The practice of fake or “manufactured” titles and fake degrees is so rampant phenomena in Ghana, it has triggered official confrontations with those with such titles between the Ghana Tertiary Education Commission, (GTEC) and the affected personalities in the public political space of Ghana.
Part of the problem of labeling contributors as “security experts” to comment on crime, fire outbreaks, security services intersectional encounters with the general public, etc., starts with the Media Houses in Ghana.
They promote undeserved titles for their guests and contributors, even if the guest or contributor resists such labels. The question is why?
The media houses appear to be the biggest propagandists to cloak so-called security experts and commentators with underserved titles such as “Dr”; “Professor”; “security expert” and so on, even when the guest does not describe himself or herself as such in some cases.
I have had previous and recent involvement with a media house, where during the telecast of the evening news, I felt obligated to correct the host that the contributor to their story was not a “professor” even though on countless occasions he had been so labeled by others. This author, although very satisfied with his credentials as a PhD and a Juris Doctor holder, which are both hard-earned terminal degrees, has had to repeatedly resist the media from labeling him as a “Professor” both on air and behind the scene.
The Ghanaian media has deviated and continue to deviate from the international best practice of introducing commentators and contributors on screen or on air to add value to media events in various fields of human endeavors.
For example, on CNN, DW or France 24, if a commentator is called to offer insights to an evolving story or news, he or she is described per his
or her current or former job role or title. Being bothered by the reckless labeling of contributors on all of the media houses programs that I have had to monitor, I simultaneously also monitored on 31st October, 2025, how the international seasoned media houses handle the international media
ethical obligation to be truthful, fearless and objective.
I noticed that all those who were invited by CNN hostess on the theme: NUCLEAR REACTION: – SOURCES-TRUMP CATCHES ADVISERS OFF GUARD WITH NUKE TEST ORDER, were not labeled as “security experts”.
They included the Former DHS Chief of Staff under Trump Administration #1, Miles Taylor. He was described not as a security expert but as he then was: Chief of Staff, Department of Homeland Security. Kevin O’Leary, Chairman, O’Leary Ventures appeared to discuss SOCIALISM DEBATE: – GOP ESCALATES: COMMIUNIST, MARXIST” RHETORIC AGAINST MANDANI, at 12:52 am, PT.
There was also Chuck Rocha, Sudstack: The Rocha Revolution, who appeared on the same segment at 12:52am PT; and lastly, Tezlyn Figaro, Host, “Straight Shot, No Chaser” on Black Effect Podcast Network, at 3:52 am ET.
France 24 also invites personalities whose credentials and affiliations are well stated unlike the Ghanaian, excuse-filled media. The blame should lay with the Program Producers, really, although, ultimately rests with the Media House. When discussing the topic of “Trump declines to
clarify comments on drills: US UNDERGROUND NUCLEAR DETONATION TEST”, the contributor was honored with the full title and affiliation she deserves without giving her the lazy and generic title of “security expert”.
This is how she appeared on the screen viewed by millions around the world: Marlana Budjeryn, Research Associate at the Center for Nuclear Security Policy at MIT.
In another story on CNN on 31st October, 2025 at 3:25 pm, ET, Phil Mudd, Former FBI Senior Intelligence Adviser, was invited to contribute to “SOURCES: FOILED POTENTTIAL ATTACK AN ISIS-INSPIRED PLOT”. If anyone should be described as so-called, “security expert”, Mr. Phil Mudd unreservedly deserves to be described as such, yet, in all the cases provided here, none of these personalities was described as an “EXPERT”.
To answer the question why do the media houses label guests or commentators as “experts”, it is because, the Ghanaian practice of labeling commentators as “experts” or “security experts” is a way for the Ghanaian media to show that they are ‘professional’ even if such label is
untruthful.
They are ‘learned’, even if such is not the case. Above all, they are ‘choicy’ in selecting commentators. These values are cumulatively supposed to add extra quality to the program? They probably think the public may weigh the value of the contributions from the guests with greater
credibility, if the contributor appears as an “expert”.
For example, whereas an eminent lawyer in constitutional law can be presumed to be a “Specialist in Constitutional law”, he or she may not
be presumed to be a legal expert in copyright and patent law, mergers and acquisition law, and a few other areas of the law such as Military Justice. Whereas a professor in political science or local government can be assumed to be a senior researcher in political science, it does not make him an
“expert in political science”.
Which branch of political science is that professor an expert of? Take note that, the media houses do not have the legal mandate to label anyone as an expert without assessing the person on objective standards generally accepted as the basis for elevating a researcher in a discipline to the status of an expert of that discipline.
Puffing up the commentators to a television or radio program, does not provide confidence in the media houses and the stories they tell or report on.
The labeling of someone as an expert is irresponsible and destroys the credibility of the media houses. The practice is poorly constructed and should stop immediately.
Research has revealed that, among the modern cultural traits of Ghanaians, is the undying, undeniable penchant for bastardizing most of the things that really help to build the credibility of the nation, and our own self-esteem, whether it concerns the use of language, expressions or word
pronunciation.
There are so many cases of Ghanaians using underserved credentials that, these collectively devalue the nation and We, The People; and cast us as promoters of fakery.
Respectfully Submitted, 11.1.2025:
