St. Bob or Sinner?

I don''t know... I believe that picking on such issues is sorta a way of trying to invalidate and disconsidering what Bob Geldof actually did.

This series of films "Geldof in Africa", besides having Geldof as the main start and presenter, and the host and whatever ( it''s not Geldolf''s fault that Western celebrity adoration culture makes us ONLY listen to faces we know already ), bring us issues such as what happens in trade, and how Europe and the US behave when it cames to trade with Africa.

I don''t really care if Geldof was crowned Chief or not. And if he ever showed up on the village again... That''s too small compared to what the West did and do the Africa.

It''s not Bob''s fault what''ve been done to Africa. It''s not Bob''s responsibility to solve Africa''s problems. He''s just spreading a message trough our means of mass communications.

What I do care is that American and European companies and Governments start to treat Africa with respect, in terms of trade, in terms of commercial agreements and such...

Bob Geldof being crowned Chief is a very small issue compared to the battles that are being fought everyday in the courts of the WTO (World Trade Organization). Battles in which the West very often come out victorious...

I just hope that people actually listened to the things he said on those films, and actually still remember the things they saw....

All i see is a reporter and her team using someones Celebrity and position to drive a story.

Everyone is human and therefore subject to human Flaws, i respect Bob regardless of any fabricated film.

Overall, the most positive thing Geldof has done is to bring public visibility and awareness about issues in Africa. However, there must be more accountability for celebrities who make these false promises to groups of people without the means to effectively see them through.

I''m surprised at the comments before mine. I would have thought that this short would have made more of an impact on people. This is a town that has been used, a town with high expectations and very real needs. Someone who devotes a lot of time to ''development'' issues would know how crucial real development (such as roads, running water, electricity and in this case things that will bring revenue like a decent market place, kola plantation and lorry park) is in the battle for a decent standard of living. The complete disregard that Sir Bob has shown over this ''misunderstanding'' sickens me.
I am bored of listening to rock star politicians and wish for the day when African experts and our peers are heard across the board. If you take the time to research and listen to them, instead of listening to what is fed to you on a plate, you will hear what our peers really want, what incredible work they are doing and the high aspirations they have. They blow our Western low horizons out of the water and will make you question what you think is ''appropriate'' for the developing world.
Sir Bob has appointed himself a spokesperson for Africa. I don''t remember his election. It''s high time he is made accountable.

@Dflo

You argue that the film detracts from what Geldof *actually* did - but what exactly did he do? He certainly didn''t promote much of what Africans want for themselves. He became a poster boy for the G8 leaders, leading the way with his self-congratulatory announcement of ?mission accomplished?.

Then you claim that it is a cheap shot, blaming Geldof when it isn?t his fault and that in today?s climate the only way to get an issue recognised is for it to be celebrity-endorsed. That maybe true ? Geldof didn''t start this culture of celebrity adoration ? and Geldof isn''t individually responsible for all the problems in Africa. However, this film uses this relatively minor issue as an excellent representation of the much larger problem: who do these Westerners, who claim to speak for Africans, think they are? Be it Bob, Bono or the World Bank. As long as these high-profile groups portray themselves as knowing other people?s problems better than they do, the culture will continue.

You say you don?t care about the relatively minor issue shown in the film ? that there are bigger fish to fry - but the townspeople do care. Furthermore, Bob?s actions are not separate from ?what the West did and do to Africa? that you are so critical of. Bob?s disregard for the real wants and needs of the townspeople demonstrates why it is so important that we let these people speak for themselves rather than assuming Western spokespeople can do it instead.

You then declare that it?s not Bob?s responsibility to solve Africa?s problems. Yet Bob made it his responsibility ? by assuming the role of spokesperson for the poor. After all, Live8 was all about raising awareness about Africa?s problems ? and Geldof claimed to know exactly what those problems were, and how to solve them. If you claim to hold such a lofty position you need to take the responsibility that goes with it. What the film shows is that in the end Bob is only human, he couldn?t live up to his saintly caricature. He can never be accountable to Africans.

What I think you failed to grasp that the film was communicating is that Bob is really part and parcel of the whole patronising attitude that Western governments have towards Africa. He is not the rebel fighting for the voice of the small person who - I get the impression - you think he is. Of course Africa should be treated with respect; that is one of the main messages of the film: treat people as you would wish to be treated yourself. Allow people the self-respect to make their own decisions, and if you make promises, keep them.

Finally, you may hope viewers will remember Geldof?s original words, but I hope people watching this film realise that it isn?t Bob Geldof they should be listening to, but the ordinary Africans like those featured in this film (for whom Geldof is certainly no spokesman!).

More information on Ghana