THE BROADCAST MEDIA AND SUSTAINABLE DEMOCRACY
IN NIGERIA: ISSUES AND CHALLENGES
By
Bello Madaki Beli
Introduction
It has been established that there is a very strong relationship between media performance and the conduct and vibrancy of politics and political activities in democracies. It is often said that in democracies, “the media have a complex relationship with sources of power and the political system” (McQuail, 2005). Both politics and the media have the singular aim of promoting the individual and collective interests of the general society.
Thus, while politics serves as a route and means of uplifting the society through good governance, protection and advancement of people’s rights, and the creation of an enabling environment for democracy to thrive; the media on their part operate within the prevailing environment to engage in the public sphere thereby expanding the frontiers of freedom and enabling the citizens to have access to quality information that will influence their judgments and decisions for sustainable democracy. Stated differently, the media in a democratic context “distribute entitlements to speak and to be heard”, even if unevenly (Keane, 1993).
From the foregoing, it is clear that the existence of a vibrant media system is quite fundamental to the enthronement and sustenance of a credible democratic process in a setting like Nigeria. As one scholar had argued:
A responsible nationwide democratic system requires a media system which is coterminous with it and which can generate discussion of issues of public concern in a way which does not favour partisan interests; whether these be the interests of particular political parties, the interests of media bosses or media professionals (Boyd Barrett, 2001).
In Nigeria, the performance of the mass media in the democratic process at various phases of our history has been well documented (Omu, 1978; Ogbondah, 1994; Yusuf, 2001 and Nwosu, 2003). Arguably, the mass media have remained in the forefront in the struggle to promote the rights of our people through a credible democratization process. After all, the media too find it quite difficult to operate in a non democratic environment. However, this is not to suggest that the media have been perfect in all circumstances. They have been severely criticized for complicity in truncating and subverting the democratic process at various times. For instance, Enahoro once observed that “whoever and whatever ruined the first republic did so with the active connivance and collaboration of the greater part of the Nigerian press”. Similarly, James (1984) had decried the high degree of professional rascality exhibited by the media during the second republic as manifested through “character assassination, false accusations, blackmail and misrepresentation of facts ….. to the extent that facts were muzzled and whole media organs became megaphones and machineries of propaganda to political parties and vested interests to the extent that the unity of this country was shaken to its very foundation”. Several other writers and scholars have expressed similar opinions (Pate, 2003; and Akinfeleye, 2004).
However, irrespective of such hard assessments, the basis of our argument is that the media are part as well as facilitators of the public sphere described as the “distinctive discursive space within which individuals combine to assume the role of a politically powerful force “(Ernst, 1998). It is our contention in this paper that the Nigerian media, particularly the broadcasting channels with their advantages of reach, cost, timeliness, and acceptability have played and will continue to perform critical functions in the promotion of a sustainable democratic system in the country. Thus, in this presentation, we shall examine the issues involved, some of the challenges and the way forward in the relationship between the broadcast media and the strengthening of a viable democracy in Nigeria.
OUR DEMOCRACY
Democracy as a system of government thrives on constitutionality, citizens’ participation, respect for the rule of law, delivery of services and the advancement and protection of individual and collective freedom. These elements are the fundamental pillars that differentiate democracy from other forms of governance. Indeed, the “essence of democracy is that citizens must be able to ventilate their views through unrestrained debates and that there should be active citizens’ participation in governance as well as unrestricted communication between the government and the governed” (IDEA, 2001).
Here in Nigeria, we have embraced the democratic option for the greater development of our people and nation. With it came the enthronement of the democratic process characterized by the existence of the three arms of government, regular elections, increased citizen’s participation in public affairs, founding of democratic structures like political parties and an active civil society sector, among others. However, this is not to suggest that the present democratic experimentation is totally healthy. Many of us believe that the system can do better in terms of enlarging citizen’s participation in governance and the respect for individual and collective rights through service delivery, free and fair elections, accountability and respect for due process.
Perhaps, the deficits experienced in our young democratic system can be attributed to two separate but inextricably linked factors. These are the prolonged militarization of the polity and the poor and low level of the people’s political education and consciousness.
For the period Nigerians lived under military rule, the psyche of the political elite and the general population has been infected with the militarist and regimented culture of arbitrariness characterized by executive fiat, absence of accountability and wanton disregard for the will of the people. Equally, the general population tended to be subdued into silence, resignation and apathy, appearing disabled to query the unacceptable state of affairs in some quarters within the system. Negative acts of political misbehaviors eloquently manifested in electoral malpractices, tyrannical attitudes, bad governance, disregard for the rule of law, massive stealing of public resources, increased deprivations, personal appropriation of state power, and gross ineptitude by elected officials seem to combine with debilitating poverty to overwhelm the general population that they can do nothing other than to raise their hands in supplication to the Almighty Allah for solution. Indeed, the democratic space is increasingly being demonized by its immediate beneficiaries, the politicians.
In the present situation, what should be the role of the broadcast media to ensure that the democratic ship sails through the rough seas successfully?
THE BROADCAST MEDIA IN OUR DEMOCRACY
The driving force of the democratic engine is vibrant politicking based on principles, plurality of ideas, electoral discipline, diversity of audiences and respect for law and order. Thus, one can safely say that politics is the heartbeat of democracy. Simply put, politics is about power--the struggle to possess, use and retain same. It affects everyone and everything in the society.
On the other hand, the broadcast media are the channels of mass communication like radio and television that are actively engaged in the gathering, analyzing and disseminating issues of and about politics. Politics is very important in the lives of the people and the democratic process. Because of this centrality, the media justifiably focus their attention, in fact accord high priority on the government and those in it. In the process, the media are partly expected to expose and criticize bureaucratic incompetence, dictatorial tendencies and abuse of power among officials. In the words of Curran and Seaton (1994), the media become an agency through which citizens reconstitute themselves to exercise informal supervision over the state.
In fact, the 1999 Nigerian Constitution is clear on its assigned role to the media in the polity. In section 22, it says that “the press radio, television and other agencies of the mass media shall at all times be free to uphold the fundamental objectives contained in this chapter and uphold the responsibility and accountability of the government to the people”. Thus, the Constitution has legitimated the functions of the media and imposed on them the role of monitoring and evaluating the performance of our leaders at all levels. The extent to which the broadcast media actualize this Constitutional provision in their functions is another issue.
As indicated earlier, the broadcast media are generally engaged in active political reporting. I believe that political reporting is necessary for the sustenance of democracy where the system of checks and balances is required for good governance and democratic sustainability. It affords the media the opportunity to provide an open forum for “legitimated interest groups” to participate in public affairs. Indeed, as Nimmo and Combs (1992) put it, “historically, the mass media were heralded as the ultimate instruments of democracy … (They) were destined to unite, educate, and as a result, improve the actions and decisions of the polity”.
Furthermore, if we operationally consider the functions of the broadcast media in the country, we may realize that they are very important in conveying the messages of politicians and political office holders in their bid to capture and retain power particularly during electioneering periods. In the words of the one time Director General of the FRCN and later NTA, Mohammed Ibrahim, “the objective of politics on radio and television is essentially to sensitize the public to the significant nature of their decision, so that they can make the right choice in giving the country the government it desires”. In a simplified form, the media supply the electorate with the right information for sound political judgment.
Equally, the broadcast media, depending on how they use their powers, can “order and structure political reality, allotting events greater or lesser significance according to their presence or absence on the media agenda (McNair, 2000). This is where the issue of opinion polling or vox populi comes in. For instance, recently, the LEADERSHIP Newspaper (Feb.27, 2007) reported the result of an opinion poll it commissioned on “What Issue Will Most Likely Influence Who You Vote for in the April Polls”. The result showed that Nigerians are likely to vote on the basis of: Anti Corruption 40.38%, Security 21.79%, Unemployment 10.90%, Economy 14.10%, Education 8.97%, and Health care 3.85%. Through such mechanisms, the broadcast media too can play significant role in determining the agenda for elections and other policy issues. To an extent, we can say that broadcast channels in the nation are fairly doing that,
even if at a low and unorganized manner.
PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF BROADCASTING
The acceptance of messages that emanate from the broadcast media largely depend on their perception by the general audience.
Currently, one can easily summarize the general perceptions into four categories. First, broadcast media stations particularly sate government owned are hardly objective in matters that involve their states and their ruling political parties.
Secondly, foreign broadcast stations are seen as more reliable in providing credible information about events and personalities in the country. Thirdly, the resource poor, the rural majority and the female gender are peripherally involved in broadcasting. They are treated merely as receivers than partners in the entire process.
And, fourthly the current commercialization of society has deeply eaten into the broadcast media thereby severely restricting access by the public and subverting the ideals of news, killing the spirit of investigative journalism, and devaluing the content of programmes and news on radio and television stations. These four observations, contentious as they may sound, have implications on the ability of the broadcast media to meaningfully influence the democratic agenda in the nation.
Based on the above premises, one can then conclude that our broadcast media houses have a long way to go for them to be positively perceived as involving all segments of society, based on the principles of inclusivity, diversity, transparency, autonomy and accountability in their desire to build a broad based national democratic process.
CHALLENGES
While the media in Nigeria may want to play their constructive role in instituting democratic values and strengthening the democratic process, we must also acknowledge some of the major challenges confronting them both individually and collectively. Some of the weaknesses are internally generated while others are beyond their borders.
The greatest challenge to the effective performance of the broadcast media and indeed Nigeria in its bid to strengthen the democratic process is the political behaviour of politicians especially those in government, particularly at state levels irrespective of political party affiliation. The non tolerant behaviour of politicians to alternative views or options in the present dispensation is frightening and threatening to broadcasting and democratic values. In fact, one can argue that while we have happily embraced democracy, our politicians have shown that they are unwilling or incapable of imbibing the tenets of democratization, two of which are tolerance and allowance of freedom to dissent.
Unfortunately, what we see today is the crude emasculation and physical strangulation of the alternative voice by ruling politicians. There are hardly any exceptions. Elsewhere, I had once observed that:
The unwritten rule nowadays is that the Oga and his team members are always right, their achievements, no matter how mean, unsurpassable and the state will collapse without them. Any view outside this framework is abominable, condemnable, punishable and not to be broadcast. Woe betides whoever that holds or dares to express contrary opinion. Such a fellow is berated, political hustlers are sponsored to reply him in the most uncouth of languages, and media managers are rattled and in worst cases dethroned. Thus, in such a climate, members of the general public maintain sealed lips and broadcast houses become exceptionally selective on who to feature on their airwaves. Sycophantic elements rule the airwaves, honest citizens recoil into their shells and democratic ebullience takes flight. A culture of resignation, despondency and fear predominates. Democratic values decline and society degenerates.
Equally, corruption and corrupt activities of officials and business groups have remained cogs in the wheel of the nation’s democratization progress. Ideally, the broadcast media through investigative journalism should be able to expose some of the scams. Unfortunately, a combination of factors has rendered them largely ineffective in this direction.
Arguably, in Nigeria today, the military may not be regarded as immediate serious threats to the democratic process in the country. Rather, the destruction of existing structural public institutions, abuse of procedures and regulations, undemocratic tendencies, massive stealing of public resources, insensitive, non-principled and desperate conduct of politicians, and the personalization of state power coupled with the rising level of public frustration are the poisonous arrows that may cripple our young democracy. For instance, the EFFC Chairman had revealed recently on the NTA ‘One—on—One” Programme (Feb.23, 2007) that the Commission had in the last two to three years confiscated over N90 Billion (USD 700 Million) of stolen monies from government functionaries who are mostly elected officials.
Equally, the Commission had reported the misuse or diversion of over N1.6 Trillion meant for the local governments in six states since 1999. There are many more sickening reports of this nature.
But, how have the broadcast media been performing in opening up some of these cans of worms? The scorecard may not read well compared to the public expectations
It is in this regard that one must encourage the broadcast stations to be bold enough to investigate some of the claims made by officials as their achievements. Stations should not simply collect money and broadcast dubious claims that have been perfected as conduits for the siphoning of public resources; they must find out the validity, costs and relevance of the claims.
The extent to which our broadcast stations scrutinize the quality of intending contestants, their manifestoes and their fulfilled promises is also weak. Our stations need to develop mechanisms that could gather the manifestoes of office seekers and evaluate the extent to which such manifestoes have been implemented .This is one way by the public can be assisted to differentiate the performing from non performing leaders who should be rejected or booted out of office.
But for all this to happen, individual media houses themselves must be seen to be well informed on the meaning and essence of the on-going democratization reform. To this end, democratic values should be seen to be reflected in their public relations, programme content and professional conduct. Credible feedback mechanisms and standard public opinion monitoring systems should be institutionalized to properly inform and guide programming pattern and content. After all, they cannot offer what they do not understand or practice. Otherwise, many of the stations may be reformed out of business. A media house is a change institution whose management requires dynamic in-flow of innovation, creativity, drive and energy to keep pace with contemporary democratic challenges in the society.
Another critical factor that undermines the function of the broadcasting media is the blanket implementation of the commercialization policy which automatically disables the majority of the people from any form of involvement in the airwaves. The high charges demanded by the various stations for almost everything disqualifies most people and sectors from any kind of meaningful engagement with the media. As a result, the airwaves are exclusively appropriated by governments, their organizations, money bags, business groups and big social institutions. They remain the only actors that have easy access to the expensive airwaves thus further widening the existing unequal balance of power relations in the society. In fact, even editorial judgment is subordinated to economic determinants. Perhaps, this is why many people are questioning the fate of investigative journalism and the concept of public interest in the new order. This has also raised further questions on the credibility and integrity of the status of state owned broadcast media stations as public broadcast service organizations that are positioned to provide independent social services for democratic sustenance.
The usual defence of managers is that their stations are dangerously and grossly under funded that they need to devise alternative sources of survival. I agree with them. In fact, the penury and poverty in some of the stations are glaringly reflected in the quality and quantity of their services and the intolerable conduct of some of their staff. Today, we have broadcast outfits that ably qualify as epilepsy patients whose standard hours of daily operation/seizure are unknown. They simply operate on the mercy of the PHCN or the availability of a gallon of diesel. I wonder how such weak institutions can command any serious respect among the general population.
Closely related to the funding anemia in these organizations is weak capacity building mechanisms on democratic values through continuous staff development initiatives. The effects of this deficiency are manifested in the conduct and output of the staff at all levels. Unfortunately, broadcasting is one place where hiding one’s intellectual and creative deficiencies may be difficult. The consequences are very glaring to the audiences.
It may also be partially correct to say that many of our media houses are far removed from the global trend. They are poorly equipped to be able to discharge their expected functions of effective coverage, reporting and disseminating value added information for the democratic journey. Their equipment is still largely analogue except for some like the NTA, the new FRCN FM stations and the private outfits.
Many have no internet connectivity, and staff offices are decrepit. Visit some of the newsrooms; they are anything but newsrooms with bare furniture, noisy ceiling fans, possibly worn out dictionaries and old rickety typewriters. The newsrooms hardly portray that they are avenues for serious intellectual endeavors equipped for professionals who are set to expand the frontiers of democracy in Nigeria of the 21st century. In other words, we have digitalized transmission equipment managed and operated by analogue managers and personnel who are still grappling with antiquated gadgets and absence of basic tools; vehicles for movement are in short supply, the alternative power generators are on and off due to overuse, and visible anger and frustration could be read on the faces of the staff each time one comes across them. I wonder how prepared could such media personnel be in addressing the numerous challenges confronting our democratization process.
CONSEQUENCES
The effects of all of these on the contributions of the broadcast media in strengthening the democracy are indeed clear to us. Apart from excluding the generality of the people who are the subjects of the democratization process, they seem to confirm the four perceptions on the broadcast media in the country.
Some of the effects are:
• The general population can loose confidence and trust in the credibility of the broadcast media system to act as watchdogs and platforms for the promotion of democratic values.
• Our people may continue to rely on international broadcast stations for crucial information that affect their lives and nation. Thus, the external media may be determining the local and national agenda instead of the reverse. This could lead to serious consequences for the nation.
