From orbit of darkness to Particles of light: a discourse on the Media, democracy and

security challenges in Nigeria

ALADEGBOLA A. I., Ph.D.Department of Political Science,College of Education, Ikere-Ekiti

+2348034273929Stainlessade2004@yahoo.com.

And

Bonnie AyodeleDepartment of Political Science

Ekiti State University, Ado Ekiti, PMB 5363Ado-Ekiti, Nigeria

Phone: +234-8038475573e-mail: ayodelebonnie@yahoo.com

Introduction

Our lives begin to end, the day we become silent about things that matter. - Martin Luther King, Jr.

The Guardian editorial of Sunday December 7th, 1997 had within its write up on the concept

of particles of light that began In 1997, as a fresh graduate, I was ambitious, but yet I was

despaired. Ambitious, because of my dream to become the best in my chosen career and

despaired because, the Nation where I will ply my ‘trade’ was always ‘one leg forward and

two legs backward’ on matters regarding socio-economic and political development. The

country Nigeria, presented a gory picture of a possible abortion of an improperly formed

foetus. I read the newspapers and listen to electronic media so voraciously to see if any

hope will spring in my heart to see a ‘possible nation.’ I suddenly stumbled on an editorial of

a Guardian Newspaper:

The country cannot be liberated until the vices that form the dark part of the Nigerian psyche are removed. We must resolve not to hate, cheat and denigrate one another. Particles of light must pierce each soul to banish wickedness, ethnicity, irredentism and callousness. After this, the spirit ‘self’ would rise and a great nation will herald its forward march with cymbals and music. (The Guardian, Editorial: Sunday December 7th, 1997).

1

Since coming across this piece, I had been imbued with a search for the mentioned

(underlined) ‘particles of light’ as a harbinger of solutions to the troubles with Nigeria. In my

search, I saw more ‘orbit of darkness’, I saw military ruthlessness, and I saw deadly

politicking, I saw a manifest of developmental deficit emanating as poverty, corruption and

high level of insecurity. In the recent years, I hastened to ask, do we really have democracy?

Or better still, is Nigerian nation a Democratic state? Is democratic consolidation visible in

an invisible democracy? Again, the lecture today has opened a fresh question that has

influenced my utmost search; what role could the media play on how to consolidate the

‘invisible’ democracy and in the face of the present national embarrassment and national

tragedy called security challenges? Arising from these questions, the problematic issues in

discourse would be first to find out the main attractions in democracy. Second, is to

examine what went wrong and see whether the Press or the Media has failed in the

expected roles and then conclude with what could be done.

The Attractions of Democracy

The idea of democracy is attractive, a bride of sort but difficult to befriend and practice. This

is because, it requires a scientific understanding and mastery of the arts, its

conceptualization must be its practise and on this line, it may actually consume its

proponent. Winston Churchill, a two time occupier of the UK’s highest political office, had

denounced democracy out of despair and claimed that it is the worst system of government

there is. He came to the situation when he was outrightly rejected by an electorate he had

led through a devastating war. It was not anything unusual, it was part of the untypical

surprises that springs up from democracy.

The beauty however, is that we live in a time when the call for freedom and democracy

echoes across the globe. Eastern Europe has cast off the totalitarian government for almost

half a century and the Republics of the former Soviet Union are struggling to replace the

communist regime of almost 75 years with a new democratic order. But the drama

surrounding the extraordinary political changes in Europe obscures the remarkable degree

to which the promise of democracy has mobilized people throughout the world. North and

South America are now virtually a hemisphere of democracy; Africa is experiencing an

2

unprecedented era of democratic reform; and new, dynamic democracies are taking roots in

Asia and the Arab world.

