Recklessness of Dr See Ess Momoh
“I wouldn’t know how he arrived at his characterization that Doyin and I were M.K.O. Abiola’s voices but I do know that I have written more articles on the need for fearless journalism than others and even led the fight that opened up the presidential press briefing for publication and broadcast.”
See Ess Momoh – actually, the See Ess stands for C.S. – is a doctor of philosophy in Philosophy, and that’s what he teaches at the University of Lagos. As is the case with many university teachers, Dr.Momoh likes to write for newspaper even when he doesn’t have anything to say. It is probably enough for him, as for many of his colleagues, to get something published. If the gentleman in question decides to write articles on the nuances of philosophy, nobody will quarrel with him; it may even be a useful exercise, since many people don’t seem to know enough about the discipline called Philosophy. Even when Dr. Momoh decided to take a philosophical view of religion, his article published in the Sunday Times of December 21, drew a shot from one Olumide Owolabi in the Sunday Times of February 8. The paper’s editor headlined the letter: “Dr. Momoh needed more facts on that article.” And that’s in his area of specialty that of thinking about thought. That headline to Mr. Owolabi’s letter was more than fitting to the following observations on an article published in the same February 8 issue of the Sunday Times in which Dr. Momoh decided to take a look at what he called “Press Freedom: A Case of Chasing the Shadow.” The body of Dr. Momoh’s article did not support in any manner what the headline meant by chasing the shadow. He wasted quite a bit of ink and paper on his views about press freedom as enshrined in the constitution. He said that press freedom was not guaranteed in the constitution, and that the constitution seemed to say that “the role of the mass communication institution in their paternal provision of the freedom of the press (was) to uphold what the government thought were its obligations and objectives.”
This was clearly a misreading of the position of the constitution on the freedom of the press. Instead of chasing the shadow of how to interpret the constitution in this regard, Dr. Momoh might have done better to look at the press as it had functioned under the constitution, and he would have seen that the relationship he had drawn up was not functional. Perhaps that had to do with his narrow academic view of the press, and to the fact that he didn’t understand the sociological interpretation of the constitution, since he was essentially a philosopher, a discipline that renders it quite impossible for Dr. Momoh to understand processes. From the way various media in Nigeria had carried on since October 1979, it was clear that a writer was free to say whatever he wanted to, once he stuck to the truth, and that fair comment, no matter how scathing, is permissible in the society. The only thing was that fair comment means different things to different people, depending on the fellow’s prejudices. What Dr. Momoh claimed to lead to his article was what he called the controversy generated by the on-going debate in the nation on the question of press freedom. He listed the active participants as my humble self, Tony Momoh, former editor of Daily Times, Chief Olu Adebanjo, Stanley Macabuh, Labanji Bolaji, Abiola Aloba and Doyin Aboaba.
Before coming to the view he ascribed to these people, Dr. Momoh came up with a queer theory of what he called “works politicians and words politicians.” He grouped President Shehu Shagari and Governor Melford Okilo of River State as examples of works politicians. Governor Jim Nwobodo of Anambra State, Governor Abubakar Rimi of Kano State and Governor Ambrose Alli of Bendel State, he grouped as words politicians. In short, Dr. Momoh said a works politician was a doer who didn’t honestly want to interfere with press freedom, who only wanted to get the work done. A words politician was one who was obsessed with what he says, who didn’t care about doing and who believed that repeated lies well told may soon be perceived by readers as the truth. That, again, was a misreading of politicians. Politicians were people who try to say things in a way that the meaning will of necessity denote different things to different people. It was hard to understand how Dr. Momoh came about his theories of works and words politicians. It was true the Gov. Nwobodo and Gov. Rimi were egocentrics who would like to see their pictures everyday in their newspapers. But what would Dr. Momoh say about Gov. Mbakwe and Gov. Lar? Did Dr. Momoh know that the Ogun State government and the Ondo State government put out weekly papers that were distributed free in the respective states? Was he aware that the Benue State government was putting out a weekly paper, although the government was a part owner of the Nigerian Standard published in Jos? Why did Dr. Momoh think that Gov. Lateef Jakande established the Lagos State Television, and that many other states were fighting like mad to start their own television stations? It was all for the same reason that politicians are inherent addicts of publicity. It is a simple sociological ailment among politicians.