• New forms of information disseminations techniques like the Internet and GSM will render non-reforming media outfits obsolete and non reliable, thus irrelevant in the democratization process.
• The potential strength and centrality of the broadcast media are severely undermined by the visible absence of diversity, accessibility, courage and relevance in promoting the democratic process.
THE WAY FORWARD
Broadcasting is too critical to be ignored in the democratization process. In fact, it is often argued that the quality and freedom in our broadcasting speak volumes about the quality of our democratic status. For instance, the seriousness and tolerance level in the system can be measured by the behaviour of its broadcasting media.
To this end, I wish to suggest the following for the positive consideration of our broadcast media stations.
• Be guided by the principle of social responsibility, i.e inclusivity, fairness and balance in the handling of political coverages.
• Build the knowledge of all staff to know the Constitution, the Electoral Law, NBC Code on Broadcasting, the Professional Code of Ethics, etc.
• Promote the principles of public involvement in programme planning and production.
• Emphasize and promote public interests, issue based programming, and institutional strengthening instead of personalities and personal activities.
• Stations need to develop Strategic Plans on promoting democratic values through behaviour change oriented programmes targeted at the different segments of the population.
• Strengthen individual media organizations’ capacity in investigative journalism within a democratic context.
• We need to encourage the emergence of strong civil society/pressure groups that will monitor the performance of the various media outlets.
• Stations should work towards changing the mindsets of our politicians and the general population on negative attitudes like money politics, political vandalism and rascality, etc.
• We urge the FGN to urgently release the policy on community broadcasting to further deregulate and liberalize the broadcast industry. This will facilitate the growth of cheaper and people oriented community radio stations all over the country.
• Let media houses temper their commercialization regimes with mercy. It has remained a big disqualifier for the majority of people to partake in the airwaves.
• We appeal to all governments and private media owners to promote enabling working environment through the guaranteeing of operational freedom and provision of adequate resources for optimal operations.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
BROADCAST MEDIA AND DEMOCRACY
THE BROADCAST MEDIA AND SUSTAINABLE DEMOCRACY
IN NIGERIA: ISSUES AND CHALLENGES
By
Bello Madaki Beli
Introduction
It has been established that there is a very strong relationship between media performance and the conduct and vibrancy of politics and political activities in democracies. It is often said that in democracies, “the media have a complex relationship with sources of power and the political system” (McQuail, 2005). Both politics and the media have the singular aim of promoting the individual and collective interests of the general society.
Thus, while politics serves as a route and means of uplifting the society through good governance, protection and advancement of people’s rights, and the creation of an enabling environment for democracy to thrive; the media on their part operate within the prevailing environment to engage in the public sphere thereby expanding the frontiers of freedom and enabling the citizens to have access to quality information that will influence their judgments and decisions for sustainable democracy. Stated differently, the media in a democratic context “distribute entitlements to speak and to be heard”, even if unevenly (Keane, 1993).
From the foregoing, it is clear that the existence of a vibrant media system is quite fundamental to the enthronement and sustenance of a credible democratic process in a setting like Nigeria. As one scholar had argued:
A responsible nationwide democratic system requires a media system which is coterminous with it and which can generate discussion of issues of public concern in a way which does not favour partisan interests; whether these be the interests of particular political parties, the interests of media bosses or media professionals (Boyd Barrett, 2001).
In Nigeria, the performance of the mass media in the democratic process at various phases of our history has been well documented (Omu, 1978; Ogbondah, 1994; Yusuf, 2001 and Nwosu, 2003). Arguably, the mass media have remained in the forefront in the struggle to promote the rights of our people through a credible democratization process. After all, the media too find it quite difficult to operate in a non democratic environment. However, this is not to suggest that the media have been perfect in all circumstances. They have been severely criticized for complicity in truncating and subverting the democratic process at various times. For instance, Enahoro once observed that “whoever and whatever ruined the first republic did so with the active connivance and collaboration of the greater part of the Nigerian press”. Similarly, James (1984) had decried the high degree of professional rascality exhibited by the media during the second republic as manifested through “character assassination, false accusations, blackmail and misrepresentation of facts ….. to the extent that facts were muzzled and whole media organs became megaphones and machineries of propaganda to political parties and vested interests to the extent that the unity of this country was shaken to its very foundation”. Several other writers and scholars have expressed similar opinions (Pate, 2003; and Akinfeleye, 2004).
However, irrespective of such hard assessments, the basis of our argument is that the media are part as well as facilitators of the public sphere described as the “distinctive discursive space within which individuals combine to assume the role of a politically powerful force “(Ernst, 1998). It is our contention in this paper that the Nigerian media, particularly the broadcasting channels with their advantages of reach, cost, timeliness, and acceptability have played and will continue to perform critical functions in the promotion of a sustainable democratic system in the country. Thus, in this presentation, we shall examine the issues involved, some of the challenges and the way forward in the relationship between the broadcast media and the strengthening of a viable democracy in Nigeria.
OUR DEMOCRACY
Democracy as a system of government thrives on constitutionality, citizens’ participation, respect for the rule of law, delivery of services and the advancement and protection of individual and collective freedom. These elements are the fundamental pillars that differentiate democracy from other forms of governance. Indeed, the “essence of democracy is that citizens must be able to ventilate their views through unrestrained debates and that there should be active citizens’ participation in governance as well as unrestricted communication between the government and the governed” (IDEA, 2001).
Here in Nigeria, we have embraced the democratic option for the greater development of our people and nation. With it came the enthronement of the democratic process characterized by the existence of the three arms of government, regular elections, increased citizen’s participation in public affairs, founding of democratic structures like political parties and an active civil society sector, among others. However, this is not to suggest that the present democratic experimentation is totally healthy. Many of us believe that the system can do better in terms of enlarging citizen’s participation in governance and the respect for individual and collective rights through service delivery, free and fair elections, accountability and respect for due process.
Perhaps, the deficits experienced in our young democratic system can be attributed to two separate but inextricably linked factors. These are the prolonged militarization of the polity and the poor and low level of the people’s political education and consciousness.
For the period Nigerians lived under military rule, the psyche of the political elite and the general population has been infected with the militarist and regimented culture of arbitrariness characterized by executive fiat, absence of accountability and wanton disregard for the will of the people. Equally, the general population tended to be subdued into silence, resignation and apathy, appearing disabled to query the unacceptable state of affairs in some quarters within the system. Negative acts of political misbehaviors eloquently manifested in electoral malpractices, tyrannical attitudes, bad governance, disregard for the rule of law, massive stealing of public resources, increased deprivations, personal appropriation of state power, and gross ineptitude by elected officials seem to combine with debilitating poverty to overwhelm the general population that they can do nothing other than to raise their hands in supplication to the Almighty Allah for solution. Indeed, the democratic space is increasingly being demonized by its immediate beneficiaries, the politicians.
In the present situation, what should be the role of the broadcast media to ensure that the democratic ship sails through the rough seas successfully?
THE BROADCAST MEDIA IN OUR DEMOCRACY
The driving force of the democratic engine is vibrant politicking based on principles, plurality of ideas, electoral discipline, diversity of audiences and respect for law and order. Thus, one can safely say that politics is the heartbeat of democracy. Simply put, politics is about power--the struggle to possess, use and retain same. It affects everyone and everything in the society.
On the other hand, the broadcast media are the channels of mass communication like radio and television that are actively engaged in the gathering, analyzing and disseminating issues of and about politics. Politics is very important in the lives of the people and the democratic process. Because of this centrality, the media justifiably focus their attention, in fact accord high priority on the government and those in it. In the process, the media are partly expected to expose and criticize bureaucratic incompetence, dictatorial tendencies and abuse of power among officials. In the words of Curran and Seaton (1994), the media become an agency through which citizens reconstitute themselves to exercise informal supervision over the state.
In fact, the 1999 Nigerian Constitution is clear on its assigned role to the media in the polity. In section 22, it says that “the press radio, television and other agencies of the mass media shall at all times be free to uphold the fundamental objectives contained in this chapter and uphold the responsibility and accountability of the government to the people”. Thus, the Constitution has legitimated the functions of the media and imposed on them the role of monitoring and evaluating the performance of our leaders at all levels. The extent to which the broadcast media actualize this Constitutional provision in their functions is another issue.
