Graphic boils over MD's intimidating tactics

…Haunts Senior Journalist To Resign

The Graphic Communications Group Limited (GCGL) is boiling over what journalists in the state-owned media organisation describe as ‘intimidating tactics’ being employed by the Ken Asigbey-led management to smoke out journalists who express their opinions on the affairs of the most profitable media organization, either verbally or written.

The latest to face this cunning intimidating tactics is prolific writer and multiple awards winning journalist, Kofi Yeboah, a Staff Writer at the Daily Graphic, the flagship newspaper of the GCGL.

Mr. Yeboah, who could no longer bear the intimidation to get him out of the company has tendered in his resignation letter to the management, which was gladly accepted.

The Chronicle chanced upon the senior journalist’s resignation letter, dated 10th November, 2014, which reads: “I hereby tender in my resignation as an employee of the Graphic Communications Group Limited with effect from February 10, 2015”.

It continued: “From the date of this letter, I herewith give Management three months’ prior notice of my resignation, in accordance with Section 20 (c) of the Collective Bargaining Agreement of the company.

"I wish to take this opportunity to express my profound gratitude to Management for giving me the opportunity to serve the company for almost 11 years. I also wish to thank exceedingly staff of the company for their cooperation and camaraderie during the period of my engagement with the company”.

Investigations conducted by The Chronicle into the resignation of Mr. Yeboah revealed that the young talented and versatile journalist was haunted to resign because of an opinion article he wrote, entitled ‘Celebrating 10 years at Graphic - Notes from my scribbling pad’, which was published in the May 5th 2014 edition of the Daily Graphic.

The opinion article, which gauges the general deteriorating morale of many workers of the company and seemingly political interference, however, did not go down well with management of the company.

Subsequently, fact-finding and disciplinary committees were set up by management of the GCGL on May 6th, 2014, to investigate the circumstances under which the opinion article, written by Kofi Yeboah was published in the Daily Graphic.

The fact-finding committee, chaired by Mrs. Mavis Kitcher, was tasked to find out how the systems at Graphic failed, leading to the publication of the said article and the ramifications on the brand’s reputation.

In addition, the committee was to interrogate all the issues raised in the ace journalist’s article and come up with its findings and recommendations, so that a similar situation would not be repeated. This is to protect the integrity and sanctity of the system and the company.

The four-member committee interviewed eight editorial gatekeepers, including the editor of the Graphic and found out: “The Features editor, night editor and deputy editor glossed over their gatekeeping responsibilities. There is evidence that the article passed through virtually all the processes required”.

The committee added: “The problem, however, was that each person thought the other had read it so no one on the Night Desk finally read the full article. All those in the gatekeeping chain failed to exercise good judgement in passing the article for publication unedited”.

Amazingly, the 16-points of the findings and recommendations of the committee found nothing wrong with the opinion article, but in a letter dated September 24, 2014, entitled ‘Final Written Warning’ and addressed to Mr. Yeboah, hinted that the writer failed to substantiate some allegations in the article.

These allegations in the letter, signed by the Acting Director of Human Resources and Administration of the GCGL, Justice M. Sarpong, stated; "…there are occasions when professionalism is sacrificed for political expediency" and "…certain stories published in the Daily Graphic are more propaganda than what the mouthpieces of the various political parties would publish just because of submitting to the dictates of politicians".

According to the letter, the management had considered the proceedings at the fact-findings and disciplinary committees and found that the opinion article in general and the allegations stated above fell short of the key principles of accuracy, fairness and integrity as outlined in the company’s Journalistic Standards & Practices.

The letter stated: “Management views your action as a serious misconduct which should attract a severe sanction.

“However, considering your general work output and most importantly the Ghana Journalists’ Association awards you won which have projected and enhanced the image of the company, it has been decided to apply a lesser sanction.

“This letter, therefore, serves as a final written warning to you for negligence of duty which will be placed on your file”.

The letter copied to the Managing Director, Mr. Asigbey and three other directors, warned the ace staff writer of the Daily Graphic that any further breach of the company’s disciplinary code would attract much more severe sanction and may jeopardise his (Mr. Yeboah) continued employment with the company.

