Distinguished guests, esteemed colleagues, and members of the press, ladies and gentlemen.
As we were putting the finishing touches on my presentation, a significant development unfolded that underscores part of the urgency of our discussions today. News broke that Australia has enacted a ban on the use of social media by children under 16 – a bold and, some might say, overdue decision. This landmark policy not only seeks to protect the mental and emotional well-being of young people but also serves as a stark reminder of the societal risks posed by unchecked digital platforms.
This decision aligns closely with our longstanding advocacy: if social media platforms fail to regulate themselves, external forces will step in to impose order, just as the Australia Government did, to force tech platforms such Instagram, Facebook, TikTok among others, to stop minors logging in or face fines of up to $32 million. This principle, as we have often warned, highlights a trajectory where the lack of proactive self-regulation leads to reactionary policies that reshape the digital landscape entirely.
In the course of this presentation, I will revisit this development and delve deeper into its implications – not only for the platforms themselves but also for us as stakeholders in this rapidly evolving digital world.
Now back to my presentation:
I am honoured to be here today to discuss a subject that is both urgent and essential in our world today: the relationship between government and the media.
Permit me to thank IPI for organising this event and intentionally choosing the theme of this summit, which is “Government vs. Media: How to Reduce Tension, Enhance Mutual Understanding, and Avoid Censorship.” I believe the theme offers us a unique opportunity to explore practical solutions to foster a more cooperative relationship between governments and the media. The ultimate goal is to create an environment where both entities can fulfill their roles without infringing upon each other’s responsibilities.
This presentation is purely based on my personal experiences and observations, as well as insights gained during my tenure as the Minister of Information and Culture between 2015 and 2023. It reflects my practical understanding of the challenges, opportunities, and dynamics of the roles of the government and the media, rather than being derived from scholarly theories or academic prescriptions.
We live in an era defined by unprecedented information flow, where the role of the media is increasingly crucial in shaping public perception, influencing governance, and holding leaders accountable. However, this role can also generate tension between the government and the media, especially in times of crisis, security challenges such as the fight against terrorists and bandits, misinformation, or political transition.
Also Read:
- Court convicts lovers for adultery, adjourns sentencing
- How we arrested suspected kidnapper after receiving N1m ransom, witness tells court
- Oba Otudeko: How not to treat an icon, by Ann Okwologu
- UCTH sacks worker over negligence following patient’s death
- Tanker explosion kills driver, injures one in Ibadan
The media, often referred to as the Fourth Estate, plays a vital role in democratic societies by acting as a watchdog, disseminating information, and giving voice to the public. Freedom of the press is enshrined in many international conventions, and its importance is underscored by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which affirms the right to seek, receive, and impart information freely. In Nigeria, for example, Section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution guarantees freedom of expression and the press, reflecting a commitment on the part of the government to upholding these values.
However, with this power comes responsibility. In today’s fast-paced media landscape, fake news and sensationalism can spread easily and rapidly, leading to public mistrust, social unrest, and even violence. The media’s role is not just to inform but also to ensure the accuracy, balance, and fairness of its reporting, which is essential for maintaining its credibility and supporting a healthy democratic environment.
Government, on the other hand, is responsible for ensuring peace, security, good governance and accountability as well as economic stability within the country. The scope of the government’s responsibility extends far beyond that of the media. While the media plays a crucial role in informing, educating, and holding power to account, the government bears the weightier task of creating an environment that allows the media in particular, and the society in general, to thrive.
A vibrant economy, peaceful, and secure environment are fundamental pillars upon which the media can effectively fulfill its responsibilities to the citizenry. Without these conditions, the media faces an arduous task in discharging its duty of providing accurate information and engendering public discourse.
The government therefore prioritises promoting stability, economic growth, and ensuring safety for all citizens. By doing so, it is empowering the media to perform its essential role as a watchdog, a mirror of society, and a catalyst for democratic development.
The relationship between the government and the media is inherently dynamic, often shaped by the prevailing circumstances. Ideally, this relationship should be cordial and cooperative, as both entities play critical roles in informing and guiding the public. However, the reality is often more nuanced, with the context significantly influencing their interactions.
For instance, during national emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the alignment between the government and the media was evident. Both parties worked collaboratively to disseminate accurate information, combat misinformation, and provide updates on public health measures. This synergy highlighted their shared responsibility in risk communication with a view to protecting and informing the citizens during the pandemic. Conversely, the relationship tends to become strained when dealing with sensitive issues such as national security. Government often prioritises confidentiality and control over information to safeguard public safety, while the media emphasises transparency and the public’s right to know. This divergence in priorities can lead to friction, with each side questioning the other’s intentions and methods.