As indicated earlier, the broadcast media are generally engaged in active political reporting. I believe that political reporting is necessary for the sustenance of democracy where the system of checks and balances is required for good governance and democratic sustainability. It affords the media the opportunity to provide an open forum for “legitimated interest groups” to participate in public affairs. Indeed, as Nimmo and Combs (1992) put it, “historically, the mass media were heralded as the ultimate instruments of democracy … (They) were destined to unite, educate, and as a result, improve the actions and decisions of the polity”.
Furthermore, if we operationally consider the functions of the broadcast media in the country, we may realize that they are very important in conveying the messages of politicians and political office holders in their bid to capture and retain power particularly during electioneering periods. In the words of the one time Director General of the FRCN and later NTA, Mohammed Ibrahim, “the objective of politics on radio and television is essentially to sensitize the public to the significant nature of their decision, so that they can make the right choice in giving the country the government it desires”. In a simplified form, the media supply the electorate with the right information for sound political judgment.
Equally, the broadcast media, depending on how they use their powers, can “order and structure political reality, allotting events greater or lesser significance according to their presence or absence on the media agenda (McNair, 2000). This is where the issue of opinion polling or vox populi comes in. For instance, recently, the LEADERSHIP Newspaper (Feb.27, 2007) reported the result of an opinion poll it commissioned on “What Issue Will Most Likely Influence Who You Vote for in the April Polls”. The result showed that Nigerians are likely to vote on the basis of: Anti Corruption 40.38%, Security 21.79%, Unemployment 10.90%, Economy 14.10%, Education 8.97%, and Health care 3.85%. Through such mechanisms, the broadcast media too can play significant role in determining the agenda for elections and other policy issues. To an extent, we can say that broadcast channels in the nation are fairly doing that,
even if at a low and unorganized manner.
PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF BROADCASTING
The acceptance of messages that emanate from the broadcast media largely depend on their perception by the general audience.
Currently, one can easily summarize the general perceptions into four categories. First, broadcast media stations particularly sate government owned are hardly objective in matters that involve their states and their ruling political parties.
Secondly, foreign broadcast stations are seen as more reliable in providing credible information about events and personalities in the country. Thirdly, the resource poor, the rural majority and the female gender are peripherally involved in broadcasting. They are treated merely as receivers than partners in the entire process.
And, fourthly the current commercialization of society has deeply eaten into the broadcast media thereby severely restricting access by the public and subverting the ideals of news, killing the spirit of investigative journalism, and devaluing the content of programmes and news on radio and television stations. These four observations, contentious as they may sound, have implications on the ability of the broadcast media to meaningfully influence the democratic agenda in the nation.
Based on the above premises, one can then conclude that our broadcast media houses have a long way to go for them to be positively perceived as involving all segments of society, based on the principles of inclusivity, diversity, transparency, autonomy and accountability in their desire to build a broad based national democratic process.
CHALLENGES
While the media in Nigeria may want to play their constructive role in instituting democratic values and strengthening the democratic process, we must also acknowledge some of the major challenges confronting them both individually and collectively. Some of the weaknesses are internally generated while others are beyond their borders.
The greatest challenge to the effective performance of the broadcast media and indeed Nigeria in its bid to strengthen the democratic process is the political behaviour of politicians especially those in government, particularly at state levels irrespective of political party affiliation. The non tolerant behaviour of politicians to alternative views or options in the present dispensation is frightening and threatening to broadcasting and democratic values. In fact, one can argue that while we have happily embraced democracy, our politicians have shown that they are unwilling or incapable of imbibing the tenets of democratization, two of which are tolerance and allowance of freedom to dissent.
Unfortunately, what we see today is the crude emasculation and physical strangulation of the alternative voice by ruling politicians. There are hardly any exceptions. Elsewhere, I had once observed that:
The unwritten rule nowadays is that the Oga and his team members are always right, their achievements, no matter how mean, unsurpassable and the state will collapse without them. Any view outside this framework is abominable, condemnable, punishable and not to be broadcast. Woe betides whoever that holds or dares to express contrary opinion. Such a fellow is berated, political hustlers are sponsored to reply him in the most uncouth of languages, and media managers are rattled and in worst cases dethroned. Thus, in such a climate, members of the general public maintain sealed lips and broadcast houses become exceptionally selective on who to feature on their airwaves. Sycophantic elements rule the airwaves, honest citizens recoil into their shells and democratic ebullience takes flight. A culture of resignation, despondency and fear predominates. Democratic values decline and society degenerates.
Equally, corruption and corrupt activities of officials and business groups have remained cogs in the wheel of the nation’s democratization progress. Ideally, the broadcast media through investigative journalism should be able to expose some of the scams. Unfortunately, a combination of factors has rendered them largely ineffective in this direction.
Arguably, in Nigeria today, the military may not be regarded as immediate serious threats to the democratic process in the country. Rather, the destruction of existing structural public institutions, abuse of procedures and regulations, undemocratic tendencies, massive stealing of public resources, insensitive, non-principled and desperate conduct of politicians, and the personalization of state power coupled with the rising level of public frustration are the poisonous arrows that may cripple our young democracy. For instance, the EFFC Chairman had revealed recently on the NTA ‘One—on—One” Programme (Feb.23, 2007) that the Commission had in the last two to three years confiscated over N90 Billion (USD 700 Million) of stolen monies from government functionaries who are mostly elected officials.
Equally, the Commission had reported the misuse or diversion of over N1.6 Trillion meant for the local governments in six states since 1999. There are many more sickening reports of this nature.
But, how have the broadcast media been performing in opening up some of these cans of worms? The scorecard may not read well compared to the public expectations
It is in this regard that one must encourage the broadcast stations to be bold enough to investigate some of the claims made by officials as their achievements. Stations should not simply collect money and broadcast dubious claims that have been perfected as conduits for the siphoning of public resources; they must find out the validity, costs and relevance of the claims.
The extent to which our broadcast stations scrutinize the quality of intending contestants, their manifestoes and their fulfilled promises is also weak. Our stations need to develop mechanisms that could gather the manifestoes of office seekers and evaluate the extent to which such manifestoes have been implemented .This is one way by the public can be assisted to differentiate the performing from non performing leaders who should be rejected or booted out of office.
But for all this to happen, individual media houses themselves must be seen to be well informed on the meaning and essence of the on-going democratization reform. To this end, democratic values should be seen to be reflected in their public relations, programme content and professional conduct. Credible feedback mechanisms and standard public opinion monitoring systems should be institutionalized to properly inform and guide programming pattern and content. After all, they cannot offer what they do not understand or practice. Otherwise, many of the stations may be reformed out of business. A media house is a change institution whose management requires dynamic in-flow of innovation, creativity, drive and energy to keep pace with contemporary democratic challenges in the society.
Another critical factor that undermines the function of the broadcasting media is the blanket implementation of the commercialization policy which automatically disables the majority of the people from any form of involvement in the airwaves. The high charges demanded by the various stations for almost everything disqualifies most people and sectors from any kind of meaningful engagement with the media. As a result, the airwaves are exclusively appropriated by governments, their organizations, money bags, business groups and big social institutions. They remain the only actors that have easy access to the expensive airwaves thus further widening the existing unequal balance of power relations in the society. In fact, even editorial judgment is subordinated to economic determinants. Perhaps, this is why many people are questioning the fate of investigative journalism and the concept of public interest in the new order. This has also raised further questions on the credibility and integrity of the status of state owned broadcast media stations as public broadcast service organizations that are positioned to provide independent social services for democratic sustenance.
The usual defence of managers is that their stations are dangerously and grossly under funded that they need to devise alternative sources of survival. I agree with them. In fact, the penury and poverty in some of the stations are glaringly reflected in the quality and quantity of their services and the intolerable conduct of some of their staff. Today, we have broadcast outfits that ably qualify as epilepsy patients whose standard hours of daily operation/seizure are unknown. They simply operate on the mercy of the PHCN or the availability of a gallon of diesel. I wonder how such weak institutions can command any serious respect among the general population.
