Presidential election: What Atiku got wrong in his campaigns – Prof Akinfeleye

Ralph Akinfeleye is a renowned Professor of Mass Communication at the University of Lagos (UNILAG). He is also the Chairman, Centre of Excellence in Multim-Media/Radio and Television at the university.

In this interview, Prof Akinfeleye, who is the Chairman of the Panel of Assessors at the Nigeria Media Merit Award (NMMA), takes a critical look at the 2019 presidential election campaigns and the role of the media.

He gave a verdict that information overload destroyed the campaign of the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar.

He also pointed out areas where the media did not measure up during the campaigns and offered suggestions for better performance in future elections. Thanks

How would you assess the role of the media in the 2019 general election? Did they measure up to expectations?

Well, in terms of the established communication network, one will say that we didn’t measure up to the level that I will want us to measure. In terms of the social media, they were way ahead of the mainstream media; and that is why I said we were not there. We should be there to be able to tackle some of the fake news that the social media were circulating. So, the communication network in my own judgment was not as rigorous as it should be; that is, most of the network news they brought to us were left-footed. Left-footed in terms of not properly educating the people on how to vote and why we must vote. For instance, there was an argument on whether you vote with your thumbprint, first finger, second finger, third finger or all the fingers. It was on and on and I think it was only one media house that explained that people should vote with the number four finger. Later on, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) said you could thumb print with all the fingers. The issue caused so much confusion and it was the responsibility of the media to guide people in terms of voter education. Then you could see that the ballot paper this year was just like a praying mat. There were too many things to the extent that more votes were disqualified because some people didn’t know where to vote or they thumb printed abnormally. I think INEC should devise another means whereby if they must have over 90 parties, there will be a system whereby the symbols will be very clear and prominent and the space for thumb printing large enough to accommodate the ink.  Also, the media did not also educate the masses when the election was postponed for one week. There was an issue, which the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) was trying to bring up. They were threatening that they would establish what they called Parallel Voting Tabulation (PVT); and PVT in my judgment appears to be something similar to INEC; it’s an illegal INEC. So, if INEC gives figure ‘A’, PVT will give another figure and that would have caused confusion. Probably, that was one of the reasons the election was postponed for one week. INEC may have wanted to make sure that there was nothing like that and if there was something like that how they were going to operate. Now, PDP is confessing that they had access to INEC server and threatening that they will declare themselves winner, which is funny to me. I think the other party has also challenged them to explain how they got access to the server. So, these are couple of things the media should have discussed in-depth and in so doing send early warning signal. Also, the National Orientation Agency (NOA) did not do well. Instead of them to be working with the media, they were working outside the media and that is why people did not know whether they were in existence. It appears to me also that the ownership factor in the media played a role, especially for the television people. The print was not so clear-cut, but on the television it was very clear. When you open a station, for instance AIT, you knew what they were going to say. The same thing was applicable to TVC, Silverbird and Arise, among others. It was only Channels Television that tried to be neutral, but not 100 per cent because of human factors also. So, there is also need to talk to the owners. The owners feel that you must write something about their parties. The other point is I don’t know if the majority of our media people have the revised edition of the Electoral Act. If they do, it appears many of them did not read it. It is better for them to read it very well and interpret it clause by clause so that people can understand what the Act is saying. There is also the need for synergy between media organisations and INEC’s information unit. Mr Festus Okoye was the one doing all the talking. They allowed him to talk rather than go to him and get a press kit where they would be taking information about what is going to happen. Some will say that the media people tried their best; especially those who were sent to hazardous places like Borno, Bauchi, Yobe, Benue, Rivers and Bayelsa states, where there were problems. Well, in terms of neutrality it appears they exhibited more level of neutrality in their coverage. But they need to improve on the intensity and direction of the flow of the information.

Q: Let’s look at the campaigns of the two main parties in the country. Do you think they were truthful and issue based this time or we are still in the era of fake promises?

Politicians by their nature are not 100 per cent honest no matter who the person is. Probably that is part of their deal when they go to the school of politics. They try to take a course on ‘manipulation of the psyche of people’ and all politicians pass it. It’s just like policemen now. It appears to me that in the Police College, there is a seminar called ‘seminar in bribe giving and bribe receiving’ and everybody pass it. So, if you go to Lagos you see policemen trying to take bribe just like their colleagues in Sokoto, Bayelsa and other parts of the country. So, politicians by their nature are not supposed to tell the truth all the time. And they are supposed to modify the truth to manipulate your psyche so that you can believe what is not believable. But it’s the nature of the media to go in-depth to double check whether what they are saying is true or not true. So, politicians by their nature make promises that are lies. Some can even promise to buy air condition and put in your pocket. They promise things that are not possible and lack credibility. In an attempt to do that, many engage in what is called information overload. Information overload in my judgment was part of the thing that really killed Atiku and his campaign. Number one, you have not been elected and you said you will sack the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). The CBN governor has his own constituency also. You have not been there and you said you will sell NNPC. You have not been there and you said you are going to enrich your friends. What kind of statement is that? So, you will not enrich people who are not your friends?

