Grandfather’s clock -2

There was time through the years, well before 89 years now, when the GBC was a “write off ” in this country. Chief excuse among the searing attacks and condemnation were government of day-con­trol and lack-lustre professional stand-up. I think I can loan a new Spanish vocabulary which I have recently learned to reverse its meaning to sum-suit my prior opener here. There was no cama­raderie between the country and its public Broadcaster. The word is “cuadrilla”. I recall quoting the late former Speaker of Parliament Peter Ala Adjetey’s semi defence of any government displaying a somewhat irresistible itchy fingers in the GBC as “too tantalising”. I had previously heard a reported remark by a Senior Military Officer in one of the FOUR Juntas in our history that “we can’t allow him to use our own Radio to criticise us like that.” That seemed retrospec­tively to have put a zip on the Ad­jetey- Theory. (The rest belongs to my Bio later).

Current and less audibly today is summary of public view – com­plaints: grumbles, groans and disapproval, was that the GBC was underperforming, allegedly and specifically, mingy with the truth. The GBC bore it then stoically and response-deliveries seemingly to prove some points. They had been hapless then, hardly any different now —solely dependent on the State. Chambers and pockets of opinions, constantly discounted that scenario, that the state of play made the National Institution vulnerable, dull and slug. It looks like a satisfactory arrangement to make it hard to interfere, is yet to be framed since as old as this fourth Republic dated 1992. How it grinds out, would mark the real ethos of the culture which of the law which set up the National Me­dia Commission [NMC] provides.

By the way, an apolitical Com­mission is not popular with our na­tional political traditions—Thomas Jefferson, Ed Burke, Ivor Jennings and de Tocqueville could be stood outside. Nevertheless, the GBC for all its ageing aches, pains, fears and doubts, has managed the de­cades-long lock out daily wake-up call to recently spark—occasion­ally bristle or dance, or flung into policy head-wrongness to copy and crashed during the passage of time has one good news—sur­vived struggling to get it right [you don’t ever in broadcasting; because it is illusory—jinx and sphinx]. The golden rule is “lead and stay ahead” for what baggage you carry as obligated by your title—respon­sibility, National Broadcaster and a Commercial Enterprise.

Repeatedly, I should insist that GBC was established denied the know-how of Business; and it is apparent that they were left alone to acquire that particular ability since 1967. I think they haven’t, but showing endeavours inclined towards qualitatively and quantitively. The goal must have to possess that chunk enveloped in broadcast professionalism and slot airing correspondingly to programmes. Cutting out shoddy adverts would cause short- term losses, conversant; and as ephem­eral, the recovery ultimately endures, depending on keeping the broadcast norm to [i] pre-edit (Advertisers are first beneficiaries, surprisingly and [ii] from the qual­ity of programs and News with all its paraphernalia of Situationers [extended news coverage],features, documentaries, music and OBs –ceremonials ( stately including banquets, cocktails, deaths— History may forgive but cannot forget the flop at the installation of a High Prelate [Angelina] and the abysmal failure at the foreign and citizens’ viewing of former President Prof J.E.Atta Mills at the State House both in Accra. Com­mentators are trained specially. OBs (Outside broadcasts, neither ordinary nor major, is mediocre and costly but emphatically, for only Sports. Training ( including specialisation) is for the fit. The persons who made their marks in the past were). The attitude at BH to that, had been lackadaisical for years.

I hope as GBC goes forward to 90, somebody in and about GBC would take a long step back to plan—ask around and so with the rest. And that is learning, even from the mortuary into and in the grave, at our public cemeteries where the apparent violence to the dead has been a toxic presence— neither all of religions (Churches), nor local authorities could escape trial for grossest negligence. We neglect that the Churches and the local authorities are biggest earn­ers. Someone might myopically wonder about relativity to GBC.

I recently visited my mother at the cemetery. I had to hire the some of the labourers there –to clean up the overgrowth of fauna to locate her stone head. Hidden under mound of soil. Dug it and cleared to find her. There is a story which requires a TV -doc­umentary. That is up to whom, monitoring meanwhile. A quarrel suddenly ensued between one of the labourers who felt an intruder had just arrived. He suspected the intruder felt there will be payment to share. ( it’s a usual happen­ing). The intruder felt that was the reason for the protest. Then he said: you can take the money …”eat it and you will die and you will be brought here.’’ The other retorted “that is why we are here.’’ Savour how apt the wisdom. Never mind Cape Coast has a historic accolade as “the Town of beautiful nonsense.”