This worldwide phenomenon belies the assumption of some critics who have contended

that modern liberal democracy is a uniquely Western artefact that can never be successfully

replicated in non-Western cultures. That is the reason why in Nigeria, the call for a ‘home

grown democracy’ is rife and some may even prefer a diachy. The fact however remains that

in a world where democracy is practiced in nations as different as Japan, Italy and

Venezuela, the Institutions of democracy can legitimately claim to address universal human

aspirations for freedom and self-government. In this sense, freedom and democracy are

often used interchangeably, but the two are not synonymous. Democracy is indeed a set of

ideas and principles about freedom, but it consists of a set of practices and procedures that

have been modelled through a long and often tortuous history. In one sense, democracy is

the institutionalization of freedom. For this reason, it is possible to identify the time-tested

fundamentals of constitutional government, human rights and equality before the law that

any society must possess to be properly called democratic.

The interesting diversity in democracy is about pluralism. This notion assumes that the many

organized groups and institutions in a democratic society do not depend upon government

for their existence, legitimacy or authority. In line with this common assumption, the Media

falls within the purview of various private organizations that operate in a democratic

society, some local, some national. Many of them serve a mediating role between

individuals and the complex social and governmental institutions of which they are a part,

filling roles not given to the government and offering individuals opportunities to exercise

their rights and responsibilities as citizens of a democracy (www.http/usinfo.state.gov).

In an authoritarian society, virtually all such organizations would be controlled, licensed,

censored, or otherwise accountable to the government. In democracy, the powers of the

government are, by law, clearly defined and sharply limited. As a result, private

organizations are free of government control; on the contrary, many of them lobby the

government and seek to hold it accountable for its actions. Other groups, concerned with

the arts, the practice of religious faith, Scholarly research, or other interests, may choose to

have little or no contact with the government at all (www.http/usinfo.state.gov).

3

In this busy private realm of democratic society, citizens can explore the possibilities of

freedom and the responsibilities of self-government – unpressured by the potentially heavy

hand of the state. The available conceptualization of democracy is legion, but the escape

route in this lecture is to abide with the word ‘freedom’. While the desire for freedom may

be innate, yet the practice of democracy must be learned. This is the reason why the

definition of democracy will always incontrovertibly end with the identifiable pillars. These

are:

i. Sovereignty of the people;

ii. Government based upon consent of the governed;

iii. Majority rule;

iv. Minority rights;

v. Guarantee of basic human rights;

vi. Free and fair elections;

vii. Equality before the law;

viii. Due process of law;

ix. Constitutional limits on government;

x. Social, economic and political pluralism; and

xi. Values of intolerance, pragmatism, cooperation and compromise.

While the elements enumerated above exemplifies the practice of democracy, the analysis

of Larry Diamond in what amounts to democratic consolidation places emphasis on the

people and institutions. According to him, democracies are “consolidated when all

significant political elites, parties, and organizations – as well as an overwhelming majority

of the mass public – are firmly committed to the democratic constitutional system and

regularly comply with its rules and constraints” (Diamond, 2000:1). The argument then was

that the consolidation of democracy is a function of the confidence of democratic

performance in terms of what is expected, which in the Nigerian parlance is called

“dividends of democracy.” Suffice it to say that democracy is hardly sustained in an

atmosphere suffused with despair, frustration and scepticism as a result of a state failure

(Olaniyan, 2008:152).

4

The eloquent testimonies cited around the world are still punctuated with many African

cases of transition to democracy spawning up what can be referred to as democracy

without democrats, or democratic dividends. The problem with Africa, is that

democratization may have opened up hitherto closed political space, but that space is still

highly exclusive, restrictive and populated by enormous threats to socio-economic and

political stability, as well as to the aspiration for democratic consolidation and socio-

economic development (Ake, 1996).

Democracy Deficits in Nigeria

Institutionalizing the democratic processes of periodically identifying those who govern us

and authoritatively allocate values in our society, as well as deepening the democratic

content of our thinking, is perhaps, one of the most important conditions for effectively and

harmoniously managing the political entity called Nigeria (Akindele, 1993). Unfortunately, it

appears the country has de-link and distanced itself from the contagious, bandwagon effects

of the whirlwind of democratization that had more recently, engulfed the global

community. It is difficult to accept that Nigeria is a democratic state, simply because of the

existence of civilian rule. A critical appraisal of the eleven aforementioned pillars of

democracy will reveal the truth about this. Though it is certain that democracy will not

solve all the problems of Nigeria, but none of the major problems can be solved without it.

