Face to Face with Asaju
“Surprisingly, Chief Asaju’s charges of parochialism and yellow journalism against Concord were based on hear-say and complaints picked up from disaffected governors and others in buses and planes. When asked whether he read any of the articles in question and if he agreed with the governors, he said not quite.”
Sometime ago, PARALLAX SNAPS snapped at Chief Michael Asaju unfair criticism of the journalism practiced by the Concord newspapers. Before that publication, Chief Asaju came to Concord House in response to a letter to him by Doyin Aboaba, the editor of National Concord. The editor said she wanted Chief Asaju to tell the editorial staff of the Concord newspapers the basis for his accusation of parochialism and yellow journalism he leveled against the papers. Chief Asaju did turn up on August 14, accompanied by Bisi Oloyede of the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ) of which Chief Asaju was the president. He met with the two editors of the national and Sunday Concord and members of the Editorial Board of the National Concord in the office of Dr. Aboaba. The discuossion went right into the heart of the matter: Why, Chief Asaju was asked pointedly, did he make the statement to the Nigerian Institute of Journalism students that was published in the July 21 issue of West Africa magazine that Concord was guilty of all kinds of negative journalism? Would he, Chief Asaju was asked, name instances of journalistic perfidies he charged against Concord?
Before the NUJ president could begin to answer the questions, Doyin told him tha Concord could have sent an equal dose of vitriol against him in the pages of Concord, but the papers decided to have Chief Asaju down to give him a good opportunity to defend his statements. And then Dele Giwa told him of the contents of his column on the matter. Chief Asaju didn’t like the column, especially the part dealing with his not knowing much about what he said in that published statement. Tom Borha didn’t help matters much when he told Chief Asaju, not directly, that he suspected that the NUJ chief didn’t write the speech and might not have it until the time he had to deliver it. In any case, after commenting at length on this writer’s observations, which he was respectfully but firmly told remained standing, Chief Asaju began to address himself to the two principal questions asked him. Chief Asaju said surprisingly that his charges of parochialism yellow journalism against Concord were based on hear-say and complaints he picked up from disaffected governors and others in buses and planes. He was asked whether he read any of the articles in question and if he agreed with the governors. Chief Asaju said not quite.
One governor mentioned was Mr. Sam Mbakwe of Imo State who had complained about a piece written on his administration by Innocent Oparadike. It was clear that Chief Asaju didn’t read the piece, yet he allowed the governor’s complaint against it to form a strong basis for his journalistic assessment of the Concord papers. Apart from that, Doyin Aboaba asked Chief Asaju whether he was aware that the National Concord gave four pages free of charge to Governor Mbakwe and Imo State Government to reply Oparadike’s assessment of the governor’s administration. That, Doyin told Chief Asaju, was fairness at its best. Chief Asaju also referred to the story of an aborted coup carried by the Concord as what he understood to be “fabrication.” So, someone, I believe it was Duro Onabule, asked the chief to tell the meeting his meaning of fabrication. Or, he was pressed, didn’t the incident reported by the newspaper take place? That was when Chief Asaju said that he simply didn’t like the way the Concord reported the incident which he said he agreed took place. So, he was told, the story wasn’t fabrication. He said, no it wasn’t.
Another story that Chief Asaju said he regarded as a fabrication was one published by Concord on reign of terror by vigilante groups in Agege. Incidentally, Ben Onyeachonam, the news editor who wrote the story, was at the meeting and he engaged Chief Asaju on how the story was reported and written. Although he later agreed that the piece was not a fabrication since it happened, Chief Asaju said he thought the whole thing had the capacity of inciting one ethnic group against another. Dr Aboaba then ecplained that all the people connected with the Concord papers wanted as much peace and concord as anyone in Nigeria. She said that the edition going to the section of the country where people might have been incited by the story carried a mild version. At that point, things calmed down a bit. Chief Asaju told the editors that he would try to correct the impression he had created in the piece published in West Africa. In fact, he said, he believed that the journalists gather in the Concord papers were excellent and as dedicated professionally as any in Nigeria, and that he would use an appropriate forum to say this publicly in the near future.
The two sides called for understanding and the need to avoid prejudices that could mar the integrity of those involved in journalism. From that meeting, it was easy to understand Chief Asaju as a nice and easy-going person who probably made an honest mistake in making the statement credited to him in West Africa. He went so far as to disavow the statement and Doyin Aboaba has already written him asking for his correction in writing. It is not too much to repeat here that journalists ought to avoid abusing their colleagues who have committed nothing worse than working for different proprietors. Although meeting for the first time, it was clear that Chief Asaju had nothing against this writer and others at the Concord meeting, some of whom were quite familiar to the NUJ president. Doyin did a responsible thing by inviting Chief Asaju to Concord, and Chief Asaju did a good thing by turning up and submitting himself to questions that were at times hostile. No denying the fact that meeting served everyone well.
©Sunday Concord, August 24, 1980
(Pp.83-85)
