His Response To The Guardian's Editorial
The Guardian newspaper’s lead story of Friday, October 25, 2024 with the title: “Calls for military intervention: misery, harsh policies driving Nigerians to desperate choices,” openly incites unrest against President Bola Tinubu’s administration and advocates regime change under the guise of journalism. The inflammatory headline and content deviate from responsible reporting.
The Guardian’s agenda is unmistakable from the cover illustration to the article. In attempting to create a balanced veneer, the author condemns military rule while fanning the flames of military intervention.
This is evident in the introduction to the article where the newspaper wrote: “Nigerians were exhilarated with the return of democracy in 1999, but 25 years on, the buccaneering nature of politicians, their penchant for poor service delivery, morbid hatred for probity, accountability, and credible/transparent elections, among others, are forcing some flustered citizens to make extreme choices, including calling for military intervention in governance. .. Deep despondency permeates every facet of the polity consequent upon soaring cost of living. And while the political elite splurge on fine wines and exotic automobiles amid poor service delivery, calls for regime change could become more strident in the days ahead even though military insurrection holds no solution to the country’s woes.”
We must question how The Guardian can present an argument for military intervention while superficially denouncing it unless it harbours a deliberate agenda.
This latest editorial reflects a troubling trend in which the publication has persistently propagated inflammatory and negative narratives, stepping dangerously close to undermining the very fabric of responsible journalism.
Moreover, the lead story relies heavily upon emotive language and imagery—such as an illustration of military armoured tank—to bolster its argument while neglecting to present a balanced view.
It indulges in lampooning the current administration while ignoring positive developments in Nigeria’s economic landscape. The report lacks empirical data and fails to exhibit the journalistic rigour that the situation demands.
It appears lost on The Guardian that such narratives could embolden anarchists intent on disrupting our democratic process.
Military rule is an anachronism in modern civilisations, irrespective of its framing, due to the oppressive nature typically associated with its practice. Guided by its experience in 1984, when two of its journalists were jailed by the military regime for reporting the truth, The Guardian acknowledges that military rule is terrible.
Yet, it attempts to provoke public ire against President Tinubu by suggesting he governs with less regard for citizens than military dictators once did.
This narrative neglects the hard-fought battle that birthed our democracy and serves only to undermine the hard-won freedoms that Nigerians now enjoy.
Good journalism is characterised by restraint and a commitment to national interest. Media outlets must propagate responsible reporting that contributes to an informed citizenry.
During times of political and economic crises, the media, as a force for good, should rally the public around their leaders, fostering unity and patience as reforms are introduced.
President Tinubu has consistently called for understanding and patience amid our nation’s challenges. This plea is not a sign of weakness but an affirmation of his dedication to a brighter future for Nigeria.
Moreover, recent policy changes have initiated a turnaround, yielding positive economic indicators.
According to the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister for the Economy