Thursday, 29 October 2009


In has much i wish to avoid focusing on the style the foroyya newspaper adopted in reporting the UDP rally and subsiquent events, one cannot but comment on their strategic ploy to make the issue down bit. The Foroyaa reportage culled from higligthed serious opportunism on the part of Foroyaa, the arm of PDOIS. They claim that,whatever was mention on the UDP rally was reported by their paper. As if rallies are the same as news paper items. If it is trust and mutual cooperation we are all advocating, the Foroyaa should change its stance and see to it that, their views or way is not the only way.
We want to respect the persons and agendas of all the opposition, try to bridge the gabs, therefore, Foroyaa activitiues on this issue isunprofessional and politically bias.

In an earlier coverage on the episode, Foroyya went as far as quote anumber to the people that attended the rally. Were they guessing ordid they actually count the number of people that attended the rally?Foroyaa should do its best to always be seen to be independent ofPDOIS, if not their side of stories like this will be rejected and/ortaken with a pinch of salt.



Oceanic, since a few folks hang onto your bona fide comments to gain a
window. I will then address you and hopefully that will do. Yes i have
bone to pick with Foroyaa. Now tell me, what is the paper, a
propaganda tool or a newspaper that we take as independent and
I am sure like me, you too and many other people vent their anger at
the continuous praise singing of the Observer news paper of our
dictator. We all know that paper regularly sings Jammeh's praises.
What is the difference between Foroyaa and Observer?
Foroyaa like the Observer can pretend to be covering news items
independently but that is all it is: pretending.
Now Oceanic, you made mention that you live in U.S, which main stream
U.S political party has its own newspaper? I am not saying, the main
stream broad sheet or tabloid papers don't favour one party as against
the other, but the issue is when politicians are directly involve in
the reporting, editorial, and publication of a newspaper. The matter
is suspect Oceanic.

Foroyaa (PDOIS) used the paper to daily unearth venom's against the
PPP then, but did also publish response from the PPP to their views?
Coming to the matter at hand, look at the subject carefully, because I
am not treating your comments like that of the Pa Sambas of this
world. Fanatical sycophants with hate filled attitude to all comments
unfavourable to their saints.
I am taking your comments seriously, i expect the same from you.

The headline of any newspaper convey a general message. The headline
of Foroyaa is sufficient to see through the facade the editors created
around themselves:
1. The headline that 700 people attended the rally.
2. The rally was mostly women and children

Another days headline:
What did the police said to Peters.
In the coverage, they went to the extent of saying endlessly:
1. The subject of meat shortage that Darboe spoke about was covered in
their paper.
2. The subject of Jammeh involving in all sectors of Gambian economy
was also publicise by there paper.
What do you think they are not saying, but hoping readers can pick out?
Let us understand that, Sarr the editor is also a politician.
Halifa a contributor to the paper is a politician
Suwaibou also another contributor is a politician
Amie Sillah a contributor is a politician

Taking all of that into account and also knowing that PDOIS cannot
stand the fact that the UDP have a bigger majority than them. They are
willing to die than accept that fact, thus the uncompromising
sentiments coming from Halifa on daily basis. So how can Foroyaa
attached a specific figures to a rall? Why should they say, it was
women and children that were the majority out there? Why should they
be saying (all that Darboe said was reported by their paper).

If the freedomnews paper, the Gambiajournal, Echo etc said such thing,
no one would raise eyebrows Oceanic. The case is different when the
intellectual who see no one has capable apart from them report on such
rival political matter.
If PDOIS also organise a rally and made mention that, "we too have
said what Darboe said" and the constitutions provides us such rights,
then the matter will be irrelevant, since the platform are the same

I will not respond to the Gainako editors simply because both young
men are keen PDOIS supporters, therefore they wouldn't be objective in
this matter.
The conflict of interest at PDOIS cannot be denied or ignored. The
attitude of the editorial board cannot also be ignored, so are the
die-hards in U.S. So the game is politics Oceanic, they will always be
quiet in matters were they play a political advantageous game. Peter's
arrest is unlawfully, the paper should concentrate on that and stop
playing smart games. We are ready to see through the paper and its
editor, with its sympathisers. Oceanic, thanks for your comments. This
is only my humble observation, i intend no malice.


Are you saying if one doesn't affiliate with PDOIS, one should not
read the paper? That should by extension go with any other paper that
is openly more sympathetic to PDOIS then. Any paper whose editor
openly support PDOIS is on equal measure bias towards other parties.

