The greatest take down of Matt Bryden & Sahan I ever seen!

[ReturnOfMariixmaan]

Sheesh

[Rebelxx22]

1 white men is forcing N&N trolls to make an article crying about him kkkkk

[ReturnOfMariixmaan]

1 white men is forcing N&N trolls to make an article crying about him kkkkk

NN waa mucjiso. Woke up and read that and was dying

[Nomand]

1 white men is forcing N&N trolls to make an article crying about him kkkkk

The article is more tabloid then broadsheet. The columnist should guide the reader into making the conclusions for himself. Not outright say that matt byden is a scumbag. Give examples of what matt byden has done and how it effected Somalia. Then the reader thinks they are forming their own opinion when in fact you are laying the foundations of your objectives. Plus don't do all at once, it is hard for a neutral to believe so much negative information on a person.

This is where you divide your attack into several separate articles over a period of time. So when the reader reads the new article in the back of their mind they remember the previous negative article about byden that was published a week ago. This is where confirmation biased comes in and that is the holy grail of newspaper hit job.

That is what separates smart journalists from amateurish ones.

[ReturnOfMariixmaan]

1 white men is forcing N&N trolls to make an article crying about him kkkkk

The article is more tabloid then broadsheet. The columnist should guide the reader into making the conclusions for himself. Not outright say that matt byden is a scumbag. Give examples of what matt byden has done and how it effected Somalia. Then the reader thinks they are forming their own opinion when in fact you are laying the foundations of your objectives. Plus don't do all at once, it is hard for a neutral to believe so much negative information on a person.

This is where you divide your attack into several separate articles over a period of time. So when the reader reads the new article in the back of their mind they remember the previous negative article about byden that was published a week ago. This is where confirmation biased comes in and that is the holy grail of newspaper hit job.

That is what separates smart journalists from amateurish ones.

One area it lacked was hard hitting evidence. It needed more proof imo. But Matt Bryden and co. aren’t ethical researchers or scholars on anything. They are parasites. No tears from me.

[Gubbet]

I second Nomand and they should perhaps start with the fact Matt is Canadian not British.

I hate sloppy work.

But it brings up a question I have thought about couple times and it is probably the one I would ask if I ever got an opportunity to ask him one.

Why did you allow yourself to become personally implicated in the subject matter?

Simple.

He is the journalist in who became the story. The doctor who became the diagnosis. The teacher who become the student. The guardian who became the ward. The expert who in became the subject matter.

Why did you allow yourself to become personally implicated in the subject matter?

I honestly would want to hear from him directly the answer to.that question.

[grandpakhalif]

This dude is one of the main tentacle behind Somalia NGO cash cow narrative. He has been banned from Somalia I heard and his wife is from Somaliland strange enough he is pro SL.

[Nomand]

1 white men is forcing N&N trolls to make an article crying about him kkkkk

The article is more tabloid then broadsheet. The columnist should guide the reader into making the conclusions for himself. Not outright say that matt byden is a scumbag. Give examples of what matt byden has done and how it effected Somalia. Then the reader thinks they are forming their own opinion when in fact you are laying the foundations of your objectives. Plus don't do all at once, it is hard for a neutral to believe so much negative information on a person.

This is where you divide your attack into several separate articles over a period of time. So when the reader reads the new article in the back of their mind they remember the previous negative article about byden that was published a week ago. This is where confirmation biased comes in and that is the holy grail of newspaper hit job.

That is what separates smart journalists from amateurish ones.

One area it lacked was hard hitting evidence. It needed more proof imo. But Matt Bryden and co. aren’t ethical researchers or scholars on anything. They are parasites. No tears from me.

The audience of this article should not be me or you. I know matt bryden is a danger for a healthy and stable Somalia and so do you. But a neutral or even a person not well versed in somali politics might not know or have any knowledge of matt bryden. It is them the columnist should target as his audience and at that he made a poor job.

[Gubbet]

I said sloppy before reading--the british thing just soured my opinion---but after having read it; it is quite convincing. Still though, why couldn't they send it for proof reading before publishing?

It seems our side in general seems to have a dislike of any proof reading or basic checking before publishing

[ReturnOfMariixmaan]

The article is more tabloid then broadsheet. The columnist should guide the reader into making the conclusions for himself. Not outright say that matt byden is a scumbag. Give examples of what matt byden has done and how it effected Somalia. Then the reader thinks they are forming their own opinion when in fact you are laying the foundations of your objectives. Plus don't do all at once, it is hard for a neutral to believe so much negative information on a person.

This is where you divide your attack into several separate articles over a period of time. So when the reader reads the new article in the back of their mind they remember the previous negative article about byden that was published a week ago. This is where confirmation biased comes in and that is the holy grail of newspaper hit job.

That is what separates smart journalists from amateurish ones.

One area it lacked was hard hitting evidence. It needed more proof imo. But Matt Bryden and co. aren’t ethical researchers or scholars on anything. They are parasites. No tears from me.

The audience of this article should not be me or you. I know matt bryden is a danger for a healthy and stable Somalia and so do you. But a neutral or even a person not well versed in somali politics might not know or have any knowledge of matt bryden. It is them the columnist should target as his audience and at that he made a poor job.

Fair enough. That’s a logical critique. I liked the article because it finally showed what we known for years is in the public space. I hope for future articles they don’t miss and do due diligence. Nobody is gonna take our side seriously if there isn’t sufficient fact checking and proof reading as Gubbet said.

[mahoka]

This dude is one of the main tentacle behind Somalia NGO cash cow narrative. He has been banned from Somalia I heard and his wife is from Somaliland strange enough he is pro SL.

I heard his wife is darod which is why he is against strong Mogadishu dominating darod regions.

The only people who seem to say his wife is somalilander are darod people and no one else

[Phinks]

This dude is one of the main tentacle behind Somalia NGO cash cow narrative. He has been banned from Somalia I heard and his wife is from Somaliland strange enough he is pro SL.

I heard his wife is darod which is why he is against strong Mogadishu dominating darod regions.

The only people who seem to say his wife is somalilander are darod people and no one else

Mogadishu will never dominate Darood/Isaaq lands again sxb, that's a unfounded notion pushed by people with an agenda, in other words fear mongering. Isaaq, Darood and Hawiye wax maheeyaan, if anything the politics has shifted to the sub-clan level. Every man controls his own gobol/state and in matters of national proceedings, we work together in good faith, it's the best outcome in the long run. You assuage Zoomali fears of being dominated by rival clans so they don't chimp out plus nobody can complain about being left out, a win-win for everyone.