Subsidy removal: Where does the media stand?
Subsidy removal: Where does the media stand?
Subsidy removal: Where does the media stand?
Subsidy removal: Where does the media stand?
Currently, information is increasingly becoming a critical resource and the news media, including the social media, plays a crucial role in the production and dissemination of that information.
Democratic societies and organisations who understand that the media is fundamental to their political life have weaved the media around their polity. Most nations know that the media matters. This is because what the media says and how it says it, obviously matters.
Democratic societies and organisations who understand that the media is fundamental to their political life have weaved the media around their polity. Most nations know that the media matters. This is because what the media says and how it says it, obviously matters.
The Nigerian government is presently battling with opposing public on its policy of removal of fuel subsidy, which has hiked fuel pump price by over 120 percent. Slant of media reports on the protests so far indicates that more media organisations differed with the policy and have toed the line of the opposing public. While others subscribed to the policy as they seem to understand the objective of the subsidy removal.
A day or two, after the announcement of the policy, some newspapers came out with headlines: ‘Petrol prices go wild,” “Fuel subsidy removal stirs anger, protests,” “Nigerians groan under subsidy chaos.” Some other newspapers came with the headline such as “Analysts see new investments in refineries as FG removes fuel subsidy.”
A day or two, after the announcement of the policy, some newspapers came out with headlines: ‘Petrol prices go wild,” “Fuel subsidy removal stirs anger, protests,” “Nigerians groan under subsidy chaos.” Some other newspapers came with the headline such as “Analysts see new investments in refineries as FG removes fuel subsidy.”
On the fourth day, some of the media came out with screaming headlines on the oppositions, protests and anger over the policy than the possible benefits that could be derived from the subsidy removal.
A media analyst who prefers anonymity said the media could have done better in its handling of the subsidy removal if there was conscious effort on the part of government to engage them to understand its vision.
“Except a few media organisations, the reports of other media houses were on the fence or on the side of the opposing public because they did not understand or were not carried along on the objective of the policy,” according to the analyst.
To him, government could have used the media to make people understand what subsidy means and who is benefitting from it. “The people don’t understand the subsidy, they are not looking beyond now and the media should have educated the people. What the media should have done is to focus on the benefits of the removal and push the government to use the proceeds judiciously than the way it is handling it,” he said further.
A media analyst who prefers anonymity said the media could have done better in its handling of the subsidy removal if there was conscious effort on the part of government to engage them to understand its vision.
“Except a few media organisations, the reports of other media houses were on the fence or on the side of the opposing public because they did not understand or were not carried along on the objective of the policy,” according to the analyst.
To him, government could have used the media to make people understand what subsidy means and who is benefitting from it. “The people don’t understand the subsidy, they are not looking beyond now and the media should have educated the people. What the media should have done is to focus on the benefits of the removal and push the government to use the proceeds judiciously than the way it is handling it,” he said further.
The analyst regretted that there was less effort on the part of President Jonathan’s administration to deepen media understanding and create media networking on the policy. The protests, he said, are based on historical misgivings against the government and not necessarily on the subsidy removal.
Yomi Bularinwa, director general, National Broadcasting Corporation (NBC), also cautioned the media on the reportage of issues relating to the subsidy, saying the NBC had not banned any electronic organisation from the coverage of the protests, but advised the media not to take the issues out of proportion.
The media should balance its reports in the coverage of the protests, he said.
The media should balance its reports in the coverage of the protests, he said.
Also commenting on the protests, Akonte Ekine, managing director, Absolute PR, told BusinessDay that there was a communication gap between the government and Nigerians. According to him, while government is proposing for the removal of subsidy, it would have followed immediately with information on projects it would execute with proceeds of the subsidy.
Akonte further said that while the present administration failed to provide clear project road maps and timetable to actualise them, the government, no matter its good intention also suffered from the distrust of previous administrations.
In his assessment, John Ehiguese, managing director, MediaCraft, believed the bulk of Nigerians are against the removal of subsidy based on their lack of understanding of government’s workings. There is a historical distrust on government due to many years of disappointments and based on this, no amount of conviction will assuage Nigerians, he noted.
In his assessment, John Ehiguese, managing director, MediaCraft, believed the bulk of Nigerians are against the removal of subsidy based on their lack of understanding of government’s workings. There is a historical distrust on government due to many years of disappointments and based on this, no amount of conviction will assuage Nigerians, he noted.
Sometimes, what the people think is best for them is actually their albatross, especially when they are ignorant of the facts as it affects them, another analyst noted.
In his comment, Fubara Shedrack said the Nigerian government was failing on its part in engaging the masses in constructive dialogue, and to fill them in on the facts and myths of fuel subsidy removal. Fuel subsidy removal is not entirely a necessary evil as some critics attempt to paint it.
In his comment, Fubara Shedrack said the Nigerian government was failing on its part in engaging the masses in constructive dialogue, and to fill them in on the facts and myths of fuel subsidy removal. Fuel subsidy removal is not entirely a necessary evil as some critics attempt to paint it.
Comments
Post a Comment