To be sure, a significant role democracy can play in solving major problems is to promote

economic growth and usher in desired development, which can in turn guarantee peace and

security in a nation-state. The essential elements of freedom and pluralism are missing and

it has serious effects on the institutions, including the Media, which is the main change

agent to deepen the democratic content of our thinking as people and actions as

governments.

This is the reason why the country cannot guarantee the commitment of political elites,

political parties, organizations and the majority of the mass public to the creation of political

space, which is in turn essential to achieving democratic consolidation. An absence of

democratic consolidation is the reason for the absence of democratic security pervading the

nation now. Democratic security, in a broad sense, must imply that democracy flourishes in

a state to the extent that it can ensure the absence of threat to life, property and socio-

economic wellbeing of the people and ensure stability for growth and development.

5

The Nigerian political scene became active in 1999 when democratic elections were

conducted to usher in a new-progressive era of civil rule. This era came with much

anticipated hopes, wishes and aspirations. It was the dawn of an era which would put an

end to the tortuous decrees and agenda of military dictatorship. This explains why millions

of Nigerians marched down to the polling stations to vote in their choicest leaders, with

exuding hopes and lofty dreams of a prosperous era where everyone could freely enjoy the

prosperity and wealth that abound in the land.

However, events and happenings in the country, particularly from the last decade has

thrown the country off balance and in turn unleashed a grave sense of post-military

disillusionment. It appears as if the riches and privileges in the country have been

exclusively reserved for the political elite. This has created an uneven socio-political

structure – an order which has facilitated the offshoot of armed radical groups that manifest

in the form of kidnapping, oil bunkering, and most dreadful of all, terrorism.

Thus, it is not an overstatement to state that the egoistic agenda of the political elite

masquerading as messiahs and saviours continually trigger new theatre of unrest and

disruptions in the society.

The resultant effect is the ‘particles of darkness’ all over. The persistent question has been,

how can democracy be consolidated in Nigeria, which had emerged from prolonged military

rule with profound legacies of militarism and militarization? The Nigerian Soldiers meddling

into the affairs of state and crass irresponsibility by the political class has created a political

milieu which attracts chaos and societal stagnation. We must note that the Soldiers attempt

to provide military security to the State has led to its using the guise of internal security

functions of the state to ‘fraudulently’ usurp powers and responsibilities that it is ill

equipped to perform. The end result is, a situational security problem created through the

30 years of social, economic, political and demographic manipulations by the Nigerian

Soldiers. This event started during the 1966 coup and took the country to the civil war and

several coup d’état’s. The Nigerian state is now effectively garrisoned and the secondary

ideology at the centre is military federalism, with the military (serving and retired)

surreptitiously dominating the political environment in a new form of diarchy. This situation,

over the years has suffocated civil society and constructed a “Hobbesian society” where life

is uncertain, painful and short, even for the well-to-do. The spill-over effects are legion: the

6

Niger-Delta militants and extra judicial killings; kidnapping for ransoms; violence and

insensitivity; the rampaging ‘Boko Haram’ consisting of the Boko’s and the Haram’s and the

irrepressible corruption. The democracy deficits in Nigeria is at the climax and it is

effectively been fuelled by our political class. For example, the Ambassador Usman Galtimari

committee commissioned by the Goodluck Jonathan administration to study the security

challenges in the North East zone traced the genesis of the dreaded ‘Boko Haram’ sect to

some political leaders in Borno state. According to the committee, the report traced the

origin of private militias in Borno state in particular of which ‘Boko Haram’ is an offshoot, to

politicians who set them up in the run-up to the 2003 general election. The militias were

allegedly armed and used extensively as political thugs. After the elections and having

achieved their primary purpose, the politicians left the militias to their fate since they could

not continue funding and keeping them employed. With no visible means of sustenance,

some of the militias frustrated towards religious extremism (Falana, 2013:82).

According to Falana, (2013:82), in less than three years, the nation has lost 3,000 people and

properties worth over N2trn. Apart from bombing churches, media houses and the United

Nations office in Abuja, the suicide terrorist have successfully attacked police stations and

military barracks.

