speech

Blog, Resources

Success Journey XXVI: Brain Dump, Get It Off Your Chest!

/

A brain dump is an idea you have but need to remember for later. Brain-dump your thoughts to get your work done. ~ Anon I was a bit hesitant in doing this because I thought hell there are loads of articles on the topic which anyone can access but on second thoughts I remembered I had my own audience and if I want to serve them why should I refer them to others? Surely I can articulate the few ideas I have in my voice and recommend further readings. In On Writing, best-selling author Stephen King also stated that writing became easier in his later years as he rarely spent beyond 3–6 months on any new project, at least for his first draft. He said he struggled to understand how writers spend years writing one book/novel when all that was required was just pouring out those thoughts. Let us examine this a bit more. I liken it to the popular advice in writing; Write daily. Some advise us to embark on “word dump” this with brain dumping). Yes, we can dive in and dump everything. It’s a strategy that helps in many ways but most significantly in overcoming the dreaded writer’s block. The fact that many best-selling writers attribute their success to the brain-dump/writing-sprint method doesn’t necessarily mean it will work for you but it does work because I have tried it and I just did a dump before starting this post. I usually wake up with a clear head at 5:15 am. I used to wake at 4:50 am until I asked myself where I was hurrying to so I decided to add an extra half hour. No, I cut 5 minutes and added 25 more minutes. Back to the topic. I woke up with an unusual cluster of thoughts even though I had a good rest and I just couldn’t figure out why. My thoughts were running wild with different issues competing to be at the fore. I figured this was because I had a jampacked weekend of work including on Sunday and in between I had 3 scheduled meetings. One with the cmonionline community and two with business concerns. I had to clear my head! So I decided to do a brain dump instead of my usual Morning pages. Yes, I do a brain dump multiple times but I do Morning Pages once a day. I set my timer for 15 minutes. I usually do brain dumps for less, max 5 minutes. Most times I just use a voice recorder and pour out my thoughts for 3 minutes. More often this serves as a reminder than to clear my head. As I started dumping my thoughts I soon realised that the recurring worry was related to my unpreparedness for the meeting I scheduled with my staff at Newross & Co. By the time I finished, 3 out of the 4 pages I wrote had almost everything I should need for the meeting. I knew I had done enough. I can develop the points further while speaking during the meeting. My head was clear and I faced my laptop to write what you are reading now. That is really one of the primary purposes of doing a brain dump; to clear your cluster of thoughts and allow your conscious mind to focus on the Most Important Task MIT. It is a great technique for beginners as well as experienced writers because we all have millions of thoughts roaming through the brain in high entropy. And the sweetest part is that there are no RULES! Some writers will advise you to do it on screen or in longhand. Others will tell you to use a speech recorder. Yet some will advise you to set out a time of the day. These tips are all worthwhile but just do you. Do what suits you. There are other benefits and like I said at the beginning this is the time to refer you to other texts. You can read them up here and then check out more tips in my repertoire of writing resources in a digital era. We live in a time when it is easier to do many things including writing more than ever in history, so why not utilise the available tools to improve the craft you love? Before I leave you, hear this. I recently came across a mind-blowing software that makes you bang out words at a breakneck pace. The write-or-die app created by Dr Wicked is designed to delete your previous words if you don’t churn out more at a certain rate. Can you beat that? Of course, you can! The app is over a decade old. We now have ChatGPT from Elon Must and other AI text generators with seemingly limitless possibilities. The future is scary looking at the speed of these technological innovations. But we won’t run away. We are here to stay so we will definitely adapt because that is what humans do. If you enjoyed this please share it and hit the follow button to join our community of digital creatives at cmonionline.com let’s grow together. Thanks for reading.

Blog, Monishots

When freedom of speech is abused.

