The Role of the Media in the 2007 General Elections:
“The Critical Challenges Ahead”
By Comfort Obi

Comfort Obi

Judging by the enormous challenges the 2007 general elections present to the stability of our dear country, Nigeria there is little doubt that there is an urgent and unconditional requirement from every segment of the Nigerian society,and indeed everybody concerned with the election process to conduct all affairs centred on the next general elections creditably and with careful moderation. This is necessary if the country must head-off the threats to its stability and peaceful co-existence, presented by real or imagined fears over the on-coming general elections.
My task here today is simply to examine how the media, as the mirror of the society, the watchdog and the surveillance satellite of the governed, can live up to these sacred roles, in line with section 22 of the 1999 constitution, which bestows it with the “dangerous” responsibility of holding government accountable to the governed. The role of the media in any society is traditionally captured in the Four Theories of the Press, formulated by Fred Siebert, Theodore Peterson and Wilbur Schramm. These theories, as they are referred to in Mass Communication are the Authoritarian Theory of the Press, the Libertarian Theory of the Press, the Sociology of News Perspective and the Social Responsibility Theory. Added to this traditional four, is Development Journalism Perspective, which finds application mostly in the developing world, as a result of some peculiar challenges of nation-building in the Third World or developing countries.
The application of The Authoritarian Theory, which can now be said to have become lame with age, limits the essence of the media to the dictates of the government in power, which the theory ascribes a natural right of having an absolute monopoly of the truth. As such, the press according to this theory only exists to serve the purpose of the government and shall exist at the pleasure of those in authority, who “shall grant them license and withdraw it, when the press is not doing their bidding.”
The Libertarian Theory runs counter to the Authoritarian. For The Libertarian stipulates that the world is a free market place of ideas, abounding with both the truth and falsehood, which contend freely with each other. The role of the press within this theory is to maintain a keen eye on the government, which cannot exert control over it, and for the press to pursue causes that would ultimately lead to the victory of truth over falsehood.
The Sociology of News perspective sees that the Press as part of the structure of government and instrument for propagating the ideological foundation of a state or government. This theory was founded on the world’s two contending economic idealogies of capitalism and communism. Herein, without any option of sitting on the fence as it were, the press was required to function in the light of any of these economic ideologies operational within a given state.
The Social Responsibility Theory demands that the press must be socially responsible to the society in which it operates. Demanded here, is an agenda-setting role for both the government and the people. The press is tasked by this theory to provide information and create an arena for debate and discussion on issues of public interest and concern. The press is also required here to act as a watchdog for the protection of the rights of the governed and to pursue the cardinal roles of educcating, informing and entertaining the public. Specifically, this theory demands that the press provides information and creates an open market for debate and discussion on issues of public interest and concern to flourish; serve as watchdog on government for the protection of the rights of the governed, enlighten the people so that they can understand and query government action; provide entertainment and seek to be financially self-sustaining, so as to be free from manipulations by external forces.
The Development Journalism model, which as earlier stated finds relevance in the developing nations of the world, stipulates that the relevance of the press should be within the context of its contribution to the socio-economic development of the society within which it operates. The press, according to this model, is expected to work in sync with the government in nation-building and in achieving national development goals.
Since the establishment of the first Nigeria newspaper, Iwe Irohin in Abeokuta, present- day Ogun State, up to contemporary Nigerian journalism, the Nigerian media, to my mind, has sought existence on the tenets of the Libertarian Theory and pursued roles as enunciated by the Social Responsibility and Development Journalism models. The dogged pursuit of the requirements of these three press theories by the Nigerian media, are what have combined to cast the Nigerian media, since independence, as the most vibrant opposition structure as well as the government’s partner in nation-buiding, political engineering and socio-economic development. The most cardinal roles of the Press, which the Nigerian Media, I dare say, has delivered on creditably include informing, educating, agenda-setting, opinion moulding, maintaining a keen eye on those in power and authority, society watchdogs and entertaining the public.
These roles, daunting as they are and worsened by the hostilities within the Nigerian state, appears to have sentenced the media; regardless, the Nigerian media has dared all such odds and refusing to be shackled by bootstrings has blossomed into reckoning as the most vibrant in Africa.
The Media in Nigeria’s Political Evolution and Electioneering
The foundation of the Nigerian Press was remarkably pivoted on nationalism. The indigenous media that sprang up during the colonial days thrived on the bravery of our professional ancestors in taking up issues with Nigeria’s colonial masters, and in challenging their authority. Iwe Irohin, founded in 1859 by Henry Townsend, set out with caustic attacks on the colonial authority. By 1937, when Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe founded The West African Pilot, the Nigerian society was already teeming with anti-colonial press. These included The Lagos Times, Lagos Observer, Lagos Weekly Record, Lagos Standard, Nigerian Spectator, Lagos Critic, Nigerian Chronicle, Nigerian Daily Mail, Eagle, Nigerian Times, African Messenger, West African Nationhood, Nigerian Pioneer, The Comet, Lagos Daily News, Nigerian Advocate, Eko Akete, Akede Eko and Eleto Ofe. Others such as Gaskiya Tafi Kwabo, founded by the then Northern Regional Government were to follow in 1939 and Daily Times in 1926. And with the success of The West African Pilot, Zik embarked on the establishment of more titles such as the Eastern Nigerian Guardian, Nigerian Spokesman, Eastern Sentinel, Southern Nigerian Defender, Nigerian Monitor and Daily Comet.
