**We apologise for any cross-posting - The following is being forwarded exactly
as received**

To: IFEX Autolist (other news of interest)
From: Independent Journalism Centre (IJC), [email protected]

NIGERIA MEDIA MONITOR
MAY 16, 2003.

· MEDIA GROUP OKAYS ELECTIONS
· NBC CLOSES RADIO STATION OVER ELECTION RESULT
· JOURNALIST CALLS FOR FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL
· NUJ ISSUES FRESH ULTIMATUM OVER UNPAID SALARIES
· WAR, THE MEDIA AND ETHICAL DILEMMA
· LOOKING BACK AT THE POLITICAL DEBATES, AN INSIDE STORY.
· ELECTIONS: HURDLES FACED BY THE PRESS

MEDIA GROUP OKAYS ELECTIONS
The Punch, May 8, 2003
The Media Monitoring Group, a coalition of members of the Nigerian Union of
Journalist and the Nigerian Guild of Editors, has commended the Federal
Government, INEC and the people of Nigeria on the conduct and outcome of the
election into the states House of Assembly held last Saturday.

In a statement jointly signed by the NUJ president, Prince Smart Adeyemi and the
president of NGE, Mrs. Remi Oyo, the MMG noted that the conduct of the May 3
poll saw a great improvement in terms of preparation of INEC as materials
arrived on time at polling centres a clear departure from the previous elections
when there were reports of late arrivals at some polling units.

The group praised the level of security and said it was high with few cases of
disruption or violence.

NBC CLOSES RADIO STATION OVER ELECTION RESULT
The Punch, May 8, 2003
A private radio station, JFM in Adeje village near Warri, Delta State has been
shut down on the orders of the Nigerian Broadcasting Commission. The station,
according to investigations by our
correspondent on Wednesday, was shut for contravening rules guiding broadcast of
election results in the country.

It was learnt that the big hammer of the NBC fell on the station following the
alleged broadcast of an unauthorised announcement, which declared Chief Great
Ogboru, the Alliance for Democracy candidate, as the winner of the April 19,
gubernatorial election in the state.

The development generated serious tension in the state as it happened when the
Independent National Electoral Commission in Asaba, the state capital, was still
collating the results

The police immediately besieged the station and arrested the continuity
announcer on duty, Mrs. Esther Ofuegbe, one George Nutasai and four other staff
of the station. They were however, arraigned at a Magistrate's Court in Asaba,
on Monday, April 28, alongside the Publicity Secretary of the state AD, Mr.
Clever Egbeji, who allegedly took the copy of the result to the station for
broadcast.

The three-count charge alleged that the accused persons published and announced
a false report likely to cause hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection
against the persons and office of the Governor, Chief James Ibori. The
announcement, the charge further stated was "likely to cause fear and alarm to
the public or to disturb the public peace, knowing or having reasons to believe
same to be false."

JOURNALIST CALLS FOR FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL
The Punch, May 7, 2003
A one-time chairman of the Kano State Council of the Nigeria Union of
Journalists, Chief Ajayi Memaiyetan, has challenged incoming members of the
National Assembly to pass the Freedom of Information Bill into law to safeguard
democracy.

The former chairman, who is now a community leader, gave the challenge in an
interview with our
correspondent in Kano on Monday. He was reacting to questions about the
performance of the media since the inception of the current democratic
dispensation.

He said unless the bill was passed and journalists given the much needed access
to vital information on how public officers spent the nation's resources, the
war against corruption would remain a slogan.

According to him, for media practitioners to also live above board, there was
need for organisations such as the Newspapers Proprietors Association of Nigeria
and the Nigeria Press Organisation to address the problem of poor working
condition of journalists.

He said since the survival of democracy partly depended on how well
practitioners played their roles, it was important for all stakeholders in the
democratic process to take a second look at how
journalists were rewarded for their work.

NUJ ISSUES FRESH ULTIMATUM OVER UNPAID SALARIES
Daily Independent, May 9, 2003.
The Nigerian Union of Journalists (NUJ) has threatened industrial action if by
May 15, 2003, media houses owing staff salaries fail to clear all arrears.

In a statement by its National Secretary, Shuaibu Usman Leman, the union
recalled that sequel to the emergency meeting of the Nigeria Press Organisation
(NPO) stakeholders at Vanguard Media Limited on March 31, 2003, the March
deadline given by the NUJ over non-payment of salaries was suspended.

The statement observed that the monitoring committee set by the stakeholders to
specifically ensure
settlement of salary arrears has been ineffective.

The NUJ said in view of the several and persistent complaints from her members
on Unpaid salaries and the attendant social dislocation, it totally condemns the
deliberate policies of media
owners to continue to sustain poverty in the media through non-payment of
salaries.

The union's grouses also include that:
· check-off deductions should be remitted instead of the current practice where
such deductions are
ploughed back into the system;
· the continued non-payment of salaries has subjected journalists to untold
hardship and subsistence life;
· the media owners' policy has subjected journalists to limited aspirations in
terms of human development; as much as we appreciate some of the problem of
media owners in terms of cost of equipment, production materials, taxation,
delayed payment on adverts, we cannot continue to watch our members work without
pay.
· The union warned that it should not be held responsible for any resultant
industrial action(s)
that would be adopted to correct the situation.

