Cash for Coverage

Posted: January 18, 2016 in African emancipation, Media, The press

Revolution will not be televised.jpg

In developing countries, more people trust the media than their governments; this is from a past report based on a ten-country opinion poll for the BBC, Reuters, and The Media Center. For instance, people in the US have a 67% trust on their governance against the media, unlike developing countries like Nigeria where they trust the media 88% versus 34% on the government.

Which got me contemplative, just how innocent is the media in the face of its public? How much should we discern what we read and see? The hard reality is that there are more than a few cases of journalists accepting money from people or agencies which they’ve interviewed, or are doing stories about. An extreme issue for the profession and quite a raw deal for the unsuspecting public. Ethics versus survival, it seems difficult for many to take the high road, especially when, “everybody else does it….”

Indeed, it is a single problem with many faces that would need a communal approach: How do we collectively salvage ourselves from this deep rooted culture of corruption (that is not just unique to Africa)? What can we do better or more assertively to address this dark side of journalism?

…. Cash For Coverage discusses: Enjoy Your Read!

Nelson Mandela has been accused by his former wife of betraying South Africa’s black population.

In a savage attack, Winnie Mandela said he had done nothing for the poor and should not have accepted the Nobel peace prize with the man who jailed him, FW de Klerk.

The 73-year-old said her ex-husband had become a ‘corporate foundation’ who was ‘wheeled out’ only to raise money for the ANC party he once led.

Terrence Howard as Nelson Mandela in 'Winnie Mandela' (2013)

Terrence Howard as Nelson Mandela in ‘Winnie Mandela’ (2013)

Winnie and Nelson Mandela, hand in hand after Nelson is released from prison after 27 years.

Winnie and Nelson Mandela, hand in hand after Nelson is released from prison after 27 years.

She said Archbishop Desmond Tutu was a cretin and claimed the sacrifices of Steve Biko and others in the fight against apartheid were being overlooked.
The comments were made in an interview yesterday with Nadira Naipaul, the wife of novelist V S Naipaul.

Mrs Mandela became notorious in 1991 when she was jailed for six years for the kidnap of Stompie Moeketsi – a sentence later cut to a fine.

Stompie, had been murdered three years earlier by members of Mrs Mandela’s bodyguard, the Mandela United Football Club.

She also caused outrage by endorsing the punishment of apartheid collaborators with ‘ necklacing’ – putting burning tyres around their necks.

Yesterday she said: ‘This name Mandela is an albatross around the necks of my family.

‘You all must realise that Mandela was not the only man who suffered. There were many others, hundreds who languished in prison and died.

‘Mandela did go to prison and he went in there as a young revolutionary but look what came out. ‘Mandela let us down. He agreed to a bad deal for the blacks. Economically we are still on the outside. The economy is very much “white”. He prefers to sip tea with the queen the biggest oppressor of black people and have dinner with the Clintons.

Let the world know that Winnie Mandela will die for her people to ensure a free Africa for the Africans.

‘I cannot forgive him for going to receive the Nobel with his jailer de Klerk. Hand in hand they went. Do you  think de Klerk released him from the goodness of his heart?  ‘He had to. The times dictated it, the world had changed.’

The Mandelas, who divorced in 1996, were married for 38 years – although together for only five.

Mrs Mandela criticised her country’s Truth and Reconciliation Committee – which she appeared before in 1997 and which implicated her in gross violations of human rights.

She said: ‘What good does the truth do? How does it help to anyone to know where and how their loved ones are killed or buried?  Africa must be free.

‘That Bishop Tutu who turned it all into a religious circus came here. He had a cheek to tell me to appear.

‘I told him that he and his other like-minded cretins were only sitting there because of our struggle and me.
Look what they make him do. The great Mandela. He has no control or say any more but has transformed into a stool pigeon for the white people.

‘They put that huge statue of him right in the middle of the most affluent white area of Johannesburg.

‘Mandela is now like a corporate foundation. He is wheeled out globally to collect the money.’

She said her daughters, Zenani, 51, and Zindzi, 50, had to struggle through red tape to speak to their 91-year-old father, who led South Africa from 1994 to 1999.

Published on THURSDAY MARCH 2010 by Zimdiaspora

This was a first among a couple trips I would make to Jo’burg. It was a rousing 4 hour flight from JKIA heading to the legendary- South Africa, to the cradle-land of the Zulu – Kwa Zulu Natal. As I checked in O.R. Tambo International Airport, it was all smiles and Unjani all the way to Kwa Zulu Natal, also known as Durban. That was back in 2010, good times to remember, the outwardly peaceable place, incapable of this lunacy we now call Xenophobia.

Coating the thought away, was the nostalgia of Mombasa in the 1990s – fresh and exotic. Somehow Durban gave me the same feeling. What could possibly loom beneath this serenity? What was the beginning of this epidemic hate?


Some argued that companies would give out their jobs, to cheap labor from illegal Zimz, Malawian’s or Mozambican immigrants to evade the complexities of affirmative action. On the other divide, the foreigners – they just thought of the black South African as unschooled, lazy criminals. Well, I am not sure of whichever divide, all I know is that I met some really cool and some pretty normal people in South Africa.


I remember the positivity we read over tête-à-têtes during my stay. We talked of the new age South Africa, post-apartheid through the wilderness on toward the Promised Land. The progressiveness of the new South African. Their inspirations drawn from Rastafari, made on show by dreadlocks and reggae songs. We spoke of legends that once were – Lucky Dube, (then still were – Mandiba). We gossiped of the bitterness of the old racist Boers, and how they now have to deal with it. What optimisms we had, they had, the new South Africa, just through rose colored glasses.