I doubt there is one national asset [“sacred cow’’] which has the comparable Gandhian ‘’sa­tyagraha’’[passive resistance and or, non-violence] resilient strength like the GBC in our history, having survived its disappointed dreams and factious fears since pre-independence. The latest refers to ‘’Chinese forfeiture in lieu of “debts’’, allegedly national in character, as much as a recent TV narrative threaded Trying to understand, I would be ambiva­lent, living in a world today when hearsay is degrees more credible than the proven truth. At GBC we were and I believe I cain claim ‘used’ to that. In Fantse, it is said “oreba, oreba na oye hu” [its ru­mour only scares].

The greater statement is GBC hasn’t gone under, or out. But there is valuable dividend from the usual alert. Apart from that, it is probable the upshot in the hounding of the “akee, akee, [and quite often neither thought of nor reckoned with as if naturally], would then plumber new ways and means for good or rare deteriora­tion. The GBC has stood the tu­mults, partly self-inflicted in panic. Yet, its triumph is GBC still stays the course. The principal reason is every national broadcaster has an intrinsic gem of self-renewal. Its baffling and certainly incom­prehensible. I am arguing that the little scare crowing shall be permis­sible. After all, the alarm from its folklore explanation background is for the Kids who won’t either sleep or mischievous, to calm deterred. GBC remains the “Gospel” of the markets’ old folks and in the rural communities bridged at the urbans. You still hear them asking if Radio has announced it. That is un-contested reference to the GBC in the context. However, the GBC lets down the old and non-liter­ate audience nationwide. Folk and country town music, the late noon programs of home and life discourses in the native language, hopefully placed in the portfolios of the decentralisation.

There are, I suggest for musing: provide a succinct mandates to the Regional Directorates in view of their parlous states. You see, the original development trained some (I remember two) abroad to oversee the implementation. They retired shortly pre-start, or were shortly after return home. I sus­pect Broadcasting House Politics which may had been an adjunct to subvert the original intents of the scheme skittled probably under economies either from the eventu­al feed-on policies –re-structuring, political and military appointees, not forgetting the breaches and repercussions in the orders of suc­cession at BH of two successive military and civilian eras, unabated and or even both. For all of these broadcasting had gone on. There are huge lots to redefine, necessar­ily pondering the 90s.—some spec­ulations but with cautions from all the experience gathered.

At 89, GBC is young to give somethings back. How it grinds out the excellence is the property of the country to leave for poster­ity’. We can’t take ourselves out of the running. I cannot dodge the non-sequitur argument about alternate proliferation of private FMs and TVs –replacing the GBC. I have explained in months ago remarks and in the first of the present, I had interpreted the meaning, implying the conse­quential purposes of the NLC’s Edict of February 1967, not to be repetitious. But there is a last: a sitting President has no absolute right to broadcast to the nation. That is as crystal clear. And if you think that even the most obscured rural Radio [or TV, if any at all] will allow him/her, let us think again over which audience. Thirdly, the nation deciphers the politics or allegiances of the Privates and aches over perhaps perpetuating a divisive country. That may be the error of the political scrambling of the airwaves, some folded or bought over; while on stream oth­ers stutter. [These would include GBC’s Regionals which through quasi-regulation civil service rule may pretend not to realise the untapped wealth around them.

Generally, the reality needs reiterated that establishing to run Radio/TV is no chicken feed. In extenso, you pick up reasons for Privates insisting on a percentage share in the proposal to a national levy as contribution by a nation, so ardent that its National Broad­caster shall be sustained for pride, preservation and total right to own it—“na we own” put in Creole. The greater agony for this nation about GBC is the result of the rush for political (military) influ­ence or control (raw or covert) of information. This was warned in a document called “Compol ‘98”. Ad interim, Grand Father’s clock ticks on. Bravo!.

BY PROF NANA ESSILFIE-CONDUAH.