/

Ignorant free speech often works against the speaker. That is one of several reasons why it must be given rein instead of suppressed ~ Anna Quindlen When I saw the caption of the story I was already shaking my head at the depth the government could descend to silence critics before I clicked on the link to read the details. At the 2nd paragraph, I paused and read the caption once more and started shaking my head again, this time, at how some journalists can willfully or otherwise mislead the reading audience with a caption. There is a thin line between criticism and insult. Here is the 2nd paragraph below: “In the July 5, 2017 tweet, Bolouere Opukiri described then-Acting President Osinbajo as ‘a novice’ for traveling out of the country at a time President Muhammadu Buhari was receiving medical treatment in London and tension was flaring between the executive and the legislature” ~ Premium Times Firstly, the word ‘novice’ means neophyte, an inexperienced person and it was used in a derogatory manner. So the headline “Nigerian woman loses job after criticising Vice President Osinbajo online” by Premium Times is misleading. It should have been “Nigerian woman loses job after insulting Vice President Osinbajo online”. As I read on I started recollecting the story. I follow the lady in question on Twitter, someone had retweeted one of her blog posts which I read and found interesting. She is a brilliant and witty young lady. I dare say she is also exuberant, opinionated and outspoken going from what she writes and her tweets. On this particular incident, she totally lost it that day. She rancorously lashed out at those who abused her for insulting her employers and even some neutrals who tried to warn her of the likely consequences of her action were not spared her venom. At a point she bragged about her rich background, boasting that she never applied for the job and that if she’s out of job her dad could take care of her for the rest of her life. Well, there you are according to Zebrudaya. The time is now. I didn’t expect the matter to be in the media, I had expected the young lady to be tweeting from Yale or Harvard in the company of fellow rich kids while arming herself with leadership skills that will be deployed to oust Osinbajo and Buhari next year. But here we are, reading about how she has been junketing and getting sacked again from another job. This matter reminds me of the Igbo adage about a certain man who felt the orange tree in his compound bore fruits that were not sweet enough so he cut it down. Lo, and behold the following season he wanted to eat oranges but ended up screaming like a madman when he was told the price at the market. There is always that tendency to take something for granted especially if you didn’t sweat or struggle hard to get it. I am one person that values loyalty, you can’t be working in an office that you not only condemn but also insult and expect a rewarding pat on the back, come on! I mean if she felt so bad about the same government she worked for she could have just resigned so that she can have all the freedom to call the Acting President names. I also do not buy into the utopian definition of freedom of speech and expression. No no no, in the real world such freedom ends where the other person’s own begins, especially where there is a nexus and even more so when such person is your employer. Therefore her right to free speech was abridged the day she picked her letter of appointment. Whats more there is no ambiguity in the relevant section of the Public Service rules. It clearly views “false claims against government officials” as a serious misconduct for which an employee should be dismissed as ultimate penalty. Celebrities like Roseann Barr just lost her job last week for a racist tweet let alone some obscure staffer at the Amnesty Office who finds it delirious to insult her employers. Give me a break! In any case, let me say that if she wants publicity with the obviously sponsored story, then she will get exactly that but in Nigeria stories like this which are a necessary distraction have a very short lifespan, they rarely last the week in the blogosphere before being relegated by another. And if she wants public sympathy I don’t think she’s getting much from what I’ve seen so far, not with our proclivity for savage clap backs and epic responses, if she does get some love, however, it ‘ll be interesting to see how that will help in paying her buxom bills. But if she wants to sue then I believe she should already know that likely outcome of taking such tedious path. The case of Yushau Shuaib who was dismissed by the previous government for criticising Ngozi Okonjo Iweala should suffice. It is also advisable that she should weigh that option meticulously and tread carefully. The grapevine is already filled with stories of her alleged involvement with a fugitive former presidential aide. Only a ‘novice’ will not know the enormous powers at the disposal of a government and its agents. They can also be ruthless if they have to be and there can be no better example than this APC government. The young lady will be better off moving on, she is still very young and talented, and with determination, the sky can only be the beginning. This is Nigeria!

