Setting aside counterarguments, the nation’s media wields significant influence over what people think and how they think. In fact, this influence extends to shaping the very topics that people discuss. As Herbert Altschull aptly put it, the media are “agents of power”. If you are unaware of a particular issue, it is unlikely to occupy your thoughts or become a topic of conversation. What you know, how you acquire that knowledge, what opinions you form based on that knowledge, and why you think in certain ways— all these aspects are influenced by the media.
The early press in Nigeria was vibrant and impactful in bringing about desired changes, but it was not devoid of partisanship and high-level political interests. In fact, Nigeria’s freedom was largely fought through the pen and the pages of Nigerian newspapers, which ultimately contributed to our independence in 1960. However, since then, the media’s vibrant values and strength, which were instrumental in ousting the colonial masters, have not been effectively utilised in our self-governance.
The Nigerian press has increasingly neglected its duty to follow up vital developmental matters such as national security, constitutional reforms, education, and police reforms, among others. This article specifically highlights the issue of poverty alleviation, which is of significant concern.
Since independence, Nigeria has witnessed several poverty alleviation programmes. These include Operation Feed the Nation (OFN), which was launched in 1976; the Green Revolution Programme (GRP), implemented in the 1980s; the Family Economic Advancement Programme (FEAP), introduced in 1994; the National Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP), established in 2001; the Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment Programme (SURE-P), launched in 2012; and the National Social Investment Programme (NSIP), introduced in 2016. The NSIP comprises several components, such as the N-Power programme, the National Home-Grown School Feeding Programme, the Conditional Cash Transfer programme, and the Government Enterprise and Empowerment Programme (GEEP). These programmes are aimed at reducing poverty and improving social welfare. However, despite their existence, these programmes have faced limitations, and their effectiveness has been called into question. One significant contributing factor to their challenges is the absence of a vibrant and uncompromising media. Books, data, and undeniable evidence highlight the failures of these programmes, and ongoing programmes seem to be following the same fate as their predecessors. Criticisms against such programmes continue to emerge in various forms.
Shortly after the commencement of the Tinubu administration and the confirmation of ministers by the Senate, the Minister of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Alleviation, Beta Edu, announced the suspension of the N-Power component of the National Social Investment Programme (NSIP) due to severe ongoing fraudulent activities in its implementation. The minister highlighted these issues and emphasised the need for an investigation to identify the loopholes and those responsible. The point I am making is that, first, the reasons cited for the suspension were mostly already public knowledge, as there had been extensive discussions on platforms like X (formerly Twitter) where users commented on these problems. While social media platforms allowed public discourse on the issues, the conventional media did little to reflect the reality and often excluded voices that highlighted the problems, whether intentionally or not. As a result, the press presented a different narrative that seemed disconnected from the actual situation. My quantitative investigation of press news sources revealed that they relied mostly on government officials for information. There were no significant investigative reports on the activities of the NSIP.
Secondly, there is a clear absence of policy-centred discourse in the mainstream media, particularly in the press. For a programme aimed at solving a public problem, one would expect extensive awareness campaigns and media coverage, followed by proactive monitoring of the policy implementation process. This type of reporting would focus on accountability. However, what we often encounter are politicised contents with carefully selected sources that support specific narratives. For instance, oppositional media consistently sources content from opposition political parties, civil rights organisations, or activists, while others who possibly have favourable relationships with the government, agencies, or parastatals simply publish syndicated content with only minor changes to the headline and by-line. This form of journalism, known as ‘pack journalism’, prioritises selling news, setting agendas, and framing and priming information without considering the NSIP policy or the program’s success.
Thirdly, in cases where the media did report on the NSIP, the news framing was predominantly responsive or episodic. Responsive framing refers to stories that featured members of the ruling party or government defending the party against criticism from the opposition. Episodic framing, on the other hand, means that stories did not address broader thematic issues but instead focused on isolated events or were triggered by specific occurrences. It is important to note that restricting the scope of national policy to singular interests lacks comprehensive insight and can mislead the public.
Lastly, I believe you would agree with me that when the public feels misled, all parties involved, especially the media, suffer a loss of public trust. Consequently, people may disengage from the programme, believing it to be highly politicised and serving partisan interests. As the saying goes, “two and more can play the game.” This is why we often hear reports of ghost beneficiaries in programmes like N-Power and other components that have not yet been suspended. Instead of waiting for press releases and statements from the government and its officials, the media should consider it a social responsibility to track these projects and interventions for the people. In conclusion, the Nigerian media must retrace its values, redefine them, and pursue journalistic integrity beyond partisan interests. It is also crucial for them to explore alternative professional sources of financial support instead of compromising the core principles of journalism profession for political or commercial gains.
_
Olasunkanmi Arowolo is a PhD (Journalism) student at the University of Kent, England and Assistant Lecturer at the Faculty of Communications and Media Studies, Lagos State University, Lagos