With few exceptions, the colonial-era press fired up nationalism with often sensational and sustained propaganda reports against the British. Some of them – West African Pilot, Lagos Weekly, The Comet, The Daily Comet – paid heavy tolls for their campaigns against the colonial masters. One major characteristics of the Nigerian media during this period was their ownership or backing by the political parties of that time, particularly the Action Group (AG), the Northern Peoples Congress (NPC) and the National Council of Nigerian Citizens (NCNC). This inevitably gave birth to media feuds, which fractured the independence campaign and nationalism along ethnic and regional lines from as early as the 1940s. With party-controlled regional governments in place, partisan reporting and perspectives heightened in the media, which in turn increased inter-party acrimony. So much so that when eventually there was no longer the British as a common enemy, the vibrant media nationalism gave way to a media that fought against itself and thus over-heated the system with rabid partisan and regional perspective reportage, which in turn characterised politics and electioneering in the First Republic. Reportage of the “wild, wild West, the census of 1962 and 1963 and the federal elections of the 60s, all followed the dangerous partern of partisan reportage. And I dare say, with every sense of responsiblity, that media reporting in Nigeria particularly in the area of politics and governance has hardly departed from these ignoble pathway set by the colonial media and carried through to the First Republic. In the Second Republic, reportage of the South west-controlled Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN), stuck out against the perceived “northern government” of the National Party of Nigerian (NPN); equally, the press in the Nigerian Peoples Party (NPP)-controlled South east towed the same line against the NPN, while the NPN in a spirited attempt to fight the partisan press war, established Radio Nigeria in virtually all states of the federation, in addition to availing itself of the services of the Nigerian Television Authority (NTA).
Even in the failed Third Republic, politicians used any media outfit they could influence to launch campaigns of animosity against opponents. The governors who functioned under a diarchial arrangement with a military President at the helm, extensively used state-owned media. And for the presidential elections, the media was also handy vehicle for purveying religious sentiments and propaganda, as well as in playing up the north-south political tug-of-war as soon as the presidential candidates of the two political parties, NRC and SDP emerged.
Yet, under the military beginning particularly with the regime of General Ibrahim Babangida, through to that of General Abdulsalami Abubakar, there existed a remarkable slant in media reportage. The press in the South was in this instance more critical and resolved in its battle against those military regimes, while the same could not be said of the press in the north and other publications backed by northern figures. The truth, indeed, is that parochial reportage, as a characteristic of media practice in Nigeria, has not helped the nation’s quest for unity, stability and nation-building.
Nigerian Democracy and Media Bias
One of the issues that set the Nigerian media agog at the dawn of the present democracy was the age and certificate scandal of Alhaji Salisu Buhari, the first speaker of the House of Representatives. The national media dominated by the Lagos-Ibadan axis of the press, made a feast of the scandal and ensured that it did consume the embattled speaker. Senator Evans Enwerem, the first senate president in the current democratic order, fell into similar political quicksand and got more than a handful from the media. But strangely, when Governor Bola Ahmed Tinubu of Lagos State fell into the same crisis as Salisu Buhari, what followed was what many saw as a conspiratorial silence by the mainstream media in the Lagos-Ibadan axis. This left some perceptive Nigerians with the conclusion that Salisu Buhari and Evans Enwerem got the huge critical focus of media searchlight because they are Hausa and Igbo respectively, while the Tinubu issue merely got fringe attention because the South west press felt the need to shield one of its own.
Looking at the central government, one can see that the Obasanjo presidency has among other things, brought a change in the face of journalism in the north. The northern press, known for its traditional conservativeness has radically transformed since 1999. Such that today, it has become obvious that regional newspapers in the north, which some 10 years back would ordinarily sit on the fence on debates on national issues or issues of public concern are now in the frontline of critical campaign against the government of the day. As the existing ones continue to earn relevance and appeal with this new reality, new ones are increasingly cropping up in the north to join the bandwagon.
Even so in matters of religious conflict in the country. It is, in fact, easily predictable in the Nigeria media, the path which for instance, a Muslim-owned northern media would take and that, which a southern-owned Christian would take. The same would almost certainly apply with an ethnic conflict between northerners and southerners, Igbos and Yorubas, Hausa and Yoruba or Igbos and Hausas. Ownership in Nigeria greatly determines content. Down to the reporter – because of ethnic and religious considerations – in reporting issues of ethnic or religious conflict in the country, he is almost certainly going to couch his story to favour the side he belongs.
If we are talking of constructive reporting, news, editorials and analysis for the sake of a successful 2007 general elections, content based along ethnic and regional lines should be done away with. Content must serve accuracy and the truth.
Factors that Shape Story Slant in the Nigerian Media
Despite the time-honoured ethics of journalism practice, which include accuracy, fairness, dependability, public interest and social responsibility in news writing and reporting, reportage in Nigeria is oftentimes influenced by extraneous considerations which include commercial and political interests, ethnic and religious considerations, financial motivation, ownership, control, vendetta and propaganda.