Beyond these ugly manifestations, our history has shown that there is always enough to go

round; also enough to keep, enough to reward with, enough to be stolen too, as long as you

belong to the political class. There have been three agents of ‘particles of darkness’ in

Nigeria. The first one was the colonial masters whose process did not train or condition

African leaders for electoral politics. The second one was the military usurpers who were a

domestic variant of colonial rulers. The third is the political jobbers, many of whom do not

realize that there is a gap – wide gap between promise and performance at the ascendancy

of political power.

Has the Press/Media Failed in Nigeria?

Scholars of both mass communication and political communication agree that the Media

performs indispensable roles at nation building and sustenance of democratic values (Ojo,

2006:12). In democracies, the Mass Media is perhaps much more required for a congruent

7

political culture to develop. To achieve this purpose, the media report the news, interpret

the news, influence citizens’ opinions, set the agenda for government actions, and socialize

citizens about politics. In a democratic setting, information must flow freely in both

directions, that is, from the government to the citizens and vice versa.

Though “highly constrained... in operation by a number of political, economic, cultural and

technological factors” (Curran, Gureritch & Woollacott, 1979:274), it is believed that the

press draws on some sources of ‘Media Power’. Curran et al identify three such sources as

structural, psychological and normative. According to these Media scholars, the “structural

root” of Press power derives from its ability to deliver and influence an audience which, in

size and composition, is unavailable “by any other means”. In regard to the “psychological

root” of Press power, it is widely understood that the Press enjoys a relation of believed. In

addition, the press derives normative strength from its perception as watchdogs and

safeguards “against possible abuse of political authority.

Curran et al conclude that, from the combined influence of the foregoing sources of power,

the Press interposes and intervenes significantly in the political process. Perhaps the major

strength of this position is that it is a valiant attempt to establish the base of media power.

As instructive as this conclusion is, however, it must be noted that it falls short of spelling

out the specific functions the press performs in the process of exerting such influence.

Recourse will, therefore, be made to other authorities for more insights into the functions

and influence of the Press.

First is the functional interpretation of the media (Corner and Hawthorn, 1980:192). This

interpretation postulates that the media perform surveillance, correlation and cultural

transmission functions for society, as well as for individuals and subgroups within society.

Wright (1960:24) has since attempted to expand Laswell’s typologies by adding the fourth

function of entertainment and drawing attention to their potentially dysfunctional aspects.

Elaborating upon Laswell’s typologies, Opubor (in Nwuneli, 1985:144-145) explains the

surveillance function as “the process of collecting and distributing factual information about

the state of the world both within and outside the society in question”. Simply put,

according to him, this refers to the function of providing news, the correlation function, he

8

explains further, “involves the interpretation of information about the environment and

suggestions about appropriate responses to change”. Such a function, according to him, is

fulfilled by editorial opinions, newspaper columns, letters, features, articles and the like.

Suggesting education as another name for the cultural transmission function, Opubor

equates it with the “communication of information about the values, preferences and

orientation of the society”. This is the means by which the Press, or any Media institution

for that matter, propagates the cultural essence of a people over generations.(Omolayo,

undated)

Assessing the Media in Nigeria is to examine the history of how they fare in the identified

‘media power’ or ‘Press power’, its intervention in political process and as ‘watchdogs’, its

surveillance correlation and cultural transmission functions for society as well as for

individuals and subgroups. The history of press freedom in Nigeria is the history of

resistance, repression and persecution. The press had fought for liberty, recognizing that

liberty (freedom) never comes from government. From the colonial rule to the military era

and the civilian stop gaps in between, the press in Nigeria gave a good account of itself and

has on several fronts had challenged the existing status-quo. At periods like the civil war,

and the June 12 crises in Nigeria where it appeared that the country would suffer total

explosion, the Media had teamed up with others to preserve the corporate existence of the

country. They had worked with pro-democracy activist during the years of struggles for

political liberation of the country from the hands of military usurpers.

