Content creator Pritty Vishy has emphatically rejected Bishop Kiengei’s apology, following a viral video that showcased the bishop making disparaging remarks about Vishy and Simple Boy. The situation has sparked considerable debate online, highlighting issues of respect, accountability, and the impact of social media on public figures.
On Tuesday morning, Bishop Kiengei issued a written apology after a video surfaced where he was seen mocking Vishy and Simple Boy. The bishop’s attempt to make amends, however, did not meet Vishy’s standards. She responded through her Instagram account, clearly stating her refusal to accept the written apology. Instead, Vishy demanded a video apology from Kiengei, paralleling the format of his initial disrespectful video.
Vishy’s response was sharp and unequivocal: “@bishopbenjcchurch, when you opened your mouth to insult me, did you send your assistant or did they write the lines for you? If you want to talk to me, speak to me directly, and before that, I don’t want a written apology; I want a video. Just as you sat down and made a disrespectful video, do the same when apologizing… Don’t send people to me because they didn’t help you laugh, or did they help you open your mouth? Respect yourself.”
The controversy began when Bishop Kiengei, a well-known figure in the religious community, made derogatory remarks about Vishy and Simple Boy in a video. The content, which many perceived as insensitive and offensive, quickly garnered attention and backlash from the public. Although Kiengei later deleted the video, the damage had already been done, and Vishy’s dissatisfaction with the written apology underscores the gravity of the situation.
In her Instagram post, Vishy also addressed the bishop’s decision to delete the video. She questioned the motives behind the bishop’s actions, wondering aloud whether the removal of the video was an acknowledgment of wrongdoing. Vishy maintained that despite the video’s deletion, she still possessed a copy and would not let the matter fade away without proper accountability.
“To those who were sending messages saying their Bishop was just joking, why did he delete the video? I thought we were all joking, right?… I have the video, and everyone else does too… I’m not done yet,” Vishy declared. Her insistence on a video apology reflects a broader demand for transparency and respect, emphasizing that the nature of the apology should match the initial offense.
The public’s response to Vishy’s stance has been mixed, but many netizens have rallied behind her. Supporters argue that the bishop’s apology should mirror the format of his original video to reflect genuine contrition. This sentiment is echoed by some who have threatened to visit Kiengei’s church on Sunday to demand a more appropriate apology if their expectations are not met.
Vishy’s rejection of the written apology underscores a crucial point about the power dynamics in public discourse. In a digital age where videos and social media often serve as the primary means of communication, the format of an apology can be as significant as its content. Vishy’s demand for a video apology not only challenges Kiengei to address her concerns directly but also highlights the need for public figures to take responsibility for their actions in a manner that aligns with their initial misconduct.
As the situation continues to unfold, it remains to be seen how Bishop Kiengei will respond. Will he heed Vishy’s demands and issue a video apology, or will he maintain his stance on the written apology? The outcome of this public dispute may well set a precedent for how apologies are handled in the digital era, reflecting broader societal expectations for accountability and respect.