Ignoble as some of these factors are, some of them are excusable and defensible. Worthy of note, for instance, is that the Code of Ethics for Nigerian journalists, as prepared by the Nigerian Press Organisation and the Nigerian Press Council, stipulates in no doubtful terms that “decisions, concerning the content of news should be the responsibility of a professional journalist.” The professional journalist in practical terms, is he (or in my case she), who practices journalism and earns a living through journalism practice. It follows, therefore, that the editor, the editor-in-chief or the reporter’s reckoning of what should form the content of his story should be his prerogative – one which no other person, let alone a non-journalist, should question. But unfortunately, journalism stands out today as the only Profession in which non-practictioners, even illiterates and semi-illiterates seek to dictate to the practictioners what should form media content. Again, commercial interest is of utmost importance to each media organ because if the medium cannot sustain its viability, it closes shop.
Like every other business, the publisher is also in the business to make profit. However, as one of the profession’s living doyens, Tony Momoh, observes “Nigeria may well be a huge market place, where everyone must buy what he wants and sell what he has. And this shows in all aspects of our lives, including our home videos. But if there must be an exception, that exception must be journalism… you Mr. Journalist cannot sell what you have in journalism to get what you want. As a professional, there is a world of difference between you and the proprietor, even if he calls himself the editor-in-chief on the grounds that the constitution grants him the right to own, establish and operate a medium. The proprietor is a businessman and it takes a lot of doing to persuade him that his product should sustain on sales and advertising, and not on parading the medium as the clout that opens doors to him to access mouth-watering contracts.”
The bad today, more than the good, ironically shape the slant of media reports. I quote Momoh again: “I am addressing you Mr. Journalist, because the complaints against you are mounting by the day. Those who make these allegations may well be exaggerating but they are not lying. They say you operate in cults you call beats and that you form various associations outside your Nigerian Union of Journalists (NUJ) parent body, so that you can in that enclave, perpetuate your end designs. They say you do not publish or file any story to your editor unless you are paid. They say you do not even wait to be told thank you, but that you demand payment before publication. What difference does this make in relation to ashewo the prostitute, who tells you that money for hand and back for ground. There are even more serious allegations. They say you decide who to cover and what to make of the coverage. In other words, you do not say what happened at an occasion but what you say happened… You ask whether the labourer is not worthy of his hire! So you do not care where the payment comes from. If not from your employer, then it must come from the person who wants to be featured.”
These ills, as Momoh observed in his book, using his own analogy, may be exaggerated, but they are true. How the journalist can overcome them in order to report the 2007 elections creditability is the big question. These ills are already plaguing political reportage verging on the elections and they are bound to plague journalism more gravely as the electoral contest draw nearer.
Apart from the sundry base motivations that affect media content in Nigeria, ownership and control are facts that shape content in Nigeria and elsewhere around the globe. Every media proprietor knows what he wants to achieve with his medium and goes about it by tailoring the content of his medium towards that goal. Control is also important in shaping media content. The owner may stand aloof, only interested in financial returns, while his employees, the editorial managers, determine what is fed the public.
Beginning from the evolutionary period of the Nigerian media industry, political, religious, ethnic/regional persuasions have been important determinants in media content. It is a tradition whose end is not predictable for now. Even now, it is easy to predict which Nigerian newspaper, magazine or electronic media is for or against a particular politician or party, or the ones that are championing the cause of a given ethnicity or religion.
And contrary to the belief that propaganda reportage, or what came to be referred to as voodoo journalism that gained prominence in the media during the battle to oust military dictatorships in the country has been jettisoned, I make bold to say that yellow journalism, as it is referred to in the profession, or better still, speculative or pre-emptive reporting still abound especially in political reporting of issues of discord, either between parties or individuals. The only difference is in the approach and nomenclature. It ravages the media through the everyday planting of stories in news organs. It is cash and carry kind of transaction between politician and media houses (and sometimes businessmen and media houses), in which stories are framed according to the desire of politicians, who usually desire to score some points, or put opponents on the edge. And he pays money, so much that oftentimes such contrived reports make newspaper cover headlines.
It is for all these sour ingredients that many have lost faith in the credibility of the Nigerian media content. Yet a worrisome dimension is that politicians themselves are now venturing into media ownership and as such would hardly incur criticism by journalists in their employ. When a journalist, who is a watchdog on the man in government now turns to be his employee, a big question as to how well the journalist can perform this sacred duty arises.
The tragedy of the issues highlighted in this sub-head, as it concerns the 2007 general elections, is that the Nigerian media are yet to reposition and re-focus for an effective re-orientation of the people and government for this all- important national event. Something must, therefore, be done without delay to drastically re-orientate the mindset of the Nigerian journalist to know that his responsibility is first to the people and that he has roles to play in nation-building.
How the Media Should Work to Ensure the Success of 2007 Elections
The mass media are powerful organs of social change. In Nigeria, journalism is the only profession the constitution assigns a responsibility. Traditionally, mass media falls into two categories – the print and the electronic. The print comprises newspapers and magazines while the electronic comprises the radio, television and now the internet. Internet, the latest addition, is a global information super-highway that has turned the universe into a village of sorts. The mass media markets information, it spreads knowledge for empowerment and enlightenment that shape and reshape societies. It can also spread hate, dissention and instability, to the extent that tears down governments, structures of government and sovereigns. This, perhaps, explains why the great Napolean Bonaparte, despite his exploits on the many battlefields of Europe, declared that “the pen is mightier than the sword.”
