew nothing about. It is thanks to his 'sensationalism' that we now know about Isa Pantami. Thanks to his 'sensationalism', the rot in Nigerian immigrations has been exposed with some actions already taking place.

If his kind of journalism spurs the government to action, a government notoriously known for not giving a hoot, I am more than happy to throw my weight behind him and lend him all the support he would need.

David is the kind of person we need now. And as some users have pointed out, while it is true that he needs editorial guidance to vet his work properly, there's no doubt that people are out there orchestrating attacks on his credibility. You need not be a genius to see why.

And to read this piece and not find a single word of praise for David raises a lot of questions in my head especially coming from a journalist like you.

As one who practices journalism myself, I know the pains one goes through to deliver exclusives, not in the least one of this magnitude. To focus only on the things he did wrongly while sidestepping what he got right is, in my opinion, unfair.

P.S: This is not an attack. I respect your work but on this matter, I'm afraid you may also need to do a reckoning over if this was really necessary.

Expand full comment
Lee's avatar

The problem with looking for righteousness in the article is that you all are missing a major point. Good journalism brings issues to light and the David’s write up does just that. It’s all speculative. By now anybody that reads him knows his style. While it may bother you that he’s getting accolades for something he has done (which you feel is not worthy) we cannot deny that he has done something that you didn’t or haven’t done.

Expand full comment
12 more comments...

No posts