Blog, Essays

Between hate speech and majesty of democracy by The Guardian

/

The journalist hangouts across the nation have been buzzing with Dapchi and the Bill Gates stories, but this Guardian editorial takes a look at another important current affair that is somewhat under reports. Read… ———————————————————————————————————————————— A careless declaration in Kano the other day by the Information and Culture Minister that a nebulous concept called “hate speech” would henceforth be treated as “terrorism’ in Nigeria had hardly been absorbed by concerned citizens when a bill that prescribes death sentence for a hate speech that leads to death. It is curious too that the minister’s threat and the hate speech bill as a private member bill from the Senate emerged after Vice President Yemi Osinbajo hinted at criminalization of government’s context of hate speech. So, there is but one mind in all these executive and legislative state actors, all bent against free speech, which defines the essence of democracy. In other words, democracy loses its majesty when its beneficiaries and those who should defend it are the ones sponsoring nebulous legislation to demonise democracy in the land. This bill sponsored by Senator Aliyu Sabi, Niger State and the executive support that heralded its arrival are to say the least hateful, careless, suspicious, obnoxious and undemocratic. Federal government has been harping on the conceptual confusion called “hate speech” and it has been finding ways of criminalizing it without seeking a national consensus on it. The federal government, which casually declared “hate speech” as an act of terrorism and warned that it would, henceforth, prosecute those who indulged in the practice as terrorism suspect should note that the most significant dividend of democracy is not physical infrastructure such as good roads: it is an intrinsic and golden thing called “free speech”, endorsed by Section 39 (1) of the 1999 Constitution as amended. And so any legislation or policy, which seeks to restrict or constrict is a violation of the organic law of the land that should be avoided. Section 39 (1) of the Constitution provides: “Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference”. The Minister of Information and Culture, Alhaji Lai Mohammed had at a recent Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ) event in Kano State announced that henceforth, offenders of dangerous comments would be treated in accordance with the 2011 Terrorism Act. The minister who spoke at the second National Conference of the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ) in Kano noted that government’s directive through the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) to sanction any broadcast stations that allowed their organs to be used as media for promotion of hate speeches should not be discounted. Even the minister’s reference to a directive to a regulator, the NBC that should be seen to be independent, to sanction stations, is dangerous and unacceptable. NBC should not be perceived as a government tool to curtail press freedom in a democratic society. It is also hoped that government is aware that it was for that reason that a Court of Appeal ruled during the Second Republic (1970-1983) that Sedition Law, a colonial legacy, should not be allowed to operate in a democratic society and was so abrogated by the Court presided over by Justice Olajide Olatawura, (JCA). It was said in that related landmark ruling that has jurisprudential significance for democracy that leaders should be tolerant of democratic opinions and those (leaders) “who cannot stand the heat” of (strong opinions) “should leave the kitchen” of democracy. According to Nigeria’s Information Minister in Kano, the federal government has continued to promote ethical standard and the core responsibility of the journalism as a profession, but an attempt to circumvent its rightful position in the society could be inimical to the national cohesion. He said the media as a purveyor of public views has a huge responsibility of preserving national unity, public values and peaceful co-existence. “As a gatekeeper, the media is expected in high hope to build responsible and lead vibrant societal development devoid of dangerous and hate speeches. The federal government will continue to promote and uphold ethical standard”, Minister Mohammed had noted in a manner of teaching journalism ethics and law. State actors who are afraid of the media should note clearly that the world has gone beyond this pedantic approach to governance and teaching social responsibility of the media to its practitioners. By the way, the role of the media is not a donation by any government. It is expressly provided in the Constitution in Section 22 as The Fourth Estate of the Realm. And a minister has no added role of defining and regulating it as there are regulatory frameworks for media practice. Nevertheless, some citizens have frowned on the groundswell of political and religious opinions that can undermine cohesion and security of the nation. And more and more prominent citizens are expressing strong views against irresponsible journalism, especially in the social media where most citizens appear to have sought refuge to vent their frustration and anger about averageness, docility, unfairness, promotion of inequality and lack of tangible and measurable progress in the country. But in the main, seeking to criminalise speech making because it is unfavorable as “hate speech’ in a democracy can destroy the majesty of that democracy, which is defined even in a global context by the quality of free speech therein. In other words, when people are no longer free to speak their minds in a democracy, there will be a strong perception that, that democracy is in trouble. So, state actors who seek to discuss “hate speech” should not demonise democracy by seeking to pollute the finesse that enhances its majesty through unnecessary policy and regulation. The conclusion of the whole matter is that constructive engagement or seeking justice in the courts of law is the fulcrum on which order and progress rest in a democracy, not through criminalisation of journalism or pollution of free speech, its most remarkable dividend. Even as we sound some warning

