A dispute between the
Presidency and an online
news medium, Sahara
Reporters, has introduced
a new twist to the health
challenge that President
Goodluck Jonathan had in
London last week
Thursday. The matter was
provoked by a response
by the Special Adviser to
the President on Media
and Publicity, Dr. Reuben
Abati, to the online
media's story on the
President's illness.
They had reported that
Jonathan’s health broke
down in London after
engaging in heavy
drinking during a bash
organised to mark his
56th birthday in his hotel
room in London.
That this angered the
Presidency is evident in
the tone of statement
issued by Dr. Abati, which
indicates that the
government may institute
a legal action against
Sahara Reporters.
In the statement that has
sparked online reactions
from many Nigerians,
Abati said contrary to
claims, Jonathan
observed his birthday on
Wednesday quietly with
better part of the day
spent on air from Abuja to
London – while the
remaining part was spent
in the privacy of his hotel
room.
But Sahara Reporters say
they are ready to go to
court as they are sure of
what they reported.
With the latest
development, the
presidential spokesman
has once again come
under fire from Nigerians
who say the response is
hardly necessary. A
majority of Nigerians who
have taken to Twitter,
Facebook and The Punch
news website, where the
statement was also
published, say Abati’s
response has thrown the
hitherto ‘unpopular and
unknown report’ into the
open.
Meanwhile, in the midst of
the debate, Sahara
Reporters says its report
on the President’s health
is valid. It made this
known in a statement on
its website, saying,
“Despite Mr. Jonathan’s
threats and deployment of
scare tactics, Sahara
Reporters, stands by its
account of the events in
London in the past few
days...
As 2015 election
approaches and Mr.
Jonathan tries to win the
sympathy of Nigerians in
his favour, we challenge
him to prove — including
in a court of law – that
these reports have been
“entirely fictional,
malicious, hate-driven
and scurrilous distortion
of the facts.”
Monday, 25 November 2013
Online War Over Real Cause of President Jonathan's Sickness
A dispute between the
Presidency and an online
news medium, Sahara
Reporters, has introduced
a new twist to the health
challenge that President
Goodluck Jonathan had in
London last week
Thursday. The matter was
provoked by a response
by the Special Adviser to
the President on Media
and Publicity, Dr. Reuben
Abati, to the online
media's story on the
President's illness.
They had reported that
Jonathan’s health broke
down in London after
engaging in heavy
drinking during a bash
organised to mark his
56th birthday in his hotel
room in London.
That this angered the
Presidency is evident in
the tone of statement
issued by Dr. Abati, which
indicates that the
government may institute
a legal action against
Sahara Reporters.
In the statement that has
sparked online reactions
from many Nigerians,
Abati said contrary to
claims, Jonathan
observed his birthday on
Wednesday quietly with
better part of the day
spent on air from Abuja to
London – while the
remaining part was spent
in the privacy of his hotel
room.
But Sahara Reporters say
they are ready to go to
court as they are sure of
what they reported.
With the latest
development, the
presidential spokesman
has once again come
under fire from Nigerians
who say the response is
hardly necessary. A
majority of Nigerians who
have taken to Twitter,
Facebook and The Punch
news website, where the
statement was also
published, say Abati’s
response has thrown the
hitherto ‘unpopular and
unknown report’ into the
open.
Meanwhile, in the midst of
the debate, Sahara
Reporters says its report
on the President’s health
is valid. It made this
known in a statement on
its website, saying,
“Despite Mr. Jonathan’s
threats and deployment of
scare tactics, Sahara
Reporters, stands by its
account of the events in
London in the past few
days...
As 2015 election
approaches and Mr.
Jonathan tries to win the
sympathy of Nigerians in
his favour, we challenge
him to prove — including
in a court of law – that
these reports have been
“entirely fictional,
malicious, hate-driven
and scurrilous distortion
of the facts.”
0 comments:
Post a Comment