The tempo was understandably high during colonial rule and the first republic, especially

when ethnic politics was tearing the country apart. It was a courageous use of press power,

its surveillance and cultural transmission agenda. As at then, a political culture was

emerging gradually. The fervency was however lost as a result of military persecution and

obnoxious decrees that were meant to gag the press. The human right abuse became so

high, as more democratic norms were set aside by the military Junta. This situation was

climaxed by the murder of Late Dele Giwa in 1986 through a parcel bomb during Gen.

Ibrahim Babangida regime and the judicial killing of Ken-Saro Wiwa, a Niger-Deltan and

environmental activist during the autocratic reign of Late Gen. Sanni Abacha in 1995. After

the dark ages of 1966 – 1998, the re-entry of civilian rule in 1999 was with pomp and

pageantry, with a hope of democratic better deals. The Media was well favoured to thrive in

9

a democracy, the freedom became real and what looks like civilization came up. At the early

stage of the fourth republic, a fresh variant of darkness again came up; the ever expanding

vast empire of prebendal politics was refreshed. High tech politicking resumed like business

as usual. The Press was almost overwhelmed, but it became lucrative with many

independent broadcasters springing up. At the resumption of the Yar’adua administration,

the amnesty programme was a magic that surprisingly tamed the hotbed of Niger Delta. It

was a season of money making for the country and the Press. Both went on pleasure until

the country was rattled by muslim violent sect called ‘Boko Haram’; they started grouping

since 2009 without any major intelligence report to checkmate the spread. And with the

Media failing in its surveillance correlation roles, the sect soon became wild and connected

and had since set Nigeria democracy on fire. At this point, how do we start thinking and

talking of consolidating democracy when the security challenges are threatening our

corporate existence, our national cohesion and our pride of political and economic

sovereignty? The questions are endless.

An Agenda Setting for the Media in Nigeria.

The country is passing through unusual and uneasy times. The Nation is at the height of

precipice; the Islamic sect has an agenda for a religious war, a defeated security, a genocide,

a state failure and an entire balkanization of the federation. They have infiltrated the

security agencies network, the government agencies, the law makers and even high state

executives as god-fathers. The death of adequate information and compromise of planned

strategies is hampering government efforts. The ‘agents of darkness’ are waxing stronger

and government at the highest level is prostrate begging with amnesty joker. The Media too

is in trouble. In desperation, the sect has introduced a ‘scaring dimension’ to the whole

issue, as they have started attacking media houses. A reporter with Channel newspaper was

killed in Kano in the cross fire.

In the midst of these confusions, with the entire country groping in the dark, I have seen the

Press as the Particles of light. The liberation of the country is seriously resting on the Press

to use its media power of information dissemination to pierce the soul of the country and

banish this wickedness, irredentism and pervading callousness destroying human and

material wealth of the nation.

10

To govern is to communicate. As modern societies grow in size and complexity, the arena

for communication and public debate is increasingly dominated by the news media: radio

and television, newspapers, magazines, books, even computerized databases.

The news media in a democracy have a number of overlapping but distinctive functions. One

is to inform and educate. To make intelligent decisions about public policy, people need

accurate, timely, unbiased information. Because opinions diverge, they also need access to a

wide range of viewpoints. This role is especially important during election campaigns, when

few voters will have the opportunity to see, much less talk with, candidates in person.

Instead, they must rely on newspapers and television to explain the issues and characterize

the respective positions of candidates and their political parties.

A second function of the media is to serve as a watchdog over government and other

powerful institutions in the society. By holding to a standard of independence and

objectivity, however imperfectly, the news media can expose the truth behind the claims of

governments and hold public officials accountable for their actions.

If they choose, the media can also take a more active role in public debate. Through

editorials or investigative reporting, the media can campaign for specific policies or reforms

that they feel should be enacted. They can also serve as a forum for organizations and

individuals to express their opinions through letters to the editor and the printing of articles

with divergent points of view.

Commentators point to another increasingly important role for the media: “setting the

agenda.” Since they can’t report everything, the news media must choose which issues to

report and which to ignore. In short, they decide what is news and what isn’t. These

decisions, in turn, influence the public’s perception of what issues are most important.