Closely related to the funding anemia in these organizations is weak capacity building mechanisms on democratic values through continuous staff development initiatives. The effects of this deficiency are manifested in the conduct and output of the staff at all levels. Unfortunately, broadcasting is one place where hiding one’s intellectual and creative deficiencies may be difficult. The consequences are very glaring to the audiences.
It may also be partially correct to say that many of our media houses are far removed from the global trend. They are poorly equipped to be able to discharge their expected functions of effective coverage, reporting and disseminating value added information for the democratic journey. Their equipment is still largely analogue except for some like the NTA, the new FRCN FM stations and the private outfits.
Many have no internet connectivity, and staff offices are decrepit. Visit some of the newsrooms; they are anything but newsrooms with bare furniture, noisy ceiling fans, possibly worn out dictionaries and old rickety typewriters. The newsrooms hardly portray that they are avenues for serious intellectual endeavors equipped for professionals who are set to expand the frontiers of democracy in Nigeria of the 21st century. In other words, we have digitalized transmission equipment managed and operated by analogue managers and personnel who are still grappling with antiquated gadgets and absence of basic tools; vehicles for movement are in short supply, the alternative power generators are on and off due to overuse, and visible anger and frustration could be read on the faces of the staff each time one comes across them. I wonder how prepared could such media personnel be in addressing the numerous challenges confronting our democratization process.
CONSEQUENCES
The effects of all of these on the contributions of the broadcast media in strengthening the democracy are indeed clear to us. Apart from excluding the generality of the people who are the subjects of the democratization process, they seem to confirm the four perceptions on the broadcast media in the country.
Some of the effects are:
• The general population can loose confidence and trust in the credibility of the broadcast media system to act as watchdogs and platforms for the promotion of democratic values.
• Our people may continue to rely on international broadcast stations for crucial information that affect their lives and nation. Thus, the external media may be determining the local and national agenda instead of the reverse. This could lead to serious consequences for the nation.
• New forms of information disseminations techniques like the Internet and GSM will render non-reforming media outfits obsolete and non reliable, thus irrelevant in the democratization process.
• The potential strength and centrality of the broadcast media are severely undermined by the visible absence of diversity, accessibility, courage and relevance in promoting the democratic process.
THE WAY FORWARD
Broadcasting is too critical to be ignored in the democratization process. In fact, it is often argued that the quality and freedom in our broadcasting speak volumes about the quality of our democratic status. For instance, the seriousness and tolerance level in the system can be measured by the behaviour of its broadcasting media.
To this end, I wish to suggest the following for the positive consideration of our broadcast media stations.
• Be guided by the principle of social responsibility, i.e inclusivity, fairness and balance in the handling of political coverages.
• Build the knowledge of all staff to know the Constitution, the Electoral Law, NBC Code on Broadcasting, the Professional Code of Ethics, etc.
• Promote the principles of public involvement in programme planning and production.
• Emphasize and promote public interests, issue based programming, and institutional strengthening instead of personalities and personal activities.
• Stations need to develop Strategic Plans on promoting democratic values through behaviour change oriented programmes targeted at the different segments of the population.
• Strengthen individual media organizations’ capacity in investigative journalism within a democratic context.
• We need to encourage the emergence of strong civil society/pressure groups that will monitor the performance of the various media outlets.
• Stations should work towards changing the mindsets of our politicians and the general population on negative attitudes like money politics, political vandalism and rascality, etc.
• We urge the FGN to urgently release the policy on community broadcasting to further deregulate and liberalize the broadcast industry. This will facilitate the growth of cheaper and people oriented community radio stations all over the country.
• Let media houses temper their commercialization regimes with mercy. It has remained a big disqualifier for the majority of people to partake in the airwaves.
• We appeal to all governments and private media owners to promote enabling working environment through the guaranteeing of operational freedom and provision of adequate resources for optimal operations.
IN NIGERIA: ISSUES AND CHALLENGES
By
Bello Madaki Beli
Introduction
It has been established that there is a very strong relationship between media performance and the conduct and vibrancy of politics and political activities in democracies. It is often said that in democracies, “the media have a complex relationship with sources of power and the political system” (McQuail, 2005). Both politics and the media have the singular aim of promoting the individual and collective interests of the general society.
Thus, while politics serves as a route and means of uplifting the society through good governance, protection and advancement of people’s rights, and the creation of an enabling environment for democracy to thrive; the media on their part operate within the prevailing environment to engage in the public sphere thereby expanding the frontiers of freedom and enabling the citizens to have access to quality information that will influence their judgments and decisions for sustainable democracy. Stated differently, the media in a democratic context “distribute entitlements to speak and to be heard”, even if unevenly (Keane, 1993).
From the foregoing, it is clear that the existence of a vibrant media system is quite fundamental to the enthronement and sustenance of a credible democratic process in a setting like Nigeria. As one scholar had argued:
A responsible nationwide democratic system requires a media system which is coterminous with it and which can generate discussion of issues of public concern in a way which does not favour partisan interests; whether these be the interests of particular political parties, the interests of media bosses or media professionals (Boyd Barrett, 2001).
In Nigeria, the performance of the mass media in the democratic process at various phases of our history has been well documented (Omu, 1978; Ogbondah, 1994; Yusuf, 2001 and Nwosu, 2003). Arguably, the mass media have remained in the forefront in the struggle to promote the rights of our people through a credible democratization process. After all, the media too find it quite difficult to operate in a non democratic environment. However, this is not to suggest that the media have been perfect in all circumstances. They have been severely criticized for complicity in truncating and subverting the democratic process at various times. For instance, Enahoro once observed that “whoever and whatever ruined the first republic did so with the active connivance and collaboration of the greater part of the Nigerian press”. Similarly, James (1984) had decried the high degree of professional rascality exhibited by the media during the second republic as manifested through “character assassination, false accusations, blackmail and misrepresentation of facts ….. to the extent that facts were muzzled and whole media organs became megaphones and machineries of propaganda to political parties and vested interests to the extent that the unity of this country was shaken to its very foundation”. Several other writers and scholars have expressed similar opinions (Pate, 2003; and Akinfeleye, 2004).
However, irrespective of such hard assessments, the basis of our argument is that the media are part as well as facilitators of the public sphere described as the “distinctive discursive space within which individuals combine to assume the role of a politically powerful force “(Ernst, 1998). It is our contention in this paper that the Nigerian media, particularly the broadcasting channels with their advantages of reach, cost, timeliness, and acceptability have played and will continue to perform critical functions in the promotion of a sustainable democratic system in the country. Thus, in this presentation, we shall examine the issues involved, some of the challenges and the way forward in the relationship between the broadcast media and the strengthening of a viable democracy in Nigeria.
OUR DEMOCRACY
Democracy as a system of government thrives on constitutionality, citizens’ participation, respect for the rule of law, delivery of services and the advancement and protection of individual and collective freedom. These elements are the fundamental pillars that differentiate democracy from other forms of governance. Indeed, the “essence of democracy is that citizens must be able to ventilate their views through unrestrained debates and that there should be active citizens’ participation in governance as well as unrestricted communication between the government and the governed” (IDEA, 2001).
Here in Nigeria, we have embraced the democratic option for the greater development of our people and nation. With it came the enthronement of the democratic process characterized by the existence of the three arms of government, regular elections, increased citizen’s participation in public affairs, founding of democratic structures like political parties and an active civil society sector, among others. However, this is not to suggest that the present democratic experimentation is totally healthy. Many of us believe that the system can do better in terms of enlarging citizen’s participation in governance and the respect for individual and collective rights through service delivery, free and fair elections, accountability and respect for due process.
Perhaps, the deficits experienced in our young democratic system can be attributed to two separate but inextricably linked factors. These are the prolonged militarization of the polity and the poor and low level of the people’s political education and consciousness.