I think Demba, you are wrong in your analysis. Foroyaa see themselves
as an independent news paper, although that is a questionable posture.
They are saying, "we are investigating" and also stating "WHAT DID THE
POLICE TOLD PETERS". The Paper has taken a moral high ground on so
many issues, priding themselves as the only believable outlet, yet the
are after all not independent or neutral. In that case why can't they
stay out this partisan issue, since i hardly read any thing UDP on
The media is suppose to be an information vehicle that should be
independent and non-partisan. This is not always the case, but there
is no need for political parties to have their own newspapers.
If media personalities like Baba Galleh, Sankareh or any other
journalist with a paper suddenly became a politician, the wise thing
to do is employ somebody else to run the paper and allow independence,
neutrality and fair play to take precedence over bias and
self-centered publications.
I have to admit, i hardly read Foroyaa, the free press (echo,
Senegambia, The Gambiajournal, Allgambia, Freedom, Gainako, Maafanta
does it for me.)
But if editors out there wish to republish verbatim the editorials and
reports of Foroyaa, this means those papers are directly aiding the
propaganda and attention seeking mechanism of PDOIS.
In closing, Foroyaa took the moral high of saying "we are
investigating" and trying to water down Ousainou speech. If any one do
that to Halifa, I am sure hell would have broke loose.


Very well said brother Bailo. The negative publicity is important to understand in a proper context. The quotation is a general statement. It implies that discussing about an issue make it popular, either for the wrong or right reasons but the fact that it make people pay some attention to it is a positive thing.

It is on that basis, i expose the duplicity in the language Foroyaa utilises in reporting the Peter's episode. Foroyaa may have highlighted some aspect of the case, but any serious and critical reader cannot but equally see the mirroring of matters towards their end.
Foroyaa mentioned that, they are still investigating the matter. One would hope, since they have not conclusively gather enough facts on the circumstances surrounding the case, they would restrain using specific and definitive words in context to the people that attended the rally. (700 people attended, mostly women and children). What is that conveying?
Gambians know, PDOIS/foroyaa see Serrekunda as their heart land although the current party leader loses his seat to Sainey Jaiteh ( I will in future analyse how he loses that seat and what some folks in Serrekunda east said was the reason they boycott PDOIS candidate).
In a parochial society like the Gambia, when we say women and children, the overiding assumption is that, the occasion is not serious. PDOIS uses such words to technically emphasise the environment of the rally.
The other area which i made mention of were Foroyaa equally use the issue to highlight their own activism is the question of the speech of Ousianou Darboe. (in a gathering, we do hear elders complimenting each other by saying: i have not much to say, elder x have said it all. This means let us go along with what such person said.)
Foroyyaa was in essense deflating the speech of the biggest opposition party in the Gambia. If this is not politics, i don't know what is. Other observers are right in that Foroyaa did report the case, to them that is enough, but to keen followers of UDP, it is a poison chalice.


Uncle Modou, thanks for the fine comments and i appreciate the inputs. I also notwithstanding my continous disagrrement with some points you raised, commend your boldness in articulating a fitting defense of Foroyaa news paper. I hope those wishing for a balance argument would find it in the exchanges offered.
Uncle Modou, i know any serious and well meaning Foroyya and PDOIS fan will defend the position of the paper as an objective media outlet just like the many out in the world wide web. But i cannot accept that argument simply because Foroyaa is the by-product of 'Voice of the Future', whcih was politically motivated information transmitter. Foroyaa is equally run by men who couple of years ago where vying for a political leadership position with the members of the UDP.

There may be a strong Chinise wall created by the publisers and editors of Foroyaa, but the overriding conflict of interest remains... Political-power play. I see the men at Foroyaa as normal human beings who have emotions and interests. There sacrifing life long interest among other things is to assume political office. Foroyaa thus became a tool where many young Gambian men and women are nurtured to understand and accept the ideology and propaganda message of PDOIS.

The head office of Foroyaa is seen as a shrine, a university, and the most suffisticated educational platform in the Gambia by the heads of the party. I am not oblivious to those facts Uncle Modou. The newspaper does not appeal to me base on one key principle: I cannot associate myself with the central message and philosophy of the party.
The language utilised in the paper is more akin to the ideas peddle by the paper.

The issues i raised on the two article on the Femi Peter's arrest were arrived at after reppeated analysis. I wish to avoid trampling on the toes of decent people like you. But that is not to say, Foroyaa doesn't occasionally undergo a conflict of interest.
Finally, what PDOIS stalwarts must understand is, there is no bad publicity par say. And Foroyaa/PDOIS hierachy are masters at responding at critics. My argument stands, the language was such that, the Peters arrest provided them an avenue to relay their message with a twist.