Why we will boycotte presidential debate- APC

The All Progressives Congress (APC) has explained why its candidates for next month’s polls will not attend the ongoing electioneering public debates on national television and radio.
The party accused the Broadcasting Organisation of Nigeria (BON) and some key organisers of the programme of what it described as “unhidden bias and campaign of calumny” against its candidates.


In a statement issued yesterday by the director, Media and Publicity of the APC Presidential Campaign Organisation (APCPCO), Mallam Garba Shehu, the party also said the debate powered by the Nigeria Election Debate Group (NEDG) was fraught with fundamental errors right from the start.
According to APC, by wearing the toga of government control, especially being composed mainly of agencies and allies of the incumbent Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) administration, it is apparent that the debates would be compromised.
Shehu said, “A salutary inspection of the composition of NEGD brings into focus the Broadcasting Organisation of Nigeria (BON), Nigerian Television Authority (NTA), Federal Radio Corporation of Nigeria (FRCN) and the Africa Independent Television (AIT, owned by a PDP chieftain).
“And going by the avalanche of inflammatory statements, misinformation and blatant lies being propagated by some of these media against our party and candidates contrary to the Koffi Annan-brokered Abuja Peace Accord, and the failure of these aggressors to desist and apologise, have left the APC Campaign with no option than to steer clear of any premeditated smear campaign that could be inimical to our prospective electoral success”.
He noted with dismay that most of the government-controlled media have clipped the wings of APC promotional advertisements, using flimsy excuses to justify their action.
Shehu recalled that the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) shutdown some telecom portals for soliciting legitimate campaign funds from members of the public for APC, a decision which he said was upturned by the court recently.
The party appealed to Nigerians not to consider the boycott of the debates by its candidates as disrespect to the Nigerian electorate or an alibi for the party to dodge public scrutiny.
The campaign spokesman added that, rather, the boycott should be viewed as an honourable right not to consent to any activity that could distract, demean, denigrate or derail the fast-moving train of the party.
The statement made available to LEADERSHIP further noted: “The APC is a party of progressive intellectuals, genuine technocrats, successful businessmen and women, and most of all eminent and courteous people of honour who would never condescend to the level of sadistic gutter propaganda, all in the name of political exigency and crass opportunism.
“Aside, elements close to sitting President Goodluck Jonathan have commissioned series of derogatory and death threat advertorials against the person, family and associates of the opposition leader, General Muhammadu Buhari, to which the APC had sent letters of complaint to the Inspector General of Police, the Director General of State Security, Advertisers Practitioners of Nigeria (APCON), Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the erring media that published or aired such offensive adverts or documentaries.
“None of our letters of protest has been attended to by the authorities. So whatever the incumbent President wants to do with the instrument of state to harass members of the opposition into humiliating submission would not work.
“The APC/Buhari campaign is now a people’s movement. The more they try to rubbish it, the more popular we are with the populace. We are not shadow-chasers or moonwalkers.
“The APC is concerned mainly with the lack of unity and security in Nigeria; plus the growing decimation of lives, property and territory of our great country due to preventable insurgency; the slumbering economy; decaying educational system; absence of jobs; poor public health; and the cancerous institutionalisation of corruption in our national life. You can’t fool the people all the time. Nigerians will vote out their oppressors come February 14.”

culled from Leadership newspaper

15 ways recruiters contribute to applicants failure at interviews

                                                                HR Talk 

                                                                   with

                                                        Moruf Kolawole Nasir

It is common knowledge that in all assessments/screening,  the best candidates don’t necessarily emerge as the best using the outcome/result of whatever screening method is being used, hence the saying – examination is not always the best way to identify the best student in class. Same thing is applicable in recruitment. It is for this reason that recruiters try as much as possible using so many assessment methods to get the best out of the lots of candidates at their disposal, even when it is crystal clear to them that identifying the best suited candidate for any job is NOT an 100% assurance thing.