For the period Nigerians lived under military rule, the psyche of the political elite and the general population has been infected with the militarist and regimented culture of arbitrariness characterized by executive fiat, absence of accountability and wanton disregard for the will of the people. Equally, the general population tended to be subdued into silence, resignation and apathy, appearing disabled to query the unacceptable state of affairs in some quarters within the system. Negative acts of political misbehaviors eloquently manifested in electoral malpractices, tyrannical attitudes, bad governance, disregard for the rule of law, massive stealing of public resources, increased deprivations, personal appropriation of state power, and gross ineptitude by elected officials seem to combine with debilitating poverty to overwhelm the general population that they can do nothing other than to raise their hands in supplication to the Almighty Allah for solution. Indeed, the democratic space is increasingly being demonized by its immediate beneficiaries, the politicians.
In the present situation, what should be the role of the broadcast media to ensure that the democratic ship sails through the rough seas successfully?
THE BROADCAST MEDIA IN OUR DEMOCRACY
The driving force of the democratic engine is vibrant politicking based on principles, plurality of ideas, electoral discipline, diversity of audiences and respect for law and order. Thus, one can safely say that politics is the heartbeat of democracy. Simply put, politics is about power--the struggle to possess, use and retain same. It affects everyone and everything in the society.
On the other hand, the broadcast media are the channels of mass communication like radio and television that are actively engaged in the gathering, analyzing and disseminating issues of and about politics. Politics is very important in the lives of the people and the democratic process. Because of this centrality, the media justifiably focus their attention, in fact accord high priority on the government and those in it. In the process, the media are partly expected to expose and criticize bureaucratic incompetence, dictatorial tendencies and abuse of power among officials. In the words of Curran and Seaton (1994), the media become an agency through which citizens reconstitute themselves to exercise informal supervision over the state.
In fact, the 1999 Nigerian Constitution is clear on its assigned role to the media in the polity. In section 22, it says that “the press radio, television and other agencies of the mass media shall at all times be free to uphold the fundamental objectives contained in this chapter and uphold the responsibility and accountability of the government to the people”. Thus, the Constitution has legitimated the functions of the media and imposed on them the role of monitoring and evaluating the performance of our leaders at all levels. The extent to which the broadcast media actualize this Constitutional provision in their functions is another issue.
As indicated earlier, the broadcast media are generally engaged in active political reporting. I believe that political reporting is necessary for the sustenance of democracy where the system of checks and balances is required for good governance and democratic sustainability. It affords the media the opportunity to provide an open forum for “legitimated interest groups” to participate in public affairs. Indeed, as Nimmo and Combs (1992) put it, “historically, the mass media were heralded as the ultimate instruments of democracy … (They) were destined to unite, educate, and as a result, improve the actions and decisions of the polity”.
Furthermore, if we operationally consider the functions of the broadcast media in the country, we may realize that they are very important in conveying the messages of politicians and political office holders in their bid to capture and retain power particularly during electioneering periods. In the words of the one time Director General of the FRCN and later NTA, Mohammed Ibrahim, “the objective of politics on radio and television is essentially to sensitize the public to the significant nature of their decision, so that they can make the right choice in giving the country the government it desires”. In a simplified form, the media supply the electorate with the right information for sound political judgment.
Equally, the broadcast media, depending on how they use their powers, can “order and structure political reality, allotting events greater or lesser significance according to their presence or absence on the media agenda (McNair, 2000). This is where the issue of opinion polling or vox populi comes in. For instance, recently, the LEADERSHIP Newspaper (Feb.27, 2007) reported the result of an opinion poll it commissioned on “What Issue Will Most Likely Influence Who You Vote for in the April Polls”. The result showed that Nigerians are likely to vote on the basis of: Anti Corruption 40.38%, Security 21.79%, Unemployment 10.90%, Economy 14.10%, Education 8.97%, and Health care 3.85%. Through such mechanisms, the broadcast media too can play significant role in determining the agenda for elections and other policy issues. To an extent, we can say that broadcast channels in the nation are fairly doing that,
even if at a low and unorganized manner.
PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF BROADCASTING
The acceptance of messages that emanate from the broadcast media largely depend on their perception by the general audience.
Currently, one can easily summarize the general perceptions into four categories. First, broadcast media stations particularly sate government owned are hardly objective in matters that involve their states and their ruling political parties.
Secondly, foreign broadcast stations are seen as more reliable in providing credible information about events and personalities in the country. Thirdly, the resource poor, the rural majority and the female gender are peripherally involved in broadcasting. They are treated merely as receivers than partners in the entire process.
And, fourthly the current commercialization of society has deeply eaten into the broadcast media thereby severely restricting access by the public and subverting the ideals of news, killing the spirit of investigative journalism, and devaluing the content of programmes and news on radio and television stations. These four observations, contentious as they may sound, have implications on the ability of the broadcast media to meaningfully influence the democratic agenda in the nation.
Based on the above premises, one can then conclude that our broadcast media houses have a long way to go for them to be positively perceived as involving all segments of society, based on the principles of inclusivity, diversity, transparency, autonomy and accountability in their desire to build a broad based national democratic process.
CHALLENGES
While the media in Nigeria may want to play their constructive role in instituting democratic values and strengthening the democratic process, we must also acknowledge some of the major challenges confronting them both individually and collectively. Some of the weaknesses are internally generated while others are beyond their borders.
The greatest challenge to the effective performance of the broadcast media and indeed Nigeria in its bid to strengthen the democratic process is the political behaviour of politicians especially those in government, particularly at state levels irrespective of political party affiliation. The non tolerant behaviour of politicians to alternative views or options in the present dispensation is frightening and threatening to broadcasting and democratic values. In fact, one can argue that while we have happily embraced democracy, our politicians have shown that they are unwilling or incapable of imbibing the tenets of democratization, two of which are tolerance and allowance of freedom to dissent.
Unfortunately, what we see today is the crude emasculation and physical strangulation of the alternative voice by ruling politicians. There are hardly any exceptions. Elsewhere, I had once observed that:
The unwritten rule nowadays is that the Oga and his team members are always right, their achievements, no matter how mean, unsurpassable and the state will collapse without them. Any view outside this framework is abominable, condemnable, punishable and not to be broadcast. Woe betides whoever that holds or dares to express contrary opinion. Such a fellow is berated, political hustlers are sponsored to reply him in the most uncouth of languages, and media managers are rattled and in worst cases dethroned. Thus, in such a climate, members of the general public maintain sealed lips and broadcast houses become exceptionally selective on who to feature on their airwaves. Sycophantic elements rule the airwaves, honest citizens recoil into their shells and democratic ebullience takes flight. A culture of resignation, despondency and fear predominates. Democratic values decline and society degenerates.
Equally, corruption and corrupt activities of officials and business groups have remained cogs in the wheel of the nation’s democratization progress. Ideally, the broadcast media through investigative journalism should be able to expose some of the scams. Unfortunately, a combination of factors has rendered them largely ineffective in this direction.
Arguably, in Nigeria today, the military may not be regarded as immediate serious threats to the democratic process in the country. Rather, the destruction of existing structural public institutions, abuse of procedures and regulations, undemocratic tendencies, massive stealing of public resources, insensitive, non-principled and desperate conduct of politicians, and the personalization of state power coupled with the rising level of public frustration are the poisonous arrows that may cripple our young democracy. For instance, the EFFC Chairman had revealed recently on the NTA ‘One—on—One” Programme (Feb.23, 2007) that the Commission had in the last two to three years confiscated over N90 Billion (USD 700 Million) of stolen monies from government functionaries who are mostly elected officials.
Equally, the Commission had reported the misuse or diversion of over N1.6 Trillion meant for the local governments in six states since 1999. There are many more sickening reports of this nature.
But, how have the broadcast media been performing in opening up some of these cans of worms? The scorecard may not read well compared to the public expectations
It is in this regard that one must encourage the broadcast stations to be bold enough to investigate some of the claims made by officials as their achievements. Stations should not simply collect money and broadcast dubious claims that have been perfected as conduits for the siphoning of public resources; they must find out the validity, costs and relevance of the claims.
The extent to which our broadcast stations scrutinize the quality of intending contestants, their manifestoes and their fulfilled promises is also weak. Our stations need to develop mechanisms that could gather the manifestoes of office seekers and evaluate the extent to which such manifestoes have been implemented .This is one way by the public can be assisted to differentiate the performing from non performing leaders who should be rejected or booted out of office.
