Mwesigye Gumisiriza said…

This is my comment to your story (When the Ivory Tower crumbles: searching for a job after Makerere). It is good that I stumbled onto your blog, so I may as well post my response.When I called you that day, what you described as a “rant”, I was definitely angry not because you misquoted me but you definitely misrepresented the context of what I told you.I am surprised that on your blog, you confess the actual motive of your article yet when you interviewed me for it you mentioned something different. Just to bring you up to speed; when I answered your call..you explained that you were working on a story arising out of a report by the Bureau of Statistics. That this report had highlighted the problem of high unemployment among university graduates [Note that there over 15 universities in Uganda]. Initially I had directed you to talk someone from the Institute of Social Research who had some tracer studies on the Mak graduates in the field. But you seemed reluctant to do do [which I find very strange for a journalist...it seemed what was just a comment to put your story]. However, if you were to act professional and in relation to the story, I feel you would be interested in actual findings about the graduates in the field after their studies!The comment that you attributed to me was said in this context: I said that some have complained that graduates are theoritical and not practical but that this was a generalisation which should not be taken at face value.My explanation was that there are internships and industrial trainings at Makerere University that expose the students to real-world situations. I also added that the University through the Makerere University Private Sector Forum (MUPSF) that reached Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) with Private Sector Foundation Uganda, Uganda Investment Authority and Uganda Manufacturers Association. These MoUs would enable things like job placement, staff attachment in the different firms/organisations that unite these umbrellas. This is aimed at improving the marketability of Mak graduates. You were indeed unfair to Makerere graduates or alumni [and I'm one of them]. Now let me comment on your article as someone who studied communication/journalism.Apart from the sensational headline, it was disjointed and hardly covered the point as you had claimed. Some of the quotes were just generalisations [I doubt if some of those people actually said that]. From the way you wrote, it was easy to tell that you definitely did not read the report from UBOS…if you did, you did not understand it. How could you compare 30 something percent to 3 or so percent?? Many graduates from Mak write much better than that..does that mean that the University of California Berkely [your university] products are poor quality and being shunned by potential employers?I have read some of your other articles, but this time it seems you were so blinded by a bias that you did not think through it.The University rankings you referred to are about Internet publication and not connected to quality of graduates. By the way, your university is not in the top 100 ranked in USA & Canada on that website??I did not write that letter to the editor because I would appear to be defensive over what is supposed to genuine discourse over some findings by UBOS study. But that was messed up…One alumni wrote a response but was not published!!May be you have not been to Mak!! I take this opportunity to invite you for a guided tour…you will see that what you called the “crumbling Ivory Tower” is just as comparable to some universities in USA and Europe.My invitation is open-minded, contact me any time.

Ah, Mr. Mwesigye, I’m not even sure where to begin… though first of all, I will say that it’s a pretty low blow to attack my alma mater, that’s low man.

So, I will respond to your points one by one:

1. “It is good that I stumbled onto your blog,” you say. Well, Google Analytics says that you “stumbled” upon my blog by googling yourself. So not really stumbling, if we’re going to be nit-picking. I doubt someone else googled Mwesigye Gumisiriza…

2. “I am surprised that on your blog, you confess the actual motive of your article yet when you interviewed me for it you mentioned something different.” I’m not sure where you see this “confession” of my actual motive that I dubiously hid from you. Maybe you can be more clear about your reference to where I confess said motive? Additionally, when I called you, I mentioned the report on which I was basing my article as well as my topic – unemployment among Makerere graduate. What did you think I would be writing about???

3. “The comment that you attributed to me was said in this context: I said that some have complained that graduates are theoritical and not practical but that this was a generalisation which should not be taken at face value.” I’m sorry, I didn’t know you weren’t saying what you actually meant… I took your comment as something said ON THE RECORD, as are all comments said to journalists that aren’t preceeded by “off the record.” Don’t say things you don’t want quoted. As I mentioned in my blog post, I cannot quote entire interviews verbatim. You say you have a background in communications, so surely, you should know this as well.

4. “But because [as you admit] your target was Mak…Imagine the word used “target”!!!! probably synymous with shooting, attack, among others???. Why not “subject” or “topic” in the journalistic sense of the word.” Wow, don’t you think this is taking it a little too far? I certainly am no Virginia Tech shooter, as you seem to imply. Perhaps the definition of “target” escapes you, but it also means to focus on, narrow down, and examine.

5. “Now let me comment on your article as someone who studied communication/journalism.Apart from the sensational headline, it was disjointed and hardly covered the point as you had claimed. Some of the quotes were just generalisations [I doubt if some of those people actually said that].” Just how do you think it was disjointed or didn’t cover the topic? If you’re going to make such accusations, then you should support them. Please point to the places wehre you see this “disjoint” and point out how id didn’t “cover the topic claimed.” As far as I can see, the topic and the headline were directly related. As for your accusation that some of the quotes are generalizations, which you doubt people said, I’m happy to pass on my source list to you and you can call everyone quoted and verify whether or not they said what they said. I’m also happy to make copies of my notebook, where ALL of the quotes are transcribed. Your “doubt” that people said these things is a fundamental questioning of my journalistic standards; I ask you to back up this accusation with some actual foot work. Source list happily provided if you’d like to verify….

6. “From the way you wrote, it was easy to tell that you definitely did not read the report from UBOS…if you did, you did not understand it. How could you compare 30 something percent to 3 or so percent??” Just which part of the report are you claiming I don’t understand/didn’t read? I’m not sure what you gleaned from it, but maybe you could sh
are your insight with me. As for the second part of this statement about 30/3, I’m really not sure what you’re getting at. How can you not compare these percentages?

7. “Many graduates from Mak write much better than that..does that mean that the University of California Berkely [your university] products are poor quality and being shunned by potential employers? (…) One alumni wrote a response but was not published!!” How many Mak graduates write for Huffington Post and Reuters AlertNet? I think my training did me well, and I’m satisfied with what I write. As for Mak graduates being able to write better than this, and the unpublished letter, the letter went unpublished because it was incomprehensible and grammatically incorrect. The letter was a mess. Futhermore, I am NOT in charge of which letters do and do not get published. This is most definitely not my department. I told YOU that if you’d like to write a letter, I would personally gaurentee it was published because I wanted you to have a chance to give your say. But, as a rule, I do not receive, filter, or choose the letters that are published. Just not my job. Take this beef up with a different department at Monitor.


Finally, I have been to Mak’s campus – multiple times. (By the way, it could use a map of departments, something your American university counterparts have placed periodically around campus to help people find their way around.) I’ve not said anything about specifics of Makerere, but I do want you to know that I’m not the only one writing about this issue. Take, for instance, this article from New York Times (I’m sure these writers will meet your standards… if not, maybe you can call up Gail Abramson and recommend some Mak graduates for her):

Africa’s Storied Colleges, Jammed and Crumbling – the article even specifically mentions Makerere

Whew, long post. That’s enough for me. Feel free to reply. Hope I didn’t take any comments at “face value” that were intended to convey some other connotation…

I will continue to write stories, and continue to write stories that anger people, because it’s not my job to make people happy. If it were, I’d be in, well, Public Relations, like you, Mr. Mwesigye.