Unlike countries where the news media are government-controlled, however, in a

democracy they cannot simply manipulate or disregard issues at will. Their competitors,

after all, as well as the government itself, are free to call attention to their own list of

important issues (www.http/usinfo.state.gov).

Few would argue that the news media always carry out these functions responsibly.

Newspaper reporters and television correspondents may aspire to a standard of objectivity,

11

but the news is inevitably filtered through the biases and sensibilities of individuals and the

enterprises for which they work. They can be sensational, superficial, intrusive, inaccurate,

and inflammatory. The solution is not to devise laws that set some arbitrary definition of

responsibility or to licence journalists, but to broaden the level of public discourse so that

citizens can better sift through the chaff of misinformation and rhetoric to find the kernels

of truth.

Again, the vibrancy of democracy is hinged on the freedom of information and access to

information is not determined by legislation but by the practice of democracy. Now, ten

African countries have Freedom of Information (FOI) laws with South Africa being the first in

2000. Niger, Tunisia and Nigeria are the latest countries to have the law. By May 28, 2013, it

will be two years since the FOI bill was passed by the Nigerian National Assembly and signed

into law by the President. But save for a few cases of use, the law remains largely viable on

paper (Fagorusi, 2013:52)

The strongest recommendation that this paper seeks to express is that the media needs to

reposition its agenda and priorities to evolve much more robust professionalism and

doggedness than it currently is for it to live up to its role as the watchdog of the political

elite. It is important to note that for democracy to thrive, elements of civil organizations,

particularly the media must continually conduct surveillance on the socio-political

happenings and realities in a democratic society so as to curtail abuse of power, gather,

interpret and contextualise and disseminate information in a meaningful and accessible

form (McNair, 2011). This view aligns with the proposition put forward in Wright (1998:20)

which states that:

The media should be the place where mass democracy communicates with itself. This involves a whole range of activities: informing, arguing, questioning, reflecting, investigating, exposing… without a media that performs this role, the nation is deprived of its collective street corner, market square and notice-board. If deprived in this way, the quality of its democracy suffers.

Here, Wright clearly states the role of the media. And when we consider the present socio-

political happenings in Nigeria, can we proudly say the media, indeed, has lived up to its

expectations?

12

Of particular interest are the current security challenges bedevilling the nation. How has the

media faired in this regard? When we considered how media outfits in the Western world

go about their reportage of tragic events such as: terrorist attacks, violent protests against

government policies and other trivial issues in their homelands, we discover their Nigerian

counterparts still have a long way to go. For instance, a typical journalist or reporter, say of

CNN or VOA, exudes much passion, authority and professionalism when covering news

event directly from the warfront.

While I do not challenge the Nigerian media man to walk straight into the battle front to

receive the bullets and explosives, what it cannot fail to emphasize is the need for

investigative journalism: facts and figures should be properly investigated and verified

before relaying them to the public. This is necessary so as to prevent the over-heating of the

polity when unconfirmed reports of events, particularly sensitive security issues are

presented through the media.

The media should take the bold step of taking the various security agencies and authorities

head-on. It should strive to expose the numerous corrupt practices of these agencies which

in turn make them compromise.

Conclusion

The hallmark of this paper is that, the Nigerian media has come of age, and hence need to

overcome some of the problems that limit its performance as a credible institution

entrusted with the role of serving as the watchdog of the Society. Granted that some of the

problems afflicting the press were essentially created by the society, many a times,

reflecting the political persuasions and affiliations of the owners, the media can certainly not

hide under any excuse to flout ethical standards and squander the imperatives for

objectivity.

Where the press may be failing, the organized freelance and independent broadcasters

would be contributing more to democratic consolidation by setting democratic agenda for

responsive leadership and good governance. Independent broadcasters had a history that is

rich in progressive activism. The pre-1999 experience of the heroic struggle against

autocracy has place a burden on them and there is a consciousness amongst the people that

13

the independent broadcasters that helped restore democracy must also be alive to its

responsibility in promoting and protecting democratic values and also help to checkmate

the activities of the terrorists ravaging the Northern parts of Nigeria.