But for all this to happen, individual media houses themselves must be seen to be well informed on the meaning and essence of the on-going democratization reform. To this end, democratic values should be seen to be reflected in their public relations, programme content and professional conduct. Credible feedback mechanisms and standard public opinion monitoring systems should be institutionalized to properly inform and guide programming pattern and content. After all, they cannot offer what they do not understand or practice. Otherwise, many of the stations may be reformed out of business. A media house is a change institution whose management requires dynamic in-flow of innovation, creativity, drive and energy to keep pace with contemporary democratic challenges in the society.
Another critical factor that undermines the function of the broadcasting media is the blanket implementation of the commercialization policy which automatically disables the majority of the people from any form of involvement in the airwaves. The high charges demanded by the various stations for almost everything disqualifies most people and sectors from any kind of meaningful engagement with the media. As a result, the airwaves are exclusively appropriated by governments, their organizations, money bags, business groups and big social institutions. They remain the only actors that have easy access to the expensive airwaves thus further widening the existing unequal balance of power relations in the society. In fact, even editorial judgment is subordinated to economic determinants. Perhaps, this is why many people are questioning the fate of investigative journalism and the concept of public interest in the new order. This has also raised further questions on the credibility and integrity of the status of state owned broadcast media stations as public broadcast service organizations that are positioned to provide independent social services for democratic sustenance.
The usual defence of managers is that their stations are dangerously and grossly under funded that they need to devise alternative sources of survival. I agree with them. In fact, the penury and poverty in some of the stations are glaringly reflected in the quality and quantity of their services and the intolerable conduct of some of their staff. Today, we have broadcast outfits that ably qualify as epilepsy patients whose standard hours of daily operation/seizure are unknown. They simply operate on the mercy of the PHCN or the availability of a gallon of diesel. I wonder how such weak institutions can command any serious respect among the general population.
Closely related to the funding anemia in these organizations is weak capacity building mechanisms on democratic values through continuous staff development initiatives. The effects of this deficiency are manifested in the conduct and output of the staff at all levels. Unfortunately, broadcasting is one place where hiding one’s intellectual and creative deficiencies may be difficult. The consequences are very glaring to the audiences.
It may also be partially correct to say that many of our media houses are far removed from the global trend. They are poorly equipped to be able to discharge their expected functions of effective coverage, reporting and disseminating value added information for the democratic journey. Their equipment is still largely analogue except for some like the NTA, the new FRCN FM stations and the private outfits.
Many have no internet connectivity, and staff offices are decrepit. Visit some of the newsrooms; they are anything but newsrooms with bare furniture, noisy ceiling fans, possibly worn out dictionaries and old rickety typewriters. The newsrooms hardly portray that they are avenues for serious intellectual endeavors equipped for professionals who are set to expand the frontiers of democracy in Nigeria of the 21st century. In other words, we have digitalized transmission equipment managed and operated by analogue managers and personnel who are still grappling with antiquated gadgets and absence of basic tools; vehicles for movement are in short supply, the alternative power generators are on and off due to overuse, and visible anger and frustration could be read on the faces of the staff each time one comes across them. I wonder how prepared could such media personnel be in addressing the numerous challenges confronting our democratization process.
CONSEQUENCES
The effects of all of these on the contributions of the broadcast media in strengthening the democracy are indeed clear to us. Apart from excluding the generality of the people who are the subjects of the democratization process, they seem to confirm the four perceptions on the broadcast media in the country.
Some of the effects are:
• The general population can loose confidence and trust in the credibility of the broadcast media system to act as watchdogs and platforms for the promotion of democratic values.
• Our people may continue to rely on international broadcast stations for crucial information that affect their lives and nation. Thus, the external media may be determining the local and national agenda instead of the reverse. This could lead to serious consequences for the nation.
• New forms of information disseminations techniques like the Internet and GSM will render non-reforming media outfits obsolete and non reliable, thus irrelevant in the democratization process.
• The potential strength and centrality of the broadcast media are severely undermined by the visible absence of diversity, accessibility, courage and relevance in promoting the democratic process.
THE WAY FORWARD
Broadcasting is too critical to be ignored in the democratization process. In fact, it is often argued that the quality and freedom in our broadcasting speak volumes about the quality of our democratic status. For instance, the seriousness and tolerance level in the system can be measured by the behaviour of its broadcasting media.
To this end, I wish to suggest the following for the positive consideration of our broadcast media stations.
• Be guided by the principle of social responsibility, i.e inclusivity, fairness and balance in the handling of political coverages.
• Build the knowledge of all staff to know the Constitution, the Electoral Law, NBC Code on Broadcasting, the Professional Code of Ethics, etc.
• Promote the principles of public involvement in programme planning and production.
• Emphasize and promote public interests, issue based programming, and institutional strengthening instead of personalities and personal activities.
• Stations need to develop Strategic Plans on promoting democratic values through behaviour change oriented programmes targeted at the different segments of the population.
• Strengthen individual media organizations’ capacity in investigative journalism within a democratic context.
• We need to encourage the emergence of strong civil society/pressure groups that will monitor the performance of the various media outlets.
• Stations should work towards changing the mindsets of our politicians and the general population on negative attitudes like money politics, political vandalism and rascality, etc.
• We urge the FGN to urgently release the policy on community broadcasting to further deregulate and liberalize the broadcast industry. This will facilitate the growth of cheaper and people oriented community radio stations all over the country.
• Let media houses temper their commercialization regimes with mercy. It has remained a big disqualifier for the majority of people to partake in the airwaves.
• We appeal to all governments and private media owners to promote enabling working environment through the guaranteeing of operational freedom and provision of adequate resources for optimal operations.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
BAUCHI STATE: TWO YEARS IN ANOTHER REVERSE GEAR
Preamble:
In 1999, just at the beginning of our nascent democracy when the elected and the electorate were at the learning stage, a write up captioned Bauchi State – two years in a reverse gear was released by some elites who have given us the impression that their criticism was just, honest and sincerely targeted at minimizing wastages and derailing corruption to during Ahmadu Adamu Muazu Administration. Now it’s their turn.
After eight years of democratic experience, the writers of that constructive criticism were chanced to be in public office courtesy of the 2007 general election and people became happy thinking their write up which was based on high principles and democratic ideologies will form the basis of their actions in the new administration.
Unfortunately, the issue of air travel which was the pivotal point of the write up is now repeated at even a wider scale. Most surprisingly, they are always part of the trip now or always there to welcome his Excellency and express their solidarity for the inefficient usage of our resources.
What we are yet to know is weather there are different rates charged between now and then and weather the basic needs which the former write up claims are denied have now been provided. Or are huge discounts obtained since the governor was a former Aviation minister and knows of new strategies to fly with lesser fuel? The resources could have otherwise being used for catering for the basic needs of the state and yet the critiques are busy enjoying flamboyant government gestures whereas the electorates’ condition are continually on the decline.
Political Matters:
The administration came with all zeal of defending its own interest and any alteration to their master plan will be vehemently resisted. This has been testified when a gang of hoodlums beat up a member of the house of Assembly just for indicating his interest in the position of the speaker. When the Mallam called him and he showed no intention of stepping down for the Mallam’s candidate, the Mallam asked his hoodlums to take laws into their own hands and make him conform to the wishes of the Mallam. The hoodlums have been well breeded before campaign and after victory they see no reason why the sayings of the Mallam should not be followed by the member. It took God’s divine intervention to save his life from the lynching of the angry hooligans.
The present speaker now moves with all the arrogance of power and considers himself more important than his coincidental position. He has arrogated the powers of the house to himself and his arrogance knows no bound as he is a strong loyalist of the Mallam and therefore thinks of himself as indispensable. The Mallam should have guided him on the right way if he is a true Mallam and always keep in mind that for the living four years is just like 4 days and remember that many hard core personalities far above your standard have held similar position and are now nowhere to be found. Please be guided!