Blog, Essays

Transcript of Nwodo’s speech at Chatham House London.

/

Let me begin by extending my deep sense of gratitude to the Royal Institute of International Affairs, for inviting me to participate in this current series of discussions on, Next Generation Nigeria: Accountability and National Cohesion. The involvement of this reputable British Institute in discussing and proffering suggestions for extant Nigeria’s problems is not only commendable, but I believe most relieving for the British establishment, who must understandably feel a deep sense of vicarious responsibility for putting together a country confronted with such grim future. Nigeria became a united British colony by the amalgamation of its Northern and Southern Protectorates in 1914. In 1960 it attained independence, fashioned a federal Constitution which had three and subsequently four regions as its federating units. The pre-1960 and the 1963 constitutions of Nigeria were fashioned by the people of Nigeria as represented by the leaders of their ethnic nationalities. The coup of January 1966 and the counter-coup of the same year occasioned by ethnic tensions and disagreements within the military-led our country to disastrous consequences. Our first Prime Minister, Rt. Hon Tafawa Balewa and the then premier of Northern Nigeria, Sir Ahmadu Bello, as well as the then Minister for Finance Festus Okotie-Eboh,  were murdered. A massive pogrom was unleashed on South Eastern Nigerians living in the Northern Nigeria. A sitting Head of State from the South East, Major General Aguiyi Ironsi and a governor from the South West Col. Adekunle Fajuyi were murdered. The military suspended our 1963 constitution and adopted a unitary system of government to fit their command and control structures. Opposition to this move by Southern Nigeria led to constitutional talks in Aburi, Ghana. The agreements reached Aburi were jettisoned. War broke out and claimed more than three and a half million lives mostly from the South East. After the war, the military-authored two more constitutions, one in 1979 and another in 1998/99. The two military constitutions were finally approved by the Supreme Military Council. Under military rule, this organ was the highest legislative organ for the country. It was made up of senior military officers, a majority of whom were from Northern Nigeria. The last constitution of 1998/99 which the military approved was the legal instrument that governed Nigeria’s transition to democracy. It is still in use in Nigeria today. It was not subjected to a national referendum. It created 19 states out of the old Northern Region, 6 states out of the Western Region, 2 states out of the old Midwestern Region and 9 states out of the old Eastern Region. An agreement by a constitutional conference convened by General Abacha divided the country into six geopolitical zones. This agreement was never incorporated into a legislation even though it continues to be adopted for administrative purposes by Government and the political parties. The creation of states and local governments in these six geographical areas did not respect any equitable parameter. Our present constitution is not autochthonous. It was not written by the people of Nigeria. It was not approved in a National referendum. In jurisprudence, its effectiveness will score a very low grade on account of its unacceptability. Regrettably, it continues to hold sway and begins with a false proclamation, “We the People of Nigeria….” Our present constitution was written at a time of unprecedented increase in National revenue following the massive discovery of oil in Nigeria and its global reliance as a source of fuel for mechanical machines. It had as its centrepiece, the distribution of national revenue and national offices using states and local governments as units for division. It constructed a federation in name but a unitary government in practice following the pattern enunciated in 1966 from the inception of military administration in Nigeria. Competition and drive for production by the federating units was destroyed. Each state and local government waited every month for proceeds from oil generated revenue to be divided out to them. The Federal Government became enormously powerful taking over mining rights, construction of interstate highways, major educational establishments, rail and water transportation, power and several infrastructural responsibilities previously undertaken by the regions.  Competition for control of the Federal Government became intense and corrupted our electoral system. Corruption became perverse as the Federal Government became too big to be effectively policed by auditing and administrative regulations. As I speak to you today, Nigeria has a grim economic outlook. Nigeria’s external debt has grown from $10.3 billion in 2015 to $15 billion in 2017. Her domestic debt has also grown from 8.8 trillion Naira in 2015, to 14 trillion Naira in 2017. Domestic debt component for the 36 states rose from 1.69 trillion Naira in 2015 to 2.9 trillion Naira in June 2017. The Federal government has on two occasions released bailout funds to enable states to meet their recurrent expenditure requirements. Only about eight states in Nigeria namely Lagos, Kano, Enugu, Edo, Delta, Abia, Rivers, and Kwara have their internally generated revenue sufficient enough to cover their interest repayments on their debts without depending on allocations from Federally collected revenue. For the Federal Government close to 40% of its annual revenue was spent on servicing of interest repayments on debts and according to International Monetary Fund (IMF), this percentage is expected to increase further. According to Fitch ratings, Nigeria’s Government gross debts is 320% of its annual revenue!! – one of the highest in the world. In the face of this economic reality, the Population Reference Bureau predicts that Nigeria will in 2050 become the world’s fourth-largest population with a population of 397 million coming after China, India and the United States of America. This is only 33 years away. In 2011, five Colonels in the United States Centre for Strategy and Technology, Air War College did a case study on Nigeria and the global consequences of its implosion and came out with a conclusion that, “despite its best efforts, Nigeria has a long-term struggle ahead to remain a viable state, much less a top-20 economy”. Faced with this grim