#StopXenophobia #SaveSouthAfrica #AfricaCries

Indeed, its hurts, but in poetry it tingles just as sweet.
I feel it today.

My spirit flags up,

In pride and admiration for this movement,
Not against any race but for a race that has transcended
A race that has had the guts to dream,
Through snuffles and tears,
And the patience to dare imagine that one day… just one day
We held up high, with pride some deemed we shouldn’t posses, 
And even with the intimidating chains and wires
Assassinations and brutality,
History of slavery,
Ripples of poverty and disease
We were maimed and troubled.
Today is, Yesterday Was, Tomorrow Will Be
And just … just one day
“One day, when the glory comes
It will be ours, it will be ours
Oh, one day, when the war is one
We will be sure, we will be here sure
Oh, glory, glory
Oh, glory, glory glory…”

“How is man to recognize his full self, his full power through the eye’s of an incomplete woman? The woman who has been stripped of Goddess recognition and diminished to a big ass and full breast for physical comfort only. The woman who has been silenced so she may forget her spiritual essence because her words stir too much thought outside of the pleasure space. The woman who has been diminished to covering all that rots inside of her with weaves and red bottom shoes.

I am sure the men, who restructured our societies from cultures that honored woman, had no idea of the outcome. They had no idea that eventually, even men would render themselves empty and longing for meaning, depth and connection.

“There is a deep sadness when I witness a man that can’t recognize the emptiness he feels when he objectifies himself as a bank and truly believes he can buy love with things and status. It is painful to witness the betrayal when a woman takes him up on that offer.

He doesn’t recognize that the [creation] of a half woman has contributed to his repressed anger and frustration of feeling he is not enough. He then may love no woman or keep many half women as his prize.

He doesn’t recognize that it’s his submersion in the imbalanced warrior culture, where violence is the means of getting respect and power, as the reason he can break the face of the woman who bore him 4 four children.

When woman is lost, so is man. The truth is, woman is the window to a man’s heart and a man’s heart is the gateway to his soul.

Power and control will NEVER out weigh love. May we all find our way.”

~ Jada Pinkett-Smith, via Sinuous Magazine

Our generation

Posted: January 27, 2015 in Poems

If you’ve ever lost faith in this generation or the next one, this 14-year-old boy may give you just enough hope to get through the day.Derek Nichols decided to post a poem written by his younger brother, Jordan, who seems to be wise beyond his years. Here’s the transcript of the poem:

Published at

Click picture for enlarged view.

our generation

Interesting read for #MyDressMyChoice #NudityIsNotMyChoice folk….


By Mohadesa Najumi

When I think about what modesty means in today’s political, cultural and religious environment, I am inclined to believe that the concept itself does not involve choice, or any dimension of freedom or independent thought.  Rather, modesty constitutes a dictatorial concept forced upon women whether they agree with it or not.  For me, modesty is patriarchy.

When I speak about modesty in this context, I speaking specifically about it in relation to clothing, mannerisms and behaviour. Throughout history, women have been judged on how “modest” they are or not.  And this has determined how much of a “lady” they presumably are or not. In a patriarchal society, to be modest is to dress and speak ”appropriately,” and to maintain a “ladylike” image. If you fail to do this, you are not only not modest, but God forbid you choose to wear a low-cut top, then you are simply a whore!

In this way, modesty, to me, means subservience. It means acquiesce. How you dress suddenly becomes someone else’s business, and how “ladylike” you are is determined by a standard you never gave your consent to in the first place. Let’s face it, men are not subject to these kinds of standards.  I mean, have you ever heard someone describe a man as “immodest”?  The dictate and quest for modesty is reserved almost exclusively for women.  And if modesty is simply about avoidance of dressing in a “revealing” manner, why is it predominantly directed at women? Why is a woman’s dress choice suddenly everybody’s business, and why is a woman’s choice to reveal what is her’s, considered “indecent” and “immoral”?

Also, how about this idea that the level of “respect” you should receive is inextricably linked with how “modest” you are. Shouldn’t “respect” be linked with intellect, intelligence, ability to hold an intriguing conversation?  What does respect have to do with the tightness of your dress or the shortness of your skirt?  Too often, we measure respect for women on the basis of how well they fit our standard of “modesty” and “decency.”  This is oppressive.  How about this?  A woman doesn’t leave her house everyday desperate to receive your stamp of approval and rating of modesty? Maybe it’s just her choice to wear what she wants and act the way she desires. It’s a ludicrous idea I know, but just consider it for a moment.

I’ve heard countless men and women use words like “impure” and “unclean” as synonyms for “immodesty.”  Modesty is a way to oppress women and to pressure them into giving into a system of patriarchy that dictates what they wear, how much skin they reveal, and how “sexual” they are.

As a way to attack, marginalize, and oppress women, it is effective. There is nothing innocent about throwing around the term modesty and there are no excuses for the ignorance about what it really implies. I for one have no interest in being “modest.”  Why?  Because who I am and whether or not I deserve respect, should have nothing to do with how I dress, how I express myself, or my gender.  And nobody should be able to dictate this for me–or you.  I refuse to vilify women who do not fit into an illusionary, irrelevant, inaccurate and un-useful standard of “modesty.”  It is a concept that truly disgusts me, and not merely because of its essential meaning, but because of the importance we have given to it.

Published by