Although by nature President Shagari could be described as publicity shy, didn’t Dr. Momoh know that the president had reneged on his clearly stated promise that he would relinquish control of Daily Times? And if the philosopher was aware of this, how could he then defend off-handedly the defence put forward by Chief Adebanjo for the Federal Government’s control of the Daily Times? If anything had squeezed the freedom of the press, it was government control of a newspaper of Daily Times influence and responsibility. It was left to readers to make up their minds about what Daily Times has become since the military government folded up stop. One doesn’t need any preference to the Columbia Journalism Review, a publication of the Columbia University in New York to know that succeeding presidents in the United States would have loved to control newspapers like the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times. The constitution, and more especially the culture, of the United States simply would not allow abridgment of the freedom of expression. And although the Nigerian constitution did not specifically say so, this country was as free as air for freedom of expression. The journalist was sufficiently protected to say what he wanted to say. If any abridgment existed here, it was not in the constitution, but maybe in the Nigerian journalism culture and forms of ownership.
Which brings us to the curious notion of Dr. Momoh in which he grouped me, Doyin Aboaba and M.C.K. Ajuluchuku as master’s voices while calling Macebuh, Aloba and Banji as independent journalists. I know for sure that Doyin and I were not M.K.O. Abiola’s voices. We were the voices of our respective conscience. And I can say Chief Abiola had told anyone who wanted to know that he didn’t think for me or Doyin. I wouldn’t know how Dr. Momoh arrived at his characterization. All that seemed clear was that he believed that a journalist was the man he works for. This was wicked and an unfair assertion. I have not written a single column that sings the praise of the NPN or the Federal Government. As a matter of fact, I have written more articles on the need for fearless journalism, and I would say that I had the fight that opened up the monthly presidential press briefing for publication and broadcast. Macebuh said that much in an article that he did for Daily Times, but which the editor of that paper expunged before publication. I have never said or written that a journalist must subscribe to a shade of opinion and play safe. I don’t subscribe to any school of thought. Pure and simple, I subscribe to functional journalism, and journalism of conscience.
©Sunday Concord, February 22, 1981
Dr. Momoh’s Recklessness (2)
Dr See Ess Momoh, the University of Lagos teacher in Philosophy, had written an article for the Sunday Times of February 8 in which he made sweeping and hollw statements. He said that Doyin Aboaba and Dele Giwa belonged to a school of thought which “seems to hold that there are various shades of opinions – tribal, political and ideological – represented on the Nigerian media scene.” “What a journalist should do is to figure out which media organ’s shade of opinion best approximates his,” Dr. Momoh said, adding that “the journalist should then seek employment under such a media organ.” Dr. Momoh went on to say in his sweeping manner that such journalists couldn’t see anything wrong with that arrangement because they saw their masters’ voices as their own. “On his theory,” he wrote, “Tola Adeniyi cannot work in any other paper except perhaps the Tribune, Dele (meaning me) may want to take a second look at the basic belief of his school of thought.
It is hard to understand Dr. Momoh’s theories, and his conclusion that the editors at the Concord ascribe to what he called the “school of thought” which echoes the master’s voice. I know See Ess Momoh, and I had never told him of that thinking. As pointed out in the first part of this column, the two editors, Doyin Aboaba and I, as well as the other journalists on the Concord, didn’t come to Concord because they agreed with Chief Abiola’s views of the world and politics. In fact, Chief Abiola did not meet the two editors until they were invited and offered positions on the paper, which the two editors carved out of the images they had in mind. And as Chief Abiola pointed out to Lewis Obi, the Concord journalists are a cantankerous lot who freely disagree with him on points of professionalism and conscience. The unkindest cut in Dr. Momoh’s articles published in the Sunday Times was his careless grouping of Doyin Aboaba, myself and M.C.K. Ajuluchuku in the same school of thought with Tola Adeniyi.
It would have been helpful if the university teacher had stated the similarities between Tola Adeniyi who believes in the journalism of death and blood and that practiced by the journalists he sentenced to Adeniyi’s school of thought. He should have pointed out what separated Tony Momoh (Dr. Momoh’s brother) and Stanley Macebuh (a journalist with whom I share professional views) from Dele Giwa and Doyin Aboaba. It seemed that it was enough for Dr. Momoh to state his theories and his hang up his pen. But that won’t do. It was easy for Dr. Momoh to see his article published but he should understand that some of us about whom he wrote live by writing for newspapers. And to group any journalist with Tola Adeniyi was akin to throwing blood on the journalist’s certificate and professional reputation.
The question here was that of conscience. It means bloody nothing to Dr. Momoh for one to work for Tribune or the Concord. Everybody must work for the Daily Times or that journalist was corrupt and unconscientious. If only Dr. Momoh and his ilk would take a little time out to read the work of journalists they criticize, instead of basing their views on some phantasmal theories, they will be able to make more sense. But, apparently, this was too much to ask for, and they will just continue to poison the public place of ideas – and processes.
©Sunday Concord, March 1, 1981
(Pp.106-110)