Blog

Irish PM reminds Trump that immigrants built America.

/

“We believed in the shelter of America, and the compassion of America, and the opportunity of America. We came, and we became Americans.” ~ Enda Kenny Talk about Irish mojo and the Taoiseach Enda Kenny comes to mind. The Irish Prime Minister who was a guest at the White House in line with a long held tradition on St. Patricks day seized the opportunity to give a rousing speech in which he reminded everyone including US President Donal Trump about the beauty of immigration. In the speech which has since gone viral with close to 35m views as at press time, Mr Kenny said that St Patrick whose day was being celebrated around the world was an immigrant and was, in many ways, the patron saint of immigrants along with being the patron saint of Ireland. He said, “Ireland came to America because we were deprived of liberty, deprived of opportunity, of safety, of even food itself, the Irish believed, and four decades before Lady Liberty lifted her lamp – we were the wretched refuse on the teeming shore”. “We believed in the shelter of America, in the compassion of America, in the opportunity of America. “We came, and we became Americans. We lived the words of John F. Kennedy long before he uttered them. We asked not what America could do for us, but what we could do for America – and we still do.” he added. It was indeed a short but powerful speech. Coming a day after Trump’s new immigration ban was halted by a federal court many opinion leaders applauded the message. Some sections of the US and UK media have gone further to extrapolate that it was an indirect criticism of the American President’s controversial immigration policies. Occupy Democrats posted the video on their Facebook page captioned “Irish PM SCHOOLS Trump: ‘St. Patrick Was An Immigrant’ Right to Trump’s face!” Opinions will vary on this one but I can tell you it felt proud to be Irish watching the Taoiseach courageously saying what the British PM who rushed to visit the White House first couldn’t say. You can watch a video of the full speech here.  

Join our essay competition.

This will close in 13 seconds

Solverwp- WordPress Theme and Plugin

Scroll to Top