There are people in this country whose stock in trade is to incite others to be angry over the things that ordinarily shouldn't get anyone agitated. They usually present half-truths, embelish stories or promote outright lies to incite the public against leadership of the country. They are what I refer to as ‘angerprenuers’.
Yes, angerpreneurs are engaged in the business of inciting the ignorant public to anger in order for them (the angerpreneurs) to continue staying relevant. They profit off the outrage industry as it is their source of income.
Unfortunately, ‘angerprenuership’ has become very lucrative and popular because a chunk of the masses are either naive or refuse to put the angerpreneurs to strict proof. Sad to say, but the bitter truth is that many of my compatriots are consumers of information; and not analyzers of same. It is a pity to see even so-called think-tanks swallow pure claptrap without batting an eyelid. An angerpreneur only needs to shout, speak with passion and pretend to care for the masses and you will be amazed at the thousands of views and likes he will garner.
When Ibrahim Mohammed, popularly known as Macho Kaaka, was attacked, which led to his unfortunate demise, did we not see many angerpreneurs in their elements? Chief amongst them was the bloke in the stables of Multimedia, who, in my view, should be blamed for inciting the Ejura youth with his reportage, which was laced with half-truths and pure lies. Without a doubt, linking Kaaka’s death to his association with ‘Fix the country’ campaign was the fuel the already agitated youth needed to rush to the streets.
I totally agree with Hon. Ken that the bloke cannot escape blame for the mischievous reportage. His hands have been soiled with the blood of those who died in the demonstration. He and his employers must dismount from the high horse and apologize to the family of the dead and injured for the indiscretion.
I, however, agree with the assertion that Hon. Ken had overstepped the boundaries. Saying he would beat the mischievous bloke if he was the president was in bad taste. What Hon. Ken has ultimately succeeded in doing is to give the mischief-makers the opportunity to deflect attention to him. Petitions to the Police, Media Commission, Parliament, American Embassy and other foreign Embassies show clearly the extent they are willing to go to destroy him. Whatever the outcome, some of us will continue to bark until Multimedia take responsibility for their misbehavior in the Ejura matter.
The angerpreneurs were once again at their frisky best as they agitated against presidential spouses’ allowance. I wrote extensively on it last week, so I have only one question: Now that Aunty Becky and Hajia Samira have refunded all that they have received from government as allowance, why have the angerpreneurs gone silent on Aunty Lordina’s refund?
The saga of car loans for Members of Parliament (MPs) has also been on the front burner for some weeks now. Of course, the angerpreneurs have, as usual, been at the forefront. They played on the keyboard of people’s emotions as they questioned the wisdom in the state securing loans for MPs.
The masses have also swallowed the bait as one could hear them calling for the cancellation of car loans for MPs. Some say MPs should be made to secure personal loans to buy cars, while others say goyvernment shouldn’t be responsible for anything related to car loans for MPs.
Funny, isn’t it? How can a democratic government worth its salt deny its legislators cars to facilitate their work? Government securing loans for MPs to buy cars is an obligation, and not an act of charity.
By the way, it’s common knowledge that the loans are not free and they've never been free. MPs pay 40% of it, while government pays the remaining 60%. It is deducted from their earnings until they finish paying. That has been the ritual since 1992, so why the noise now?
The people who vote for MPs say they don’t want their representatives at the House of Honourables to have cars. Yet they are the first to complain that MPs do not visit their constituents to engage them on their challenges or listen to their concerns. What type of hypocrisy is that?
Frankly, it’s heartwarming to note that the House of Honourables itself wants subsequent governments to scrap the car loan and procure cars for them instead. I would be the first to support our MPs should they decide to revolt to press home this demand. Then shall the masses see how gullible they had been.
To paraphrase my Facebook friend Mustapha Hameed, people profit off the outrage industry because it actually pays them. By all means let’s criticize and express anger over issues that go wrong. But we must not waste our emotions over needless issues at the behest of angerpreneurs.
See you next week for another interesting konkonsa Deo volente!