The writer
By Prince Adjei (Guy Gee)
The power of media in shaping narratives, influencing public opinion, and fostering societal cohesion cannot be overstated. As a vital institution of democracy, the media bears a solemn responsibility: to uphold truth, objectivity, and the principles of responsible journalism. In Ghana, Media General has long been recognized as one of the torchbearers of credible broadcasting.
Yet, the network’s recent silence concerning the incendiary comments made by Captain Smart in relation to the AngloGold chaos in Obuasi raises serious questions about the station’s journalistic integrity and commitment to national harmony. How should a journalist incite people on the airwaves? And he still had the guts to come live on Facebook yesterday evening to explain that the video was not a 2025 video but rather June 2023 video. But what does it change? Is it that Media General is a psychiatric institution housing junkies, alcoholics and bipolar sufferers?
The AngloGold unrest, which tragically claimed lives and left a community fractured, has highlighted an unsettling trend within segments of Ghana’s media landscape. And at the center of this controversy is Captain Smart, presenter on Onua TV, a subsidiary of Media General. It is clear comments attributed to him may have played a role in stoking tensions and inciting violence among disgruntled youth in Obuasi. That such remarks could find airtime on a reputable platform is deeply alarming. But perhaps even more concerning is Media General’s apparent unwillingness to acknowledge its role in this tragic turn of events.
Media responsibility
Media organizations are not merely businesses vying for ratings; they are custodians of public trust. In a competitive media environment where bloggers, influencers, and sensationalist reporting threaten to blur the lines of ethical journalism, traditional platforms like Media General ought to stand as bastions of accountability and intellectual rigor. Yet, their continued silence on the potential role of Captain Smart’s inciteful programming in the Obuasi conflict suggests a troubling departure from these principles.
Freedom of expression, while sacrosanct, does not grant the right to incite violence or inflame passions in fragile situations. Indeed, the framers of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution foresaw the dangers of unbridled speech, hence the inclusion of provisions to guard against speech that could endanger national security or public order. Media outlets, therefore, are legally and morally bound to filter and fact-check content disseminated on their platforms. When they fail to do so, as appears to have happened in the case of Onua TV, they become complicit in the chaos that follows.
Captain Smart’s role in the turmoil
The allegations surrounding Captain Smart’s incendiary remarks underscore the dangers of irresponsible broadcasting. A presenter of his caliber wields significant influence, particularly over Ghana’s youth, many of whom look to him as a truth-teller and a voice for the marginalized. However, with great power comes great responsibility, and it appears this responsibility was grossly neglected. It is worth asking: Did Media General, particle Onua TV, adequately scrutinize his commentary before airing it? If the platform provided an unchecked avenue for divisive rhetoric, then it is culpable in the consequences that unfolded.
What makes Media General’s silence even more puzzling is the group’s robust reputation in years past as a defender of ethical journalism. This is not merely an oversight—it is a betrayal of trust. By failing to condemn or even investigate the alleged actions of one of its own, Media General risks eroding the public confidence it has painstakingly built over the years. Worse still, it sets a dangerous precedent for other media organizations, suggesting that ratings and recognition can outweigh ethical considerations.
The consequences
The fallout from the Obuasi incident extends beyond the immediate casualties. The lives lost represent a grave human cost, but the broader implications—heightened communal tensions, diminished trust in state institutions, and a climate of fear—paint an even bleaker picture. It is not enough to lament these tragedies in their aftermath; we must hold to account those who play a role in their genesis.
Media General, as a leading broadcaster in Ghana, should have been among the first to recognize the gravity of the situation and take corrective action. Their failure to do so—whether out of negligence, arrogance, or misplaced priorities—is a dereliction of duty.
Need for accountability
The ongoing silence from Media General should galvanize not only their management but also the broader journalistic community in Ghana. It’s a dent on the journalism profession. The Ghana Journalists Association (GJA) and the National Media Commission (NMC) have a responsibility to uphold standards in the industry, and incidents like this underscore the urgent need for stricter oversight. Media houses cannot be allowed to operate without checks, especially when their content has the potential to inflame tensions and cause harm.
Moreover, Media General must go beyond mere damage control. The network must publicly acknowledge any role its programming may have played in the AngloGold turmoil, issue an unreserved apology to the victims and their families, and commit to overhauling its content monitoring processes. Failure to do so will further tarnish its image and diminish its standing as a trusted media outlet.
Ghana’s democracy cannot flourish in an atmosphere of unchecked media irresponsibility. While freedom of the press is crucial, it must be exercised with discernment and accountability. Media General’s apparent inaction regarding the AngloGold incident is a wake-up call for all stakeholders in the industry. It serves as a stark reminder that when profit and prestige overshadow journalistic principles, the very fabric of our society is at risk.
About The Author
