By Perekeme Odon
As a trained and certified journalist, I confess to a growing unease. We live in an age when social media has democratised access to information, yet many so-called seasoned and practising journalists in Nigeria cling stubbornly to outdated media conventions. These conventions, relics of a bygone era, often deny the very realities that are indisputably documented and accessible to all. It is a troubling paradox that those entrusted with reporting the truth appear, at times, to turn away from it.
Social media has irrevocably reshaped the journalistic terrain. Information is no longer confined to editorial rooms or print deadlines; it emerges instantly, in real time, captured by ordinary citizens armed with smartphones, recorded for posterity, and stored indefinitely on the digital stage. In this environment, the public encounters multiple “realities” simultaneously; some are verified, others are raw, unrefined, and sometimes misleading. The democratisation of news-gathering is exhilarating, yet it is also perilous: it empowers, but it undermines, for not every eyewitness is trained in the rigorous standards of journalism, and not every account is accountable.
What disturbs me most is the apparent erosion of core journalistic principles. The pillars of our profession—pursuit of truth, accuracy, objectivity, verification, structured reporting, the careful distinction between fact and opinion, and unwavering accountability seem increasingly to be regarded as optional rather than essential. We teach the “5 Ws” (Who, What, When, Where, Why) as the bedrock of reporting, yet too often these fundamentals are neglected in favour of speed, sensation, or convenience.
Consider the distinction between persecution, pogroms, and genocide, concepts that have haunted humanity for centuries, shaping ethnic, cultural, and political landscapes, exacting unthinkable human cost, and leaving scars upon generations. Nigerian journalists today can articulate these distinctions fluently, yet the framing and reporting of events linked to them often fail to convey the gravity or nuance required. Media responses to injustice have varied, ranging from amplification and documentation to subtle omission or misrepresentation. The consequences of such choices are profound, affecting public perception, historical memory, and ultimately, justice itself.
I am no longer shocked when trained lawyers twist evidence to suit arguments. What troubles me deeply is that journalists, who hold truth as their highest responsibility, sometimes distort or present unverified narratives, offering the public a version of reality that is incomplete, or worse, false. This betrayal strikes at the very essence of journalism, undermining trust and eroding the credibility painstakingly built over decades.
The challenge of modern journalism lies in embracing the benefits of social media, its speed, reach, and permanent record without abandoning the ethical rigour of traditional reporting. The internet never forgets, they say, yet the permanence of information does not guarantee its truthfulness. It falls to the journalist to ensure that immediacy does not come at the cost of accuracy, that public access to information does not become a license for misinformation.
In a world where technology accelerates the flow of information, the journalist’s duty remains timeless: to bear witness faithfully, to verify meticulously, and to present truth uncompromised. It is only by honouring these principles that journalism can survive, and society itself can flourish, amidst the cacophony of the digital age.
Finally, it is vital to remember that journalism is both an individual and institutional endeavour. While the journalist gathers information, the final report is shaped, edited, and filtered by organisational processes that can refine or, regrettably, distort the original account. Preserving the integrity of these processes is essential, not just for professional pride, but for the public trust upon which all meaningful journalism depends.