Since the process of consolidation is on-going, it is expected that stakeholders in the media

would take stock of the performance, so far under the present dispensation with the view to

taking steps to reposition the press for the purpose of building enduring and stable

democracy.

14

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abayomi, F (2004). The press in Nigeria’s emerging democracy: the challenges of a new era. Kunle Ajayi and Bonnie Ayodele (eds) Perspectives on Democracy and Development in Post-Military Nigeria. Ibadan: Julius and Julius Associates Pp:133 – 144

Adeyemo, T. (2012). Boko Haram: The Beginning of Genocide. Tell Nigeria’s Independent weekly. July 9, 2012 Pp:15

Akindele, R. A. (1993). Managing Nigeria, Reflections and Prescriptions. Annals of Social Science Council of Nigeria. No 5 Pp: 3 – 33.

Ake, C. (1996). Democracy and Development in Africa. Ibadan: Spectrum Books Limited.

Corner, J. and Hawthorn, J. (1980). Communication Studies: An Introductory Reader. London: Edward Arnold.

Curran, J., Gureritch, M. and Woolacott, J. (1979). Mass Communication and Society. London: Edward Arnold.

Diamond, L. (2000). A Report Card on Democracy. Hoover Digest, No 3. Available online at www.hooverdigest.com

Falana, F. (2013). Legal Perspective to Religion and Security. A paper delivered at the conference of the Department of Religious Studies, University of Ibadan, on April 15 th. The Punch, Nigeria daily newspaper. Monday April, 22, 2013. Pp 82 – 83.

Fagorusi, S. (2013). Making the FOI Act work in Nigeria. The Punch Nigeria daily newspaper. Monday April 1, Pp 52.

Kolawole, D. (2007). “The Conduct of Free and Fair Elections of Credible Personalities into Public Offices: Responsibilities, Gains and Challenges”. The Nigerian Tribune, Monday, 9 July. Pp 16. A lecture delivered at the summit of legislative arms of government across the states of the federation hosted by Oyo state House of Assembly.

McNair, B. (2011). An Introduction to Political Communication. 5th Edition. London. Routledge.

Nwuneli, O. E. (ed) (1985). Mass Communication in Nigeria: A Book of Readings. Enugu, Fourth Dimension Publishing Co.

Olaniyan, A. O. (2008). “External Pressures, Socio-Economic Reforms and Democratic Consolidation in Nigeria”. Journal of Contemporary Polities, Vol. 1, No. 1. Department of Political Science (UNAD). Ibadan, Julius and Julius Associates, Pp144 – 156.

Opubor, A. E. (1985). “Custodians of Culture”, Nwureli, O. E. (ed). Mass Communication in Nigeria: A Book of Reedings. Enugu: Fourth Dimension Publishing Co.

15

Omolayo, S. (undated). “The Nigerian Press and Foreign Policy Decision-making: The Case of Charles Taylor’s Political Asylum”. An Unpublished M.Sc. project proposal submitted to the department of Political Science, University of Ado-Ekiti (now Ekiti State University).

Ojo, O. E. (2008). “Imperatives of Sustaining Democratic Values”. Emmanuel, O. Ojo (ed) Challenges of Sustainable Democracy in Nigeria. Ibadan: John Archers publishers, Pp 3 – 24.

Sadeeq, W. (2008). “Mass Media and Democracy”. Emmanuel Ojo (ed). Challenges of Sustainable Democracy in Nigeria. Ibadan: John Archers Publishers, Pp 247 – 260.

Suleiman, T. (2012). “The North is dying”. Tell Nigeria Independent weekly. July 23, Pp 18 – 25.

U.S Department of state (undated). What is Democracy? Office of international information programs. (www.http/usinfo.state.gov). Pp 2-6, 28-29

Uwerunonye, N. (2013). “Boko Haram: Can they be Trusted?” Tell Nigeria Independent weekly. February 11, Pp 42 – 46.

Wright, T. (1998). “Inside the Whole: The Media from Parliament”, Seaton, J. (ed). Politics and the Media. Oxford: Blackwell.

Wright, C. (1960). “Functional Analysis and Mass Communication”. Public Opinion Quarterly.

16