The media have the power to draw goodwill even to the worst of government policies and programmes. They can also rubbish the best of intentions to the extent that the formulators of such policy frameworks would never wish to touch it even with a long pole. The media have the power to make or break. Since 1983, when the military toppled the government of President Shehu Shagari, the former leader has tactically avoided the Nigerian journalist - a decision that verges heavily on anger with the Nigerian Press. Extreme as this decision may appear, he said it was borne out or his conviction that the Nigerian press was responsible for the collapse of his government. We also remember how the media battled Babangida until his resolve to continue to stay in office caved-in on August 26, 1993. Tough as General Abacha was, the media can claim credit for forcing him into a life of a recluse.
It has not been a jolly-ride for the Obasanjo government with the press either. At any point when the media feels that the president’s handshake with the people was going beyond the elbow, the press has never shied away from taking up issues with him. In the case of the tenure elongation plot, for instance, the media took up fight.
For their role in the society and the enormous power which it wields, how the media conduct itself have since the advent of printing been of immense concern to both governments and the society, such that there exists no absolute freedom of the press anywhere in the world. Even the freest societies of the world still maintain a baleful took at their press.
On our part, the Nigerian media, the journalist, can use his privileged position and power to drastically re-mould the attitude, mindset and stereotypes of politicians, voters, government, political parties, INEC officials, security agents and even that of judicial officials, who would undertake judicial reviews of the elections, towards political campaigns, voting and release of the results of next year’s elections. But how can the media do this?
The key lies in reportage, in content. The journalist, the media should not compromise on the roles of the press under the Social Responsibility Theory and Development Journalism model. To do this, the reporter and the editor must keep national interest, the peace and stability of the country, above ethnic and political persuasions, and seek to admonish their politician-friends, who are desperate for power on the virtues of moderation, rather than getting fired up for inflammable reports by patronage and promises of reward by the politician. Proper education of the electorate and the bridging of the information gap between INEC and the electorate, and between the government and the electorate on electoral issues should be pursued by the media. Right now, there is ignorance and disconnect. While some actors in the political system may be announcing their conviction on the insincerity of government to actually hand-over, whereas this is worthy of reporting, it would also be necessary to announce to the public the efforts of INEC and the government towards a successful 2007. Reporting the former, without the latter is capable of inducing anxiety and disaffection capable of convulsing the polity. A well-educated voter would not sell his vote. He would rather vote his conscience and the media largely shares in this education.
The media must apply restraint in reporting claims and allegations from politicians and political parties. 2007 calls for verification or investigative journalism. Allegations and claims by politicians, such as “he is planning to assassinate me”, “He is the person that killed him”, “He is training hired killers”, should be handled with circumspection. As Momoh tells the journalist, “Your social and professional chores do not end with he says, she says and they say. You are the eyes of the polity and because sovereignty resides in the people, the people gave you the responsibility to monitor what happens on their behalf. That is your societal chore. It cannot and should not end with what people say they have done. You must go after what they say they have done and find out if they did do it, if they did it well”.
The media must maintain a keen surveillance. A keen eye should be kept on the government to expose any authority or functionary who acts in bad faith against the peoples’ collective desire, in line with its watchdog role. Such must also be extended to the political parties, and INEC in equal measures.
The media should avoid sensationalising reports on political disagreements and controversies in the polity. This is the practice today. Let’s apply the brakes.
· Accurate, fair and balanced reports are necessary so that the public would have the correct account of what happened. Fairness demands all parties to be heard and balance for all sides of the story and issue to be laid bare. This would check the circulation of falsehood and give every party to a conflict the opportunity to be heard. The media is a public highway, it should carry opinions of all. The media should report all sides of the story and allow members of the public to make up their minds, especially in matters of conflict.
The media should devote content to healthy discourse on the evils of bad politics, expressed in the winner-takes-all disposition, money for votes, thuggery, campaigns of calumny, character assassination and murder. We should not just report political murders and keep silent afterwards, editorials, features, and articles should be devoted to renouncing them.
Perhaps, it would be profitable to all media practitioners to refresh their minds on the code of ethics for Nigerian journalists, as issued by the Nigerian Press Organisation and the Nigerian Press Council, as we face our duties concerning the 2007 general elections. It is a total of 15 broad ethical requirements, but for the purposes of our roles and responsibilities as journalists, we shall examine only those that are central in our duty in the on-coming elections.
Editorial Independence
Decisions concerning the content of news should be the responsibility of a professional journalist.
Accuracy and Fairness
The public has a right to know. Factual, accurate, balanced and fair reporting is the ultimate objective of good journalism and the basis of earning public confidence. A journalist should refrain from publishing inaccurate and misleading information. Where such information has been inadvertently published, prompt correction should be made. A journalist must hold the right of reply as a cardinal rule of practice.
In the course of his duties, a journalist should strive to separate facts from conjecture and comment.