For example, our government faced criticism from the media and the civil society over certain regulatory actions taken against some media platforms for publishing or broadcasting hate speech, fake news, inflammatory content that could incite violence or for yielding their platforms to terrorists, bandits, secessionists and other anti-state groups, to rationalize their nefarious and depraved activities against the country and its citizens. No government will turn a blind eye when the peace and security of the country is being threatened!
Let me therefore highlight some salient issues that influence Government-Media Relations
Misinformation and Fake News: The democratisation of access to information through social media has significantly enhanced our democracy, by giving voice to the voiceless. However, this development also presents challenges, particularly the rapid spread of fake news. Such disinformation can cause public panic, damage reputations, disrupt social order or even cause a legitimacy crisis for a government. While the government has a vested interest in curbing fake news, the media often perceives such interventions as potential threats to press freedom.
As Minister of Information, you may recall that our government was compelled to suspend the microblogging platform Twitter (now X) when it became evident that the platform was being used as a preferred tool by secessionist groups seeking to destabilise the country. While the decision attracted significant criticism, it was a necessary step to preserve the unity and stability of this great country.
From the outset of my tenure as Minister of Information, our intentions regarding the media were clear. Shortly after assuming office, during one of my earliest engagements with the media precisely on November 23, 2015, I assured a cross-section of social media platform owners that the government had no intention of stifling social media. Instead, we emphasised the need for responsibility, accountability, and self-regulation within the space.
National Security and Public Interest: As I mentioned earlier, the Government holds the position that certain types of information, if disclosed, could pose serious risks to national security or disrupt public order, particularly in the context of combating terrorism and banditry. Sensitive details, such as operational strategies or intelligence reports, could be exploited by malicious actors in order to undermine the efforts to safeguard lives and property. On the other hand, the media often argues that transparency is essential to fostering accountability and maintaining public trust. Therefore, striking a balance between these two critical imperatives remains a complex but necessary task in ensuring both security and democratic governance.
Public Trust and Credibility: Trust is central to both government and media credibility. The more that each party can demonstrate its commitment to the public interest, the more productive their relationship can be. Both sides need to work on strengthening public trust, which can reduce the likelihood of tensions escalating into confrontations.
Economic and Political Pressures: Media organizations sometimes operate under economic and political pressures that might influence their editorial choices and news coverage. Financial dependencies, such as reliance on advertisers or sponsors, may lead to prioritization of content that aligns with commercial interests. Similarly, political affiliations or expectations can shape the tone and focus of reporting. On the other hand, government may face pressure to control narratives, often seeking to highlight positive developments in the polity and the economy.
Strategies to Reduce Tension and Build Mutual Understanding
To address the challenges in the interaction between the government and the media, both parties must work towards greater cooperation, transparency, and respect for each other’s roles. Here are a few strategies:
Establish Open Channels of Communication: Regular dialogue between government officials and media representatives can help both parties understand each other’s constraints and objectives. It was in furtherance to establishing open channels of communication that I introduced and sustained various platforms of interaction between the government and the media. Some of those engagements included exposing the media to the challenges and successes of the government in order to give them a broader view that would aid them in reporting those events.
I recall that the first thing we did on assumption of office was to embark on a process to change the narrative on Boko Haram to reflect the massive progress that our gallant military made. We, therefore, decided to visit the liberated areas of the North-east with about 40 local and international journalists. We embarked on this visit on 5 December 2015, flying to Maiduguri and then going by road to Bama through Konduga and Kaure. We did not meet a single vehicle along the road that stretched about 72 kilometres, skirting the Sambisa Forest at many points. The visit was an eye-opener. In Bama, with over 6,000 buildings, none was standing intact at that time. Signs in Arabic were visible everywhere. It was no longer a matter of speculation that our troops were winning the war, we were armed with empirical evidence. We were able to return and tell Nigerians what we saw, with pictures and videos to back it up. This went a long way in helping to change the narrative about Boko Haram, to convince Nigerians that the territories captured and occupied by the insurgents were taken back, that indeed our military was winning the war and that they needed the support of their compatriots.
We also embarked on a robust engagement with critical stakeholders in the information sector with a view to exchanging ideas on the programmes and policies of the Administration, bridging any communication gap and leveraging on the created rapport to keep Nigerians better informed. Regular meetings were thus institutionalised with organisations such as the Broadcasting Organisations of Nigeria (BON), Newspaper Proprietors’ Association of Nigeria (NPAN), Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ), National Association of Women Journalists (NAWOJ), Radio and Theatre Arts Workers Union (RATTAWU), On-Air Personalities, Online Publishers and Social Media Influencers. In continuation of the engagement, we embarked on a tour of media establishments across the country. In perhaps an unprecedented move, we rallied the indigenous language newspapers as a platform to take government messages to the grassroots.
