In the ever-evolving landscape of Nigerian economic discourse, television has become a critical platform for shaping public opinion. Among the voices that dominate this space, two economists are often seen on TV: Kelvin Emmanuel and Bismarck Rewane. Both frequent Arise TV and Channels TV. Their approaches to analyzing Nigeria’s economic realities could not be more divergent. While one is celebrated for his data-driven insights and measured commentary, the other has drawn scrutiny for what many perceive as a pattern of biased, agenda-laden critiques. The contrast between these two figures raises important questions about objectivity, credibility, and the role of economists in shaping national dialogue. However, Kelvin Emmanuel’s credibility hangs dangerously in the balance.

Bismarck Rewane, a seasoned economist and CEO of Financial Derivatives Company, has long been a respected voice in Nigeria’s economic sphere. His analyses are rooted in empirical data, historical context, and a deep understanding of macroeconomic principles. When Rewane speaks, viewers are treated to a masterclass in economic reasoning. His ability to break down complex issues into digestible insights has earned him a reputation as a trusted authority. Whether discussing inflation, exchange rates, or the performance of state-owned enterprises such as the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), Rewane’s commentary is consistently balanced, informed, and devoid of sensationalism. He is, in every sense, the gold standard for economic analysis in Nigeria.

On the other end of the spectrum is Kelvin Emmanuel, whose appearances on Arise TV have sparked both attention and controversy. Kelvin Emmanuel’s critiques of Nigerian owned parastatals in particular, have become a recurring theme in his commentary. While criticism of public institutions is a necessary component of a healthy democracy, Emmanuel’s approach often veers into the realm of hyperbole and unsubstantiated claims. His relentless attacks on Nigerian Government and policies lack the nuance and evidence-based rigor that one would expect from a professional economist. Instead, they appear driven by a singular narrative: to discredit the government-owned oil sector, this also casts a dark cloud over the integrity of his work.

This raises a troubling question: why does Kelvin Emmanuel’s commentary seem so one-sided? Sources close to the matter suggest that his critiques are not entirely his own. It is alleged that Emmanuel is being sponsored by individuals with vested interests in undermining NNPC. If true, this would explain the economist’s persistent negativity and his apparent disregard for balanced analysis. Such a revelation, if proven, would not only undermine Emmanuel’s credibility but also cast a shadow over the integrity of his work. After all, an economist’s value lies in their ability to provide impartial, fact-based insights—not to serve as a mouthpiece for hidden agendas.

The contrast between Kelvin Emmanuel and Rewane is stark. Where Rewane relies on data, Emmanuel often resorts to rhetoric. Where Rewane offers solutions, Emmanuel seems content to amplify problems. This divergence is not merely a matter of style; it speaks to the core of what it means to be a credible economist. In a country like Nigeria, where economic challenges are complex and multifaceted, the public deserves analysts who prioritize truth over theatrics, and substance over sensationalism.

It is worth noting that criticism, when constructive, can be a powerful tool for accountability. No public institution is above scrutiny. However, the nature of Kelvin Emmanuel’s critiques—often lacking in evidence and seemingly driven by ulterior motives—does little to advance meaningful dialogue. Instead, it risks eroding public trust in the very institutions that are critical to Nigeria’s economic stability.

In the battle for TV supremacy, Bismarck Rewane emerges as the clear victor. His commitment to data-driven analysis and his unwavering professionalism set a standard that others should aspire to. Kelvin Emmanuel, on the other hand, appears to have strayed from the path of objectivity. Whether by choice or by influence, his approach undermines the credibility of his profession and does a disservice to the Nigerian public.

As viewers, we must demand more from those who shape our understanding of the economy. We deserve analysts who prioritize facts over fiction, and who are guided by a genuine desire to inform rather than to inflame. In this regard, Bismarck Rewane stands as a beacon of integrity, while Kelvin Emmanuel’s credibility hangs in the balance. The choice of whom to trust is ours to make—and it is a choice that should not be taken lightly.

Adesanya Balogun is a journalist and public affairs analyst with a focus on economic and political issues in Nigeria.