By Sumaila Ogbaje, News Agency of Nigeria (NAN)
Nigerian journalism is facing a credibility challenge that increasingly originates outside the newsroom — on WhatsApp, X, TikTok, and other digital platforms.
For reporters, speed without verification can damage a newsroom’s credibility, expose media organisations to legal action and, in conflict-sensitive environments, contribute to communal tensions.
Recently, the Premium Times Academy and conflict scholars facilitated a seminar which underscored a stark reality.
The sessions brought together media experts and academics—including Dayo Aiyetan (International Centre for Investigative Reporting), Musikilu Mojeed, Idris Akinbajo, and Dapo Olorunyomi (PREMIUM TIMES), Prof. Isaac Olawale Albert, Oluwaseyi Ayeni, Joan Hassan, and Silas Jonathan.
They all shared a central message: modern journalists must evolve from traditional information gatekeepers into active “gate-checkers.”
One of the strongest warnings focused on ethnic profiling in news reporting.
The ICIR presentation used a simple illustration by comparing the headlines: “Fulani man arrested for kidnapping” and “Man arrested for kidnapping.”
The crime and arrest remain the same; only the ethnic description has changed.
The presentation described profiling as treating a personal characteristic as a shortcut for judging an individual.
It becomes particularly dangerous when ethnicity is used to suggest collective blame, criminality or dangerousness.
In Nigeria, where ethnicity intersects with politics, land, elections, farmer-herder conflicts and resource control, careless framing can amplify tensions far beyond the original report.
Facilitators said mentioning ethnicity could be legitimate where it was directly relevant to the story, necessary for identification or supported by evidence.
“It becomes profiling when repeated references turn an individual into a representation of an entire ethnic group.
“Before publication, journalists were encouraged to ask five questions: Is the ethnic identity relevant? What evidence supports its inclusion?
“Could its inclusion be interpreted as collective blame? Does it deserve headline prominence? Would the story be written the same way if the individual belonged to another ethnic group?
“The underlying principle is simple: report the person; not the stereotype; evidence should take precedence over identity.’’
Another major challenge is the increasing reliance on social media as a source of breaking news.
Oluwaseyi Ayeni, one of the facilitators at the training, warned that although significant breaking stories now emerge first on social media, User-Generated Content (UGC) remains subject to ownership rights and ethical considerations.
“A public post is not automatically public property, while a screenshot is not necessarily a verified source,’’ Ayeni warned.
Three major risks were highlighted: copyright, privacy and defamation.
Journalists were advised to obtain permission before using photographs, videos or other user-generated material and preserve evidence of such permission.
“Attribution alone does not necessarily resolve copyright concerns.
“Privacy considerations also remain important, particularly when reporting on minors, victims, protesters and grieving families.
“Defamation presents another risk. Where a journalist republishes an unverified social media allegation of fraud, rape, corruption or other wrongdoing, the publication may attract legal consequences.’’
The recommended newsroom protocol was the “ACCEPT” test: verify the author; establish the context; obtain consent; consider ethical implications; establish that the material is not manipulated, recycled or AI-generated; and ensure the information can be defended with evidence.
Journalists were also advised to verify social media accounts through official websites and established channels and contact the purported owner by phone or email where necessary.
They were encouraged to preserve screenshots of relevant posts and submit screenshots, links and embed codes alongside stories for newsroom records.
Silas Jonathan, a facilitator on fact-checking and digital verification, examined another emerging challenge: Artificial Intelligence (AI).
Jonathan said AI tools had significantly reduced the technical barrier to producing convincing fake photographs, cloned voices and manipulated videos.
Examples cited included the fake Joe Biden robocall during the 2024 New Hampshire primary, fabricated audio involving a Slovak political figure during the 2023 election and synthetic images depicting former U.S. President Donald Trump with Black voters.
But Jonathan cautioned against relying solely on AI detectors.
“Such tools provide probabilities rather than conclusive proof, while genuine material can also be falsely dismissed as AI-generated.
“The more reliable questions are: Is the material authentic? Who created it? When and where did it originate? What narrative does it promote?
“Visual indicators such as distorted hands, garbled text, inconsistent shadows and duplicated objects can assist verification, but their reliability may decline as generative tools improve.’’
The more durable approach, Jonathan said, was establishing provenance and corroborating information independently.
“Before publishing, journalists should determine whether the material is authentic or recycled, identify the earliest uploader and verify the location through landmarks, signboards, language and vehicle number plates.