Realising the need to constantly work to bridge the communication gap between the government and the citizenry, and the imperative for citizens’ participation in governance, we launched, on April 25, 2016, the Town Hall Meeting series, which provided a platform for the government to directly interact with a cross-section of the public, especially against the background of pervasive fake news and disinformation. The Town Hall Meeting ensured a two-way communication between the government and the governed, served as a feedback mechanism for government policies and programmes and deepened participatory democracy. While participating Honourable Ministers and other top government officials told Nigerians what they were doing, they also got instant feedback from the citizens. 22 Town Hall Meetings were held across the six geo-political zones of the country. A special edition of the town hall meeting for youths was held in Abuja. Other thematic areas included: Revamping the Economy; Provision of Infrastructure; Boosting Agriculture; Fight Against Corruption; Farmers-Herders Clash, Banditry; Protection of Government Infrastructure; National Unity as well as Peace and Security. To further reach our people at the grassroots, we organised a number of Town Hall meetings in indigenous languages, in Kano and Enugu.
Also in order to deepen the interaction with the media and the need to positively project Nigeria to the world, we worked with the Nigerian chapter of the International Press Institute (IPI) to successfully bid for the hosting of the 2018 World Congress of the IPI in Abuja. Hundreds of international journalists converged on Abuja for that global conference where robust interactions were held with a view to further bridging the gap between the media and the government.
Our routine press releases, media briefings, media appearances and sustained engagements with bureau chiefs had also been used to deal with topical issues and to propagate the Administration’s achievements.
Our administration equally established a monthly meeting involving top government officials, military and security chiefs, as well as editors and bureau chiefs of media organisations in order to foster meaningful engagement by providing the media with essential background information and insights particularly on the government’s efforts against terrorism and banditry. While certain details shared in those sessions were not for public dissemination, they served as crucial guides for accurate reporting and balanced editorials.
We also launched a media tour of government and other projects across the country to showcase the projects executed or facilitated by the Administration and also to provide Nigerians with authentic and verifiable information about them.
To positively project Nigeria’s image and also ensure access to authentic information about Nigeria, the Ministry embarked on biannual interactive sessions with the foreign media organisations in both the United States and the UK. The interactions with the global media in London and Washington enabled the Ministry to provide them with first-hand information and background briefings about topical issues in Nigeria, clear any misconception arising from lack of credible information and also build a rapport with them. For example, when the Federal Government proscribed IPOB and designated it a terrorist organisation, it fell on the Ministry to explain to the global audience, through its interaction with the foreign media, the reasons for the government action. This went a long way in shaping the global perception of the organisation. The Ministry also provided ample information to the foreign media at the height of the Farmers-Herders crisis, making them realise that the hot contest for increasingly-scarce natural resources, like water and grazing fields – rather than religious and ethnic considerations – fueled the crisis.
We believe this played a major role in changing the perspective of the international community on the issue. A critical component of the foreign interactions is the side meetings with international think tanks. Those interactions were invaluable, especially in policy formations in global capitals with regards to Nigeria.
Following the 2023 presidential elections, we undertook a special engagement with the international media in Washington and London to address a misleading narrative propagated by one of the presidential candidates. This candidate leveraged social media propaganda and procured opinion polls to falsely claim victory in the elections. Additionally, he sought to mislead the international community with a flawed argument that the delay in uploading the election results onto the IReV portal denied him victory. This claim ignored the fact that, in Nigeria, the collation of election results remains a manual process, and the portal plays no role in determining the outcome of the elections.
That particular engagement with the international media became necessary to counter the opposition leader’s propaganda, which was a futile attempt to delegitimise the outcome of the election.
The PMB Scorecard Series, a platform for interactions between the media and the Honourable Ministers, alongside the launch of a comprehensive Compendium detailing the achievements of the administration and the establishment of a dedicated portal, www.pmdscorecard.gov.ng, were strategic initiatives aimed at showcasing the accomplishments of the APC-led government.
These efforts were designed to highlight the progress and milestones achieved under the APC administration, ensuring that the electorate was well-informed in the months leading up to the 2023 presidential elections. By presenting verifiable data and evidence of performance, those initiatives sought to counter misinformation, and reinforce the government’s narrative of delivery on its promises.
Clear and Fair Media Regulations: Regulatory bodies like the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) and the Advertising Regulatory Council of Nigeria (ARCON) were established by law and vested with the authority to make subsidiary legislations, such as the Nigerian Broadcasting Code, to uphold ethical standards in the media. These regulations are designed to promote professionalism, fairness, and accountability within the industry. The government’s intention has always been to ensure adherence to these codes of practice, not to suppress dissent or stifle freedom of expression.
It is, therefore, essential for the media to always adhere to the code of practice as established by the laws setting up the regulatory bodies. Such a framework is crucial for safeguarding media integrity and public trust.