DECENCY
A journalist should refrain from using offensive, abusive or vulgar language.
A journalist should not present lurid details, either in words or picture of violence, sexual acts, abhorrent or horrid scenes.

DISCRIMINATION
A journalist should refrain from making perjorative reference to person’s ethnic group, religion, sex, or to any physical or mental illness or handicap.

REWARD AND GRATIFICATION
A journalist should neither solicit nor accept bribe, gratification or patronage to suppress or publish information.
To demand payment for the publication of news is inimical to the notion of news as a fair, accurate, unbiased and factual report of an event.

VIOLENCE
A journalist should not present or report acts of violence, armed robberies, terrorist activities or vulgar display of wealth in a manner that glorifies such acts in the eyes of the public.
A journalist should strive to enhance national unity and public good.

SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
A journalist should promote universal principles of human rights, democracy, justice, equity, peace and international understanding.

CONCLUSION
In summing up my thoughts on how the media can contribute to a successful 2007 general elections in Nigeria, I urge that my colleagues and I lay more emphasis on issues, rather than personalities, in the reportage leading up to the elections. Barely eight months to H-Hour (as the military would tag it), no aspirant or political party is telling us anything about how the tension in the Niger Delta region would be contained. No one or group is enunciating any workable policy on how to deal with our energy crisis (NEPA or PHCN); neither is there any talk about how Nigerians can feed better post 2007-elections.
As watchdogs for the people, it behoves the media to re-focus the discourse on the coming elections to issues that have direct relationship with the general well-being of the Nigerian people. And the time to begin to do this is immediately after this National Forum, symbolically convened by the umpire of the elections – INEC.

I thank you for listening.

Being the text of a paper presented by Comfort Obi, Publisher/editor-in-chief, The Source magazine, at INEC’s NATIONAL FORUM held at Ladi Kwali Hall, Sheraton Hotel and Towers, Abuja, on Wednesday, August 30, 2006.