The Plateau killings are a national tragedy—but our discourse, reporting, and responses will decide if we cultivate reconciliation or exacerbate divisions.
The media should consistently adhere to journalistic ethical standards by providing balanced and impartial coverage of all topics, especially when dealing with delicate ethnic and religious tensions or community disputes. Focusing excessively on one perspective while inadequately covering another can lead to misinformation and an inaccurate portrayal of what has occurred.
The latest surge in violent incidents in Plateau State has once more highlighted both the precarious nature of security in Nigeria and the significant divisions within how our media landscape handles and conveys these grim events. According to a study carried out by PRNigeria from April 9th through April 16th, there is a concerning trend toward sensationalism, political manipulation, and erratic coverage, which could exacerbate an environment that is already highly unstable.
The report indicates that almost half of the analyzed media content had a notably pessimistic tone, with 45 percent of the narratives emphasizing topics like violence, governmental collapse, and supposed political involvement. Although some level of investigative journalism is crucial for democratic societies, filling newsfeeds with provocative terms such as “massacre” and “terror” doesn’t foster constructive dialogue. Rather, this approach stokes panic, intensifies communal strife, and undermines trust in official bodies.
Similarly concerning is the discrepancy in reported casualty counts, which vary between 17 and more than 50, according to different sources. In an area prone to conflicts, these inconsistencies are significant—they can trigger retaliatory assaults, ignite public anger, and hinder peace negotiations. The absence of unified communication and verified news reports exacerbates this issue further.
Meanwhile, political actors have not hesitated to exploit the situation. From opportunistic statements by opposition figures to suggestive commentaries attacking the Federal Government, the crisis has been weaponised in the battle for political capital. This politicisation of tragedy detracts from the urgent need for a unified, strategic, and humane response to the suffering of ordinary Nigerians.
Furthermore, certain groups and individuals have resorted to a blame game, pointing fingers at specific ethnicities as being responsible for the recent surge in killings across Plateau communities, without giving the relevant authorities the chance to properly investigate and uncover the true perpetrators. Alarmingly, some civil society organisations have even called for the withdrawal of military troops from their communities, accusing them of failing to take adequate action in curbing the ongoing violence.
Most crucially, journalists and media houses must embrace their role as nation-builders, not just newsbreakers. In moments of national tragedy, the line between informing and inciting becomes perilously thin. It is a line we cannot afford to cross.
Nevertheless, not everything is dire. The review also points out a significant amount of fair and balanced reporting (constituting 50 percent). This includes editorials advocating for justice, peace, and better strategies. Noteworthy was the acknowledgment of successful military operations that prevented additional assaults, along with top-tier security inspections meant to reassure the public. Such narratives warrant greater visibility since they underscore the resilience and capacity for restoration inherent in our institutions—if only these aspects received more consistent amplification.
The research highlights that Nigeria requires a comprehensive societal strategy to tackle both the security and communication aspects of this crisis. In addition to implementing operational changes within the security forces, the National Orientation Agency along with media entities should actively work towards debunking false information, promoting responsible reporting during conflicts, and rebuilding trust in official communications.
Likewise, security agencies should enhance their initiatives by implementing forward-thinking strategies to tackle this issue instead of depending only on post-incident reactions once harm has occurred. Achieving this requires strong and continuous cooperation between different departments along with improving information-collection processes. This involves interacting and partnering with unofficial entities within neighborhoods to identify and thwart possible security violations prior to them becoming critical issues.
Moreover, prominent personalities and public officials should be cautious with their public comments on these delicate matters. It’s essential to employ gentle, accountable, and unprovocative language so as not to escalate the situation further. Even a single provocative statement from an involved party has the potential to spark retaliation, especially when dealing with bereaved or upset family members.
To sum up, the Plateau killings are a national tragedy — however, our approach to discussing them, reporting on them, and responding to them will decide whether we cultivate reconciliation or exacerbate divisions.
Above all, reporters and media organizations should assume their part as nation-shapers rather than mere purveyors of headlines. During times of national sorrow, the boundary separating enlightenment from agitation can be dangerously slim. We simply cannot traverse this line.
Moreover, the media should consistently adhere to journalistic ethics by providing balanced and impartial coverage of all matters, especially those concerning delicate ethnic-religious disputes and community tensions. Providing excessive attention to one party while inadequately covering another can lead to misinformation and an inaccurate portrayal of reality.
Furthermore, for the Plateau crisis and analogous disputes to find lasting solutions, actions should transcend mere symptom management; underlying issues must be confronted. Problems like social inequality, graft, and societal instability require direct intervention from the authorities. Many young people and marginalized folks continue to face barriers such as low literacy rates, joblessness, and inadequate sources of stable income. The adage warns us that “idle hands breed trouble.” Hence, equipping these populations with greater opportunities could significantly alleviate security concerns not just within Plateau State but throughout Nigeria at large.
To put it simply, the Plateau killings are a national tragedy — however, our approach in discussing them, reporting on them, and responding to them will decide if we foster reconciliation or exacerbate divisions.
Mukhtar Ya’u Madobi
He serves as a research fellow at the Centre for Crisis Communication. For correspondence, he can be reached at ymukhtar944@gmail.com.
Provided by Syndigate Media Inc. (
Syndigate.info
).