Expenditure:
The governor who resides in the federal capital territory comes to Bauchi any day he has an official engagement using the most expensive means of transportation; a phenomenon he has been using to criticize his immediate past predecessor. He is a day governor who after assumption of power has not stayed in the state capital for a period of three days consecutively. What mismanagement! Unfortunately, with his current expenses on air traveling, he will spend in four years what his predecessor has not spent in eight years and this alone has convincingly portrayed him as a power monger who was just criticizing the former governor just to get to the hot seat at all costs and at whatever price.
Social Factors:
The issue of the first lady is another issue that poses a great threat to the mal administrative tendencies of the government. The wives of his Excellency are constantly in aggressive competition to outwit one another. Competition is something that should be encouraged in industries, markets and other important economic sectors but not the way our resources are being squandered to run the office of the first lady which contravenes our religious and cultural heritage. This is however due to the inability of his Excellency to put the wives under control and consequently each of the wives is running a separate office under the same name and obtaining maximum support from him so that none of them will be offended thereby wasting resources enough to cater for the damage to the ear drums of the electorate courtesy of the in epileptic blast of siren from the first, second, third, and fourth ladies that never ceases.
His Excellency has proved to the world that he is too much a nice person that can not exercise an effective control over his polygamous home for fear of offending any of his wives including the non – indigene and yet he claims to be improving the standard of living of the people of the state when a non indigenous first lady has brought her entire clan to come and exploit the resources of our state for the benefit of an instrument she calls her husband and his inability to halt that. May our resources be saved!
Employment Opportunities:
The entire state is now run like a traditional palace where appointments are not based on merit or competence but rather on loyalty to his royal highness the Matawalle of Bauchi. His blood brother has been appointed the Chairman of the State Primary Education Board for no any other motive than to mobilize and harmonize corruption in that place to recover his campaign generosity. What a selfish move!
The numerous appointments of the Special and Personal Assistants to the Governor is just done arbitrarily and as things are now only God can determine the portfolios of the SA’s and PA’s. They are randomly appointed and referred to ministries or parastatals and some even go to the extent of demanding for hand over from permanent secretaries. What else will you expect if you are appointed SA courtesy of impressive performance at SARA SUKA.
The character commission is never reflected and Bauchi local government alone has more than 40% of the appointments in a state with 20 local governments.
House of Assembly Jeeps:
When the state government has made maximum recovery of cars from the political figures of the opposition party, it is well believed that the gifts of luxirious cars to political office holders have ended since a Mallam has been voted into power. The Mallam seems to be unaware of the severe sufferings of the masses if such amounts could be expended on cars for house of Assembly members and the electorates have nothing near to it as compensation. In fact this is a situation of monkey dey work baboon dey chop.
The recent was the purchase of new brand Honda popularly known as continue discussion and dash them to the members representing Bauchi state at the house of representative and the senate
The betrayal of trust
The people of Bauchi State have entrusted themselves to him and at the end was them with their blood. The only and unprecedented deputy Governor in the whole nation receive it most. It is in record that the succsee maalam recoerde was largely due to the presence of Garba Gadi as his running mate
Preamble:
In 1999, just at the beginning of our nascent democracy when the elected and the electorate were at the learning stage, a write up captioned Bauchi State – two years in a reverse gear was released by some elites who have given us the impression that their criticism was just, honest and sincerely targeted at minimizing wastages and derailing corruption to during Ahmadu Adamu Muazu Administration. Now it’s their turn.
After eight years of democratic experience, the writers of that constructive criticism were chanced to be in public office courtesy of the 2007 general election and people became happy thinking their write up which was based on high principles and democratic ideologies will form the basis of their actions in the new administration.
Unfortunately, the issue of air travel which was the pivotal point of the write up is now repeated at even a wider scale. Most surprisingly, they are always part of the trip now or always there to welcome his Excellency and express their solidarity for the inefficient usage of our resources.
What we are yet to know is weather there are different rates charged between now and then and weather the basic needs which the former write up claims are denied have now been provided. Or are huge discounts obtained since the governor was a former Aviation minister and knows of new strategies to fly with lesser fuel? The resources could have otherwise being used for catering for the basic needs of the state and yet the critiques are busy enjoying flamboyant government gestures whereas the electorates’ condition are continually on the decline.
Political Matters:
The administration came with all zeal of defending its own interest and any alteration to their master plan will be vehemently resisted. This has been testified when a gang of hoodlums beat up a member of the house of Assembly just for indicating his interest in the position of the speaker. When the Mallam called him and he showed no intention of stepping down for the Mallam’s candidate, the Mallam asked his hoodlums to take laws into their own hands and make him conform to the wishes of the Mallam. The hoodlums have been well breeded before campaign and after victory they see no reason why the sayings of the Mallam should not be followed by the member. It took God’s divine intervention to save his life from the lynching of the angry hooligans.
The present speaker now moves with all the arrogance of power and considers himself more important than his coincidental position. He has arrogated the powers of the house to himself and his arrogance knows no bound as he is a strong loyalist of the Mallam and therefore thinks of himself as indispensable. The Mallam should have guided him on the right way if he is a true Mallam and always keep in mind that for the living four years is just like 4 days and remember that many hard core personalities far above your standard have held similar position and are now nowhere to be found. Please be guided!
Expenditure:
The governor who resides in the federal capital territory comes to Bauchi any day he has an official engagement using the most expensive means of transportation; a phenomenon he has been using to criticize his immediate past predecessor. He is a day governor who after assumption of power has not stayed in the state capital for a period of three days consecutively. What mismanagement! Unfortunately, with his current expenses on air traveling, he will spend in four years what his predecessor has not spent in eight years and this alone has convincingly portrayed him as a power monger who was just criticizing the former governor just to get to the hot seat at all costs and at whatever price.
Social Factors:
The issue of the first lady is another issue that poses a great threat to the mal administrative tendencies of the government. The wives of his Excellency are constantly in aggressive competition to outwit one another. Competition is something that should be encouraged in industries, markets and other important economic sectors but not the way our resources are being squandered to run the office of the first lady which contravenes our religious and cultural heritage. This is however due to the inability of his Excellency to put the wives under control and consequently each of the wives is running a separate office under the same name and obtaining maximum support from him so that none of them will be offended thereby wasting resources enough to cater for the damage to the ear drums of the electorate courtesy of the in epileptic blast of siren from the first, second, third, and fourth ladies that never ceases.
His Excellency has proved to the world that he is too much a nice person that can not exercise an effective control over his polygamous home for fear of offending any of his wives including the non – indigene and yet he claims to be improving the standard of living of the people of the state when a non indigenous first lady has brought her entire clan to come and exploit the resources of our state for the benefit of an instrument she calls her husband and his inability to halt that. May our resources be saved!
Employment Opportunities:
The entire state is now run like a traditional palace where appointments are not based on merit or competence but rather on loyalty to his royal highness the Matawalle of Bauchi. His blood brother has been appointed the Chairman of the State Primary Education Board for no any other motive than to mobilize and harmonize corruption in that place to recover his campaign generosity. What a selfish move!
The numerous appointments of the Special and Personal Assistants to the Governor is just done arbitrarily and as things are now only God can determine the portfolios of the SA’s and PA’s. They are randomly appointed and referred to ministries or parastatals and some even go to the extent of demanding for hand over from permanent secretaries. What else will you expect if you are appointed SA courtesy of impressive performance at SARA SUKA.
The character commission is never reflected and Bauchi local government alone has more than 40% of the appointments in a state with 20 local governments.
House of Assembly Jeeps:
When the state government has made maximum recovery of cars from the political figures of the opposition party, it is well believed that the gifts of luxirious cars to political office holders have ended since a Mallam has been voted into power. The Mallam seems to be unaware of the severe sufferings of the masses if such amounts could be expended on cars for house of Assembly members and the electorates have nothing near to it as compensation. In fact this is a situation of monkey dey work baboon dey chop.
The recent was the purchase of new brand Honda popularly known as continue discussion and dash them to the members representing Bauchi state at the house of representative and the senate
The betrayal of trust
The people of Bauchi State have entrusted themselves to him and at the end was them with their blood. The only and unprecedented deputy Governor in the whole nation receive it most. It is in record that the succsee maalam recoerde was largely due to the presence of Garba Gadi as his running mate
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)