Factors contributing to best suited candidates not emerging first at interview could be categorized into three- the candidates themselves; the circumstances/ environment; and the INTERVIEWR’S BIAS. This article centers on the role of the interviewer in candidates inability to emerge best when they, ideally, are the best suited for the job, i.e. INTERVIEWER’S BIAS. The Biases are as follows:

1. THE AVERAGE /CENTRAL TENDENCY BIAS: This occurs/arises when the interviewer finds it difficult to decide which candidate is the best suited for the job and as such rates them all about the same. In this instance, the interviewer ends up doing ‘mini mini mani mo…’ to pick one of them, which is may not be the best of them.

2. THE CONTRAST BIAS: This is a bit common among interviewers. It occurs when the interviewer(s) compares candidates to each other or compares all candidates to a single candidate. For instance, let’s say the first candidate is weak, others after such a candidate may be rated higher than they really are due to comparing them to the first weak candidate.

3. THE HALLO EFFECT : This happens when the interviewer evaluates a candidates positively based on a single characteristic. For instance, a candidate’s self confident attitude may blur the interviewer’s sense of adequately identifying the candidate’s lack of experience in certain areas.

4. THE HORN EFFECT / HARSHNESS BIAS: This bias is the opposite of the Hallo effect bias, here a candidate is evaluated negatively based on a single characteristic of his/hers

5. THE FIRST IMPRESSION BIAS: This may either be to the advantage or disadvantage of the candidate. If a candidate is not too lucky to gather himself at the first few minutes of the interview, and as such is very nervous or stutters, such a candidate could be seen as less qualified, even if such a candidate puts himself together during the remaining part of the interview, the impression has already been formed.

6. THE CULTURAL NOISE BIAS: This happens when the interviewer let out some pointers unknowingly, e.g. if the interviewer stresses a particular requirement for the job-say team player; and the candidate leverage on that to tell him what he wants to hear to land him/her the job. Even if such a candidate is a loner the chances of him claiming to be a team player is very high, and as such he tells the interviewer what he/she wants to hear.

7. THE GUT FEELING BIAS: This bias occurs when the interviewer relies on an intuitive feeling that a candidate is a good or bad fit for a particular job, without or before looking at the candidate’s profile whether it meets the job specifications or not. I have had cases where a supposed interviewer walked past applicants and said to me, “Kola that lady/guy in so and so top what is his/her name, I think (s)he will be a good candidate for the job”. All that was required of such candidates were few impressive answers and the jobs became theirs.

 To be continued next..

send your questions to nmkolawole@gmail.com or comment in the comment box below. Till next week!

Jonathan certificate is authentic, says UNIPORT

The Deputy Registrar of the University of Port Harcourt, Dr. William Wodi has confirmed that President Goodluck Jonathan completed his bachelor’s, master’s and doctorate degrees at the institution. Wodi made this disclosure in a statement sent to Sunday Punch via electronic mail, describing the rumour about the President’s educational qualification as baseless. According to the statement: “The authorities of the University of Port Harcourt are aware of rumours that are now spreading over the doctoral degree status of President Goodluck Jonathan. The allegations have neither legs nor grounds to stand on and we hope that its purveyors will now rest in silence.

“For the avoidance of doubt, the authorities of the University wish to state without equivocation that Mr. Goodluck Jonathan, as he then was, was among 422 students, who matriculated in 1977. He was admitted into the then Department of Zoology, now Animal and Environmental Biology in the then School of Biological Sciences, now a Faculty in the new College of Natural and Applied Sciences.At the end of a successful residency period, Jonathan was awarded the Bachelor of Science (Upper Division) in 1981. It was rumoured among students that the young university was reluctant to award the First Class to its pioneer class in an effort to consolidate its academic profile.”

Wodi added that the President later enrolled into the postgraduate programme and obtained the Master of Science degree in Hydrobiology and Fisheries in 1985 and crowned his academic pursuit in the University with the Doctor of Philosophy degree in Zoology in 1995.According to him, “From the above account, it has become obvious that Dr. Jonathan successfully completed the prescribed courses and programmes as specified by the Senate of the University of Port Harcourt to earn his degrees from the university.We have absolutely nothing to hide as an institution that has a statutory mandate to advance the frontiers of knowledge.”