Wanted in Nigeria: Effective public enlightenment

In Nigeria, one popular communication strategy is the dissemination of falsehood.  Here, we recall that some years back, Nigerians were deceived about the correct number of our soldiers who died in ECOMOG operations in Liberia and Sierra Leone until 10 years later when the Commander of the troops publicly confessed that he was under official […]

In Nigeria, one popular communication strategy is the dissemination of falsehood.  Here, we recall that some years back, Nigerians were deceived about the correct number of our soldiers who died in ECOMOG operations in Liberia and Sierra Leone until 10 years later when the Commander of the troops publicly confessed that he was under official instructions to release false information. Another method is the subtle manipulation of information. Labour issues come readily to mind here. Before the last elections, state governors agreed to pay the minimum wage but after the election, communication on the subject moved to emotional explanations of how some states will cease to exist if they paid the previously agreed figure. This method is known as the “wisdom after event” communication which the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) has accused the Federal Government of employing with respect to a-2009 agreement by both parties.  Interestingly, government has unwittingly helped to generate sympathy for ASUU. If as we hear, some of the union’s demands are new, why is government unable to use its overwhelming machinery of communication to put the issue in perspective? Why is the public allowed to believe that government is playing out the “Aburi mentality” model of communication?

We also have the “playing to the gallery” type of communication. For instance, some governors appear to be in support of the removal of fuel subsidy only when they are in Abuja. Apart from the comrade governor, no known state government machinery has been used to mobilize the public at state level to embrace the policy thereby federalizing the subject. In other words, no governor wants to be an apostle of subsidy removal because it is publicly perceived as anti-people. Meanwhile, their Excellencies are waiting in the wings to reap the fruits when it materializes. No wonder, the Federal Government appears to be carrying the cross alone. Unfortunately, it has on its part adopted a wrong approach- the singing of discordant tunes as there are as many versions as the number of officials who speak on it. While one source confirmed that fuel subsidy was gone another source said it is yet to go. No one understands why it was not reflected in the budget.  The President, we are told was still consulting which suggests that it could be in a supplementary submission. Well, when John Momoh reinvented his reportorial skills to ask at the recent famous town hall meeting in Lagos, why the take-off date of the new policy has remained unknown, we thoughtfully attributed it to lack of effective communication.

For communication to be effective, the relevant target group and the language it understands have to be identified. The Lagos town hall meeting may therefore be described as successful if it was intended to enlighten the elite but a failure if it targeted Nigerians in general. First, too many of our people who have no television sets are out of the target group, so are those who hardly have electricity.  The programme could also not have been meant for our kith and kin who cannot understand Queen’s English or the mathematical calculations of the World Bank and the IMF. What an earnest campaign on the subject requires is the recognition of the indisputable fact that the old and the young, the literate and the non-literate, the urban and rural dwellers who are interested parties in the subject do not have the same opportunities, tastes and aspirations. An effective scheme which uses different publicity strategies for different categories of people has to be evolved.  While paying tribute to the government officials who have so far added the task of educating the public to their own assignment of designing the policy, societal institutions set up to publicize government programmes must at this point be “allowed” to handle their mandates. For instance, the National Orientation Agency, with a grassroots structure which enables it to relate directly with all Nigerians in the 774 local government areas is better positioned to organize a more robust publicity for the subject. What is more, the Agency’s ‘son of the soil’ operational arrangement whereby its workers function in their places of origin and relate with the people in the language they understand is an appropriate and credible channel. But can the channel be effective now that it is classified as a culture rather than an information Parastatal?

Effective communication presupposes that the message being transmitted is clear and accurate. There should be no ambiguity so that it would be easy to comprehend because human beings use and interpret the meanings of words differently. Leaders must therefore be more careful with what they tell the public. In the recent Madalla bomb blast for example, it is difficult to fathom how the following condolence messages were understood by different people: (a) the bombing of catholic worshippers should not be seen as a religious matter;

(b), Muslims were not behind it; (c), Christians should not retaliate; (d), Christians should prepare to defend themselves.

A citizen who is not personally affected by a particular crime can discountenance the stereotype communication which repeatedly assures the public that criminals would be pursued and punished.   But when a bereaved wife or child is told that government would spare nothing to bring the killers of their bread winner to book, what exactly is such communication expected to achieve? Compatriots, those who think they must speak always need to know that silence could sometimes be golden!