We have also made efforts to promote self-regulation in social media by engaging stakeholders across the ecosystem to develop a realistic and workable regulatory framework. However, our intentions were widely misconstrued. Ironically, the very groups we sought to protect – particularly the traditional media, whose credibility is often undermined by the activities of social media – opposed the initiative.
However, like I have been saying in different fora, there should be some form of regulations for the social media in Nigeria to address key challenges such as the spread of fake news, hate speech, and harmful content for children. The regulation will help to ensure accountability, protect users from online abuse, and promote ethical standards.
Let me emphasise that regulating social media is not, as some might argue, about shielding the government from criticism or stifling dissent. Rather, it is about protecting the integrity and credibility of individuals, institutions, and society at large. The unchecked spread of fake news and malicious content has, time and again, proven capable of inflicting irreparable harm on people’s reputations. Innocent individuals have seen their integrity destroyed by baseless accusations and fabricated narratives, amplified and perpetuated across social platforms.
Consider the deeply personal consequences: marriages shattered by falsehoods that go viral in mere moments, leaving families broken.
At a broader level, entire communities could be destabilised by the exploitation of social and cultural fault lines. Inflammatory content, often disseminated with the intent to incite violence or hatred, has the power to drive neighbours to take up arms against one another, unraveling the fabric of societal harmony.
In this context, regulation is not about control but about protection – protection of truth, of individuals’ dignity, and of communal peace. Left unregulated, social media becomes a battleground for misinformation, where lives and relationships are collateral damage.
Countries worldwide are implementing diverse strategies to address the challenges posed by social media platforms, recognising their transformative power and the risks they bring. From policies focused on combating misinformation to frameworks ensuring accountability and transparency, these approaches reflect the global consensus on the need for regulation.
Nigeria must not remain an exception. It is imperative to develop a holistic framework that reflects our unique socio-cultural and political realities while aligning with global best practices. This approach should be inclusive, involving stakeholders from the government, civil society, academia, the media, users and the private sector to ensure that the adopted policies are fair, balanced, and widely accepted.
The only objective should be to create a regulatory environment that upholds freedom of expression while protecting individuals, communities, and institutions from harm. By adopting a unique but globally informed strategy, Nigeria can harness the benefits of social media while mitigating its risks effectively.
Promote Media Literacy and Responsible Journalism: To combat disinformation, our administration partnered with UNESCO to set up a UNESCO Category 2 Institute for Media and Information Literacy here in Abuja. It is gratifying that my successor followed up to actualize the initiative. The Institute, when fully established, will educate both the media and the public on how to identify credible sources and fact-check information. In the same vein, media outlets should adopt strict editorial standards and avoid sensationalism, which often fuels mistrust and can exacerbate tensions with government authorities.
Encourage Self-Regulation within the Media: Encouraging self-regulation allows media organisations to take responsibility for content quality, ethical standards, and accuracy, without government interference.
At this juncture, I wish to commend the Newspaper Proprietors Association of Nigeria and other stakeholders for establishing the National Media Complaints Commission – an internal mechanism aimed at promoting ethical compliance and ensuring professionalism in media practice. The Commission, a few months ago, demonstrated its effectiveness by investigating and delivering a verdict on a complaint filed by the Federal Government regarding a news report on the Samoa Agreement published by Daily Trust newspaper. This development marks a significant milestone in ensuring improved government-media relations.
Moving forward, the Commission will continue to act as a mediating body, by addressing complaints and ensuring that journalists adhere to professional codes of conduct, which will go a long way in promoting ethical journalism and accountability within the media industry.
Avoiding Censorship:
The key to avoiding censorship is for both parties to recognise their shared objective of serving the public. While the media’s role is to inform, the government is responsible for ensuring peace, security and stability. By acknowledging each other’s roles and adopting a balanced approach, government and media can coexist without compromising the democratic values that support a free society.
In conclusion, the relationship between government and media is, by nature, one of checks and balances. Tension between these institutions is not inherently negative; it can drive both parties to fulfill their roles more effectively. However, to avoid destructive conflicts and ensure that this relationship benefits society, both government and media must work toward understanding and respecting each other’s mandates.
By establishing transparent regulations, promoting self-regulation within the media, responsible journalism and sustained engagement between the government and the media, we can create an environment where the two parties are not adversaries but partners in progress.
As former Minister of Information and Culture, I understand the challenges that both entities face, and I remain hopeful that, through collaboration and mutual respect, we can forge a pathway that upholds press freedom while supporting national stability and development.
I thank you for listening.
. Mohammed, a former Minister of Information and Managing Partner of Bruit Costaud, delivered this paper on December 11, 2024 at the Annual Conference and Annual General Meeting of the International Press Institute Nigeria in Abuja.
Follow The Eagle Online Channel on WhatsApp