In a four-page strong-worded reply to the management of the company, Mr. Yeboah noted that he objected to the contents of the letter, saying his objection was based on the following reasons:

"The disciplinary committee's prescription as pronounced in the headline of the letter, 'Final Written Warning' is alien to the Collective Bargaining Agreement of the Graphic Communications Group Limited (GCGL) which outlines the rights, duties and liabilities of Unionised Staff of the company," he argued in the letter.

He, therefore, could not appreciate the basis for such a measure against him, contrary to the Collective Bargaining Agreement, saying: “The phrase, Final Written Warning suggests that I had been given written warning(s) in the past. In fact, I have not been given any written warning since I was employed in May 2004.”

On the contrary, he has received commendations on many occasions for discharging his duties with diligence, commitment and excellence, as attested to by his official records.

Mr Yeboah’s letter dated November 7, 2014, noted: “I have no knowledge of any reports or recommendations of the fact-finding and disciplinary committees. Further, your letter did not state that the two committees made any adverse findings against me.

"Therefore, I find no basis for the charges levelled against me in the letter. That being the case, it is, in my humble view, unjustifiable to prescribe sanctions against me for no offence established”.

The management's assertion that he - “Either failed or refused to provide any evidence to back the allegations” that the disciplinary committee asked Mr. Yeboah to substantiate is not accurate, the letter pointed out.

In fact, he indicated to the disciplinary committee in both oral and written submissions that to the best of his knowledge, the staff writer adequately addressed the issues the disciplinary committee sought to clarify when he appeared before the fact-finding committee.

Mr. Yeboah’s replied letter further stated: “I don’t know what the fact-finding committee captured in its report; I am not sure whether the disciplinary committee consulted the fact-finding committee to establish the veracity or otherwise of my claim".

Since he is not privy to the reports of the two committees, and given the fact that the “Final Written Warning” letter did not make particular reference to the recommendations of the two committees, the assertion that Mr. Yeboah “failed or refused“ to substantiate the “allegations” could not be tenable.

The senior journalist’s letter indicated: “Paragraph 5 (a) of your letter stated that my article fell short of the key principles of accuracy, fairness and integrity as outline in the company’s “Journalistic Standard & Practices”. I respectfully disagree with this assertion. That is because the fact-finding committee admitted to some of the issues I raised in the article.

"On the issue of political influence, for instance, the chairperson of the committee, Mrs Mavis Kitcher, said the situation was not as bad as it used to be under the past military regimes, which confirms that it is still happening,” Mr. Yeboah explained.

But Albert Sam, head of corporate affairs at the GCGL and a member of the disciplinary committee, in his submission, intimated that the editor had the discretion to drop any story and that he (editor) was not answerable to anybody for exercising such discretionary power. He did not in any way dismiss the example Mr. Yeboah gave as untrue.

"On the basis of these submissions, it is clear that the issues I raised were not misleading or untruthful or distorted, and so I do not see how I breached the principles of accuracy, fairness and integrity enshrined in the company’s Journalistic Standards & Practices," Mr Yeboah stated in the letter.

Furthermore, it emphasised: “In paragraph (b) of your letter, you stated that the issues I raised were my personal opinions that did not necessarily reflect the facts. Indeed, my article was a newspaper opinion which is allowed by the company’s philosophy enshrined in its Journalistic Standards & Practices. The blueprint provides that 'The full exchange of opinion is one of the principal safeguards of state institutions”.

Therefore, the seasoned journalist restated that: “There is no basis for the misconduct, negligence and other charges levelled, and sanction applied against me in your letter, hence my objection of same. I respectively request that this letter be placed on my file”.

When The Chronicle contacted Albert Sam, head of corporate affairs at the GCGL and member of the disciplinary committee on Saturday to cross-check the story, he was not interested in the question posed to him, but rather in the one who gave the newspaper the story.

This reporter told him (Mr. Sam) that he got the information from the company and not Kofi Yeboah, which attracted a quick response from Mr. Sam who said: "I am at a meeting. I will call you in 20 minutes," but he failed to call back in 20 minutes.

Again, this reporter called Mr Sam, four hours later and he said: "I am at a seminar, let me call you at 6 pm". He, however, did not honour his promise.