He got to a campaign somewhere in the East and said he was going to complete a road project because of his wife. What happens to other places where you have no wife? He should have said that he would complete the road because of the people who were going to vote for him. These are thing you shouldn’t say even if they are in your mind; get there first. There were many other things. He went to America and it became a campaign talk. Is America going to vote here? That’s not an issue. Whether you went to America or not is not my business; tell us what you are going to do for the people. Then there was a presidential debate. There was a promise and the people publicised the debate very well. Atiku said he was coming from the U.S; he came there and was dressed up properly for the debate and was given the microphone. But he left because he didn’t see President Buhari there. I thought the communication specialist handling Atiku Abubakar did not handle him well. If I were him, that was a moment of opportunity for him to tell the Nigerian people what he has for them in terms of their manifesto; more so there was nobody to contradict him. If I were him, I would have seized the microphone and said, ‘ladies and gentlemen, you can see me; I’m still in my coat. I’m coming from the airport. I’m here because of the love I have for this country and because of the love I have for democracy. Although my other contestant is not here, I will go on with the debate.’ Then he could have said all kinds of things and that would probably have earned him plus one million votes. He goofed by declining to participate because Buhari was not there. Buhari on his own part was very clever. He said he had wanted to participate, but that it clashed with his other engagements and so he couldn’t come. Simple! Why did Atiku come to the place and was saying that because Buhari was not there, he would not participate? Was he contesting for Nigeria or contesting against Buhari? I think they did not manage his communication very well. On the issue of foreign intervention, the media failed in my judgment in trying to interpret the difference between intervention, interference and taking side. It became a serious matter when Governor el-Rufai said that foreigners who try to interfere in Nigeria’s election will go back in body bags. The following day, the president said, ‘well, I warn anybody who wants to snatch ballot boxes to desist. Otherwise, that’s the last time he will do it. I have given the Armed Forces the power to deal with them ruthlessly.’ That was the climax of the whole thing. If you were not going to snatch ballot boxes, that doesn’t concern you, but the opposition took up the matter, including Chief Obasanjo who during his time ordered the Armed Forces to shoot such people on sight. Supporters of the ruling party quickly dug up Obasanjo’s statement and it was everywhere. So, that was information overload for Atiku. Instead of him to keep quiet, he came out to persuade the Chief of Army Staff not to obey the Commander-in-Chief. And the man had to come out and said: ‘I don’t know what kind of Head of State you are going to be when you are asking me to disobey the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces.’ If I were him I wouldn’t have said anything, because how can you say the Armed Forces should disobey the Commander-in-Chief. It’s not possible. You don’t talk in such matters. He talked too much and that’s why he got into a circle of confusion and I think he should learn from that mistake. Information overload is as dangerous as information under-load. So, you have to balance the two. On the part of the APC, they didn’t engage in information overload. Sometimes they even got into information under-load, but somehow they were able to balance it because what the president could not say, Oshiomhole would say it. But it appears as if Atiku was saying everything and people simply decided to wait for him in the battleground.

 You talked about the social media and noted that both parties deployed it extensively…

  (Cuts in) Sometimes to their detriment.

So, to what extent do you think the social media impacted on the outcome of the election?

Well, I cannot say that it significantly influenced the outcome of the election, but we cannot condemn the power of the social media. There are people with very weak internal mechanisms so they believe whatever they see, hear or read in the social media. In my own case, I don’t believe information in the social media. When I see something in the social media, I crosscheck with the mainstream media because social media are what I call them. They are not journalists; they don’t practice journalism. They don’t have any respect for objectivity, fairness and balance in their stories. They are socially irresponsible. Therefore, I don’t call them journalists and they don’t practice journalism. They practice what I call journalesse and I see them as information processors. The real name that I give to them is information traffickers. They traffic on falsehood; they traffic on things that lack surface credibility; they can post anything on their websites. So, it’s for you to determine whether this is true or not true by embarking on fact-check. So, they are fast in terms of getting information and posting information. Sometimes, they post falsehood; sometimes, they are paid to do that. In support of what I have said that they are not journalists, the owner of Facebook was in Nigeria some years ago and Nigerian journalists asked him if he practiced journalism. He said no. He said he was providing a platform for people to disseminate information as fast as possible.

So, they are not journalists; they don’t practice journalism and their platform is social platform not social media. In fact, they are better called social platforms rather than social media because there is no element of media in them. It’s a platform for disseminating information. Although some of them are trained journalists, but when they get into that thing, they don’t put concern on the credibility of their sources and the information they process. Therefore, they can cause confusion. And that one leads to not only fake information, but also hate messages. We had a lot of them during the 2015 elections. This last election was better than the 2015 election in terms of fake news.

Really?

Yes, the 2019 election was better in terms of circulation of fake news; I know. I have the score of how the NBC sanctioned so many stations during the 2015 election. This year, the stations they really fined were the principled ones and people were saying that they are over regulating. Somebody was telling me that they sanctioned many stations sometimes three or four times. They do that as penalty for the violation of their codes. If you make a mistake, the NBC will fine you may be like N500,000. So, if you want, you can continue to violate their codes and pay each time. During the review of the code, there were suggestions that they should jack up the fine or make it a percentage of whatever they get from people. And maybe they can stop. So, I think fake news was not as serious this time as it were in 2015 because government is highly sensitive to it. Government is aware and people are afraid that if you write something, which is not true, you can be arrested. So, people were very careful.

 Q: There was this saying in some quarters at the peak of the campaigns that elections are not won and lost in the social media. What is your take?

That is true! Elections are not won and lost by social media. The social media can be used as stimuli and not everybody will respond to that stimuli. Like me now, and I think you as a trained journalist, you are a doubter. You don’t take everything they put in the social media as true. But there are some people who believe that whatever is in the social media is true. And again, when you look at the geography and demographics of this country, you find that many of them don’t even have the time to look at the social media. Some rely on information from the mainstream media while some are simply waiting for the naira and kobo that will come from the harvest, because they see elections as harvest time for them every four years. So, they want to exploit it. So, social media as far as they are concerned is nonsense. What is important in their mind is how much naira, how many bags of rice and how many cartons of tomato will come to them. And this is not good. That is why the media should encourage our voters not to sell their conscience because of the bags of rice or onion or any other item from the politicians, but to go and vote for the person you want to vote for.