by Kolapo Olapoju

There was a time, when UK newspaper, ‘The Economist’, thought President Goodluck Jonathan, was going to be the man who would repair the decay of the Nigerian state.

Back then, the publication described him glowingly, with terms like Nigeria’s ‘best hope’, going further to place faith in him by saying his could be a ‘transformative  administration’.

The Economist in its brief profiling of Jonathan suggested that his task would be the “cleaning up the electoral process, fighting endemic corruption and fixing the electricity grid”.

Five years later, the news platform is apparently unimpressed with Nigeria’s president, and has now made it’s feelings felt.

In it’s recent editorial, both Muhammadu Buhari and Goodluck Jonathan got the stick, but the former came out better-off.

The title: ‘A former dictator is a better choice than a failed president’, depicted exactly how disappointed The Economist was at Jonathan… but then, what gives it the right to be so crestfallen about a man it once believed in?

The Economist is allowed to change their mind, but can we really believe them again. Can we really take their word for it again, after inadvertently telling us they were way off the mark the first time around.

What’s to say they are not making another wrong move in backing another horse… only to turn around and condemn it?