Daily Graphic’s 30th August 2013 front page headline story captioned “Supreme Court affirms Mahama” had a picture of a smiling President John Mahama, his right hand raised towards the sky. The words accompanying the picture read as follows: “President John Mahama raises his hand and smiles broadly in celebration of his victory.” Without doubt a nice photo.

So why do I insist that the said picture of our President was fraudulent and dishonest? Because it was not taken on Thursday 29th August 2013, the day the Supreme Court determined that our hitherto beleaguered President was validly elected.

How do I know this? I know this because the photograph of the President the Daily Graphic (Graphic) used for its Friday 30th August 2013 edition was one of several which had been used by the NDC for its billboards during the 2012 elections. It was not taken on the day of the Supreme Court ruling!

Further proof? Pages 16 and 32 of the Friday 30th August 2013 edition of the Graphic newspaper had photographs of a beaming, relieved, validated President in a white Kaftan with his lawyers and Vice-President after the verdict was announced. His white Kaftan, though similar to the one Graphic used on its front page was; mark my words, SIMILAR, but DIFFERENT from what he was wearing on the front page. Whilst what he was wearing for the 2012 campaign photo shoot had no buttons down his shirt front and had a loose wrist-cuff, the one he actually wore that day had three (3) stud buttons on his shirt front and a double-cuff wrist with cufflinks.

It is also noteworthy that Saturday 31st August 2013’s Daily Graphic which had a Photo Report on Page 32 of an elated, “majestic” President “before and after the judgement on the petition” showed clearly that his shirt had buttons on the front and a double cuff wrist exactly the same as the photos on Pages 16 and 32 of the previous Friday’s edition but different from the Kaftan he was wearing on the front page of that same Friday’s edition.

So why did Daily Graphic visit this fraud on Ghanaians and its readers? Couldn’t its “cameramen” caught in the joyous scenes at the seat of government have taken vivid, brilliant, photographs of a truly relieved and jubilant President; pictures worthy of being elevated to memorabilia by Graphic’s readers?

Our recently re-branded Graphic in my opinion missed out on a great opportunity to poignantly capture a momentous if somewhat controversy filled piece of our nation’s history, through true, un-doctored photography. Graphic rather contrived to fraudulently and unnecessarily deceive Ghanaians that it had captured the president pointing to the sky using a “studio picture” he had taken eleven months earlier and used during his campaign to become President. It’s also curious that such a ‘historic’ photo did not have the photographer’s name underneath the caption as Graphic’s photographers zealously and jealously ensure. The other centre page pictures relating to scenes after the verdict was announced were boldly credited to EBOW HANSON.

Why did Graphic do this? What was the point? What was it seeking to achieve? Who was/is responsible for this deceit? Graphic must tell its readers and the Ghanaian public why it lied to us. Did someone in government order or suggest the use of that photograph? I shudder at that thought.

The era of the towering image of the larger than life “Great” leader with outstretched right hand cast in huge bronze statues and dominating huge concrete “memorial parks” overlain with granite or marble and smaller busts of them adorned with brass plaques extolling their virtues, vision, valour and wisdom, died with the passing on of communist despots like Mao-Tse-Tsung of China, North Korea’s Kim Il Sung and recently Iraq’s totalitarian Saddam Hussein. Designed and built to psychologically ensure that their oppressed people remained in awe of them, these giant statues are a symbol of oppression and pain all over the world. They start with innocuous but carefully crafted images spun to ensure that leaders appear godlike, benevolent, Messiah-like. Then they develop into these wasteful, loathsome, reverential statues. My primeval fears may be silly, rabid maybe. I just hope and pray Graphic isn’t beginning a canonization.

Our dour Daily Graphic jubilantly announced its rebranding a few months ago. Given the fanfare that accompanied the event, one would have expected a measurable improvement in the quality of its reporting, articles, editorials, grammar, content and proof-reading etc. But alas, save for an improved font, layout and print quality, there’s very little joy and anticipation in buying a copy every morning; it’s like buying GH10.00 worth of petrol, non-gratifying. Like a boring history class. At an average of GH¢72.00 per month (720,000 old Cedis), for the daily buyer, Graphic must serve up something better. It can. It must be a good read. Currently it isn’t. Those little boxes captioned “Fact Sheet” and “Quick Read’ look nice, but they add little depth or information. Graphic, save for a few writers like Kofi Akordor and Yaw Boadu-Ayeboafoh, doesn’t edify. It neither rivets nor illuminates. Why should one buy a newspaper and head for the Obituaries (now preposterously labelled “Called to Glory”)? My aim here is not to critique Graphic. One day I’ll attempt that. That may require tons of ink and paper. My object is to seek an answer to this “lie-lie”. Another question springs to mind form this Joseph Goebbels-like stunt.

I think the Board of Graphic Corporation should wade into the affairs of Daily Graphic and set a much higher standard for its Editorial Board, writers and staff. But for now Graphic must tell us why it deceived most of us. My other question; I’ll ask that after we’ve got some answers to the above.

Johnny Blukoo-Allotey,

Accra, Ghana.