As a lover of news events and current affairs, with limited choices
of news channels to watch (only BBC and SKY on free-view), one can not
but continue to add-up to the figures that makes up for the rather high
audiences recorded by BBC, even though it is mostly down to lack of good
choices.
Although BBC is renowned for its rather bias and
disgusting representation of Africa which without doubt is supported by
'the west'; It feels disheartening that the corporation's resolve never
to highlight any good thing from the continent now stands in the way of
reporting sensitive information.
While any bad ideology
never misses the all-seeing eye of the BBC and are often repeatedly
broadcasted by the worst scenes and vocal expressions; the same
all-seeing eye often turns blind when it comes to a good bit that
concerns Africa.
In 'Welcome to Lagos', a research by BBC
on Nigeria, a nation of 150 million was summarized as a 'ghetto'. While
there are bad sights all over the world, including Southampton where I
have lived for 4 years, BBC will rather spend its time showing the
breath-taking sights of the London-2012 Olympics. BBC's interest ended
as soon as the portrayal of a ghetto Nigeria had been satisfactorily
crafted.
I enjoyed the wide prominence gained during the
process of electing the IMF president, review of potential candidates'
credentials and qualities. However, rather than the presidential
election in IMF's sister institution, the World bank to gain equal
prominence, if not more, the all-bad-seeing eyes of the BBC has failed
to highlight the processes.
Is it because the most qualified candidate which ironically 'the west' may decide not to give the job to is African?
would
BBC rather not expose the west's foolishness in advocating democracy
while it does not practice same? IMF-euro/W/Bank US alliance?
Middle,
Okonjo Eweala, the most qualified candidate for the job, left and
right, Kim, a medical Dr and American, with Jose, a columbian resp