“They should also examine the narrative being promoted and seek independent evidence outside the original post.
“The recommended workflow is to pause, save and archive the material, trace its earliest version, corroborate the location and time independently, and then decide whether to publish, hold or debunk it,” he said.
Among the free verification tools recommended were Google Reverse Image Search and Lens, InVID and FotoForensics.
Data from the Centre for Journalism Innovation and Development (CJID) on crises in Jos showed that fear-inducing narratives generated about 53,800 interactions, compared with 11,600 for conspiracy claims.
The figures underscored how emotional content can travel faster and further than factual information.
Idris Akinbajo, Managing Editor of Premium Times, and Prof. Isaac Albert, Professor of Peace and Conflict Studies, urged journalists to broaden their understanding of conflict and avoid focusing only on its violent manifestations.
Akinbajo and Albert noted that journalists often concentrate on the final stages of conflict while paying insufficient attention to latent and emerging stages where early warning and preventive reporting may be possible.
Albert defined conflict as a difference of opinion or diverging interests involving thought processes, realities and needs.
Conflict, he noted, was not inherently dysfunctional, but could become destructive when handled adversarially.
Journalists were encouraged to distinguish between different forms of conflict, including stakeholder, geographic, causative, intensity and time dimensions.
They were also urged to understand the distinction between insurgency and terrorism in analysing security situations.
The principles of conflict-sensitive journalism include seeking truth, minimising harm, maintaining independence and remaining accountable.
Among the practical recommendations were understanding the conflict before reporting it, assessing how coverage could affect the conflict, explaining the reasons behind actions and presenting conflict as a process rather than a single event.
Journalists were also encouraged to avoid presenting conflicts as involving only two sides and to recognise the complexity and internal differences within groups.
They should ask deeper questions: What is the conflict about? What are its underlying causes? Who is fuelling it? Who is working to prevent violence?
The recommended reporting process involves developing the story idea, conducting background research, developing a hypothesis, mapping sources, preparing a pitch, conducting field reporting, organising materials, comparing findings with initial research and writing strictly from evidence.
Musikilu Mojeed, Editor-in-Chief of Premium Times, stressed the importance of reliable data in humanitarian reporting.
Mojeed said reliable data could help save lives, expose gaps and test official claims.
But journalists, he said, must interrogate statistics rather than reproduce them uncritically.
Key questions include: Who produced the figures? What definitions were used? What methodology was applied? What interests could influence the data? Are there competing figures?
Among the recommended sources were the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA), National Commission for Refugees, Migrants and Internally Displaced Persons, North-East Development Commission, National Bureau of Statistics, Budget Office, Open Treasury Portal, UNOCHA, UNHCR, IOM, ACLED, Uppsala Conflict Data Programme, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.
Dapo Olorunyomi, Publisher of Premium Times, provided historical examples of how media narratives can interact with political and communal tensions.
Olorunyomi distinguished between a report, which tells what happened; a story, which explains what happened to someone and why it matters; and a narrative, which shapes the broader meaning attached to events over time.
In Rwanda, Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines (RTLM) used dehumanising language against Tutsis and broadcast messages that contributed to the environment surrounding the 1994 genocide.
The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda subsequently convicted media figures, including Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza, a co-founder of RTLM, and Hassan Ngeze, editor of Kangura newspaper, for their roles in incitement and related crimes.
In Kenya, the 2007 post-election violence resulted in more than 1,000 deaths and widespread displacement. Radio broadcasts were among the media platforms examined in discussions about the role of inflammatory political communication.
In Sierra Leone, politically aligned radio stations during periods of conflict and elections reflected the country’s political polarisation.
The examples highlighted recurring risks: dehumanisation, amplification of political rhetoric without adequate verification, the vulnerability of highly influential broadcast platforms and weaknesses in regulation.
Joan Hassan, a facilitator at the training, described fake news and hate speech as mutually reinforcing threats to social cohesion, capable of deepening polarisation and undermining public trust.
The Code of Ethics of the Nigerian Press Council, the Nigeria Broadcasting Code and relevant provisions of the Cybercrimes Act 2024 provide standards and legal obligations relating to responsible reporting and harmful information.
In short, the main lesson is simple—digital journalism demands both speed and discipline.
Being first brings brief rewards, but being right builds lasting credibility.
For Nigerian journalists navigating today’s complex information environment, experts say the golden rule remains: be fast, but verify first.(NANFeatures)
Edited by Chijioke Okoronkwo
***If used, please credit the writer and the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN)
Comments