The media must remain reliable, and ensure that scoop does not trump the truth

We all know the damage misleading information can do. Whether it comes as misinformation – unintended inaccuracies – or as disinformation – consciously crafted to mislead people – false information will always distort reality and tip the scale in favour of the wrong course. Anything that compromises the integrity of information reduces people’s capacity to take informed and right decisions in matters that affect them. For media professionals, particularly editors, the implications are far reaching because misleading information erodes not only the credibility of the message, but also that of the messenger and the institution. Actually, this is also true for diplomats: if we want to remain credible and reliable, we have to make sure that the information we spread is accurate.

Now, technologies have made communication easier and faster. But their growing ability to falsify or even recreate realities has also enhanced the ease and rapidity of producing and spreading deceptive content, both online and offline, which are more and more difficult to distinguish from original contents. 

So it’s not a surprise that, according to a July 2024 report published by the European Parliament, many people across the world today worry about the effect of misleading information: Some 85 % of people worldwide are concerned about the impact of disinformation on their fellow citizens; 87 % think disinformation has already affected political life in their country; and 38 % of EU citizens list false and/or misleading information as a threat to democracy. 

Nigeria is by no means different. Back in 2020, a report on Nigeria’s Disinformation Landscape published by the Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD), warned that “the volume of disinformation now circulating in Nigeria is unprecedented, and has further exacerbated pre-existing ethnic and religious tensions that predate the internet.” Although what the report describes as Nigeria’s “big, strong, unimaginatively creative, but invisible rumour mill” has always been there, it points out that both falsehoods and accurate information can now spread faster and in a multitude of formats, including text, audio, images, memes, and videos, all thanks to technology. 

In a sense, these are good news for traditional professional media: while some were and sometimes still are predicting the end of traditional media and their replacement by millions of individuals producing news, the role of professional media is again legitimized by their reliability compared with the informative chaos on the social networks. 

But for this to happen, there are two conditions. First, media must remain reliable, they must be fact-checkers and make sure in particular that the research for the scoop does not beat the research for the truth. And, second, the public must be aware of the danger of false information and willing to escape from it.

Now, while disinformation campaigns may start on social media platforms, they penetrate offline spaces too, influencing the contents of conventional media and shaping the well-established word-of-mouth rumour mill. It is, therefore, becoming increasingly difficult to draw a distinct line between content that is shared on social media and information reported or broadcast by print media, radio, and television. This undiscernible diffusion of social media content into the traditional channels has created problem around transparency and accountability, key features underlining media credibility. 

In such a dire situation, media and information literacy, both within and outside the Fourth Estate, has become an urgent compulsion rather than a choice. A literate public is much more empowered to be able to assess the information they are exposed to, identify sources they can trust, and make well-informed decisions, participate in debates and shape policies that affect them. 

For media actors themselves, this is an existential imperative. Being media literate empowers people to engage more fully, creatively and critically with the online and offline media world.

Conversely, information manipulation and disinformation erode democratic values; breed mutual suspicion and disaffection; and undermine peace, security and stability at both national and regional levels. The growing glamorisation of anti-democratic forces as superheroes, in opposition to democratic values, is a sad pointer to the damage information manipulation is causing in West Africa.  The raising of Russian flag by local protesters last year in Kano evidences how vulnerable Nigeria is.         

The European Union is actively working to combat disinformation and promote media literacy, with fact-checking playing a crucial role in these efforts. Within its borders, the EU has adopted far-reaching measures to combat disinformation. Internationally, the EU is working with partners, including the media and the civil society to protect the integrity of the information matrix. 

Cooperation, awareness-raising, and support for fact-checking and media literacy initiatives are key aspects of the EU’s multi-faceted approach. The European Digital Media Observatory (EDMO) provides a platform for fact-checkers, academics, and other experts to collaborate on understanding and combating disinformation. Across national borders, the Rapid Alert System (RAS) facilitates information sharing among EU Member States and institutions about disinformation threats. The EUvsDisinfo project is a dedicated platform for raising public awareness about information manipulation.

In addition, the EU develops a series of activities:

• We monitor and analyse disinformation campaigns, particularly those targeting elections or sensitive topics. This for instance one of the features of the electoral support we provide through our SDGN project (support to democratic governance in Nigeria).

• We promote media literacy initiatives and provide resources for citizens to critically evaluate information. 

• We support fact-checkers and researchers working to debunk disinformation and foster collaboration among them. Our previous work with Nigeria’s foremost fact-checking platform, Dubawa, is an example. 

• We are also building up critical capacity for fact checking in the media, and to help journalists strengthen their resilience to disinformation, information manipulation and propaganda. Besides the support we offer locally through our media-focussed interventions, we also directly facilitate the participation of Nigerian journalists in trainings on media literacy in Europe. Two of such trips have taken place this year, including a visit to the war-ravaged Ukraine for first-hand reportage. Furthermore, we are engaging with young people, including university students, to provide direct information on our programme. This is in addition to what our Member States do.

• In this regard, we actively cooperate with other institutions, civil society organizations, and online platforms in their efforts to counter disinformation and promote media literacy. This includes providing resources, training, and opportunities for collaboration. 

Our choice of collaborating with the Nigerian Guild of Editors on this programme is part and parcel of this general effort. We recognise the critical role of editors as the last line in the gatekeeping process. 

The editor is ultimately responsible for what is pushed into the public space as content. Aside from their gate-keeping role, editors are key influencers both within and outside the newsroom. Not only do they shape public perception of issues, they also mentor their reporters who will grow to become editors. So getting this critical group into this fact-checking project is a great idea. 

I believe that this will mark the beginning of fruitful conversations not only between the EU and Nigerian editors, but also among editors, on the all-important issue of fact-checking and media literacy.

Thank you for your attention.