NIGERIAN JOURNALISTS AND ELECTION 2003
Daily Independent, May 6, 2003
Two days to the commencement of the National Assembly elections, the Independent
National Electoral Commission (INEC), the body charged with the conduct of the
elections in the country, opened a Media Result Centre to allow the media access
to authentic results.

The centre, fitted with about 30 armchairs, five computer work stations, writing
desks and a television set was created to cater for more than 1,000 local and
international journalists covering the elections.

Worhy of mention at the centre, during the period, was the ever present
sit-tight "media-less" journalists, popularly known as Press Centre Press Corps
(PCPC).

This group of journalists kept the centre busy with their uninformed,
unintelligent and un-researched discussions. This tended to lower the reputation
of Nigerian journalists before their foreign counterparts. The group, which
sough to interview any foreigner seated at the centre with routine questions
such as "how is the election, how are you finding your stay in Nigeria, what are
you expecting from the election and what are your experiences at the elections?

But the way and manner in which they conducted themselves ended up embarrassing
practitioners of the pen profession in the country. One of the foreign
journalists told the News Agency of
Nigeria (NAN) that he was surprised that colleagues at the centre were bent on
interviewing him, when he should be the one speaking with them. Apart from
conducting themselves in unprofessional manner, the group constituted themselves
into information officers at the centre, circulating unfounded rumours and
speculations about who was winning and in which state. They also seemed to have
reasons why some candidates were either winning or losing and the steps
Such people were expected to take to redress the situation.

Meanwhile, it was surprising that they were never in a hurry to send their
stories whenever INEC released any result, but were more interested in what INEC
would do for them.

Knowing that NTA and AIT transmit live activities at the centre, PCPC's focus
shifted to how they would be called upon to analyse results and situations on
those stations.

The activities of Nigerian journalists at the centre, during the April 12, and
April 19, elections should be a wake-up call to the Nigeria Union of Journalists
(NUJ) to take urgent steps to put its house in order. There is no gain-saying
the fact that only accredited journalists should be allowed to cover an event of
such magnitude.

Contributed by Alex Abutu, a staff of the News Agency of Nigeria

WAR, THE MEDIA AND ETHICAL DILEMMA
Daily Independent, May 9, 2003
The ideal Society has always eluded man but it is not very difficult for one to
visualize. It should be a society where every one is equal. Equal in the sense
that happiness; material wealth, opportunities, respect, knowledge and morals
are available to everyone in the same measure. Of all the institutions naturally
charged with charting not only the course but also the methodology of bringing
the ideal society into fruition the press is the most strategic. This is very
easy to agree with seeing that the media by nature is the best channel of
communication between all the publics of the society. For one, it is the
shortest and quickest method through which the leaders can communicate with the
people and vice-versa. It is not for nothing that the press is regarded as the
fourth estate of the realm or the base upon which the three arms of government
stand. For this reason the former American president, Thomas Jefferson, would
rather the government cease to exist than for the press to be tampered with. The
press moderates the relation between the big three and makes sure that checks
and balances are properly in place and also sets the agenda for national
discuss.

In the modern world where the bridge between local and international politics is
becoming increasingly narrower seeing that information technology has reduced
the world to a village. The role of the press in international politics and
diplomacy is becoming as important as it is difficult. The press in a country
knows its duties as promoting aspiration of the people, setting the agenda for
discuss, serving a channel of communication between the government and the
governed, promoting the culture of the people, and doing all within the tenets
of the profession-or that feature that makes it impartial. But in international
reporting the situation becomes more crucial and demands the highest
responsibility. If local reporting in peace times present a lot of trouble them
international reporting in war times presents a dilemma.

The first issue in war reportage is the morality of war in itself. This is an
issue that the world media most attend to. Granted America, like any other
nation, has a national interest in international security how should the
American media present the justification for war to not only the other countries
of the world but especially to ordinary Iraqis. The ideal situation would have
been that the American media should condemn any war for whatever course in that
it should build rather than destroy. But the same media is supposed to defend
the aspiration and security of the American
people.

The dilemma here is reinforced by the argument of scholars of international
relations who posit that war is an instrument of peace. Harry Truman faced the
same situation, when he decided to drop the Atomic Bomb, a deadly product, in
Hiroshima so as to quickly end World War II, which would have protracted if he
had been reluctant.

The expediency of the war is one thing and the manner of coverage and
presentation of materials is another. Herein lies one of the most difficult
duties of the international media. Facts in this profession are sacred and
truth should be your watch word.

However, if the media joins a government in its war against a foreign enemy then
it may lend itself to be used as an instrument for propaganda, which is part of
the strategies of war.

I have friends that treat the war reports of most American media as poison.
These are the same people who used to tune to and hold fast to news (from those
stations) on happenings in Nigeria. I still believe that even today they still
will look up to those media to serve that purpose. But if the two countries are
at war then the foreign station becomes suspect. But people are ignorant of the
heavy burden that the gate-keepers (or editors) in the media have had to bear in
situations like this. Should you report all the details of war and broadcast the
grim pictures of the usual consequences of war it may raise not just public
outrage against the aggressor but will fuel the anger of those sympathetic with
the victims. In this case the Middle East would be agog with volunteers who
may be suicide bombers. Self acclaimed moralists and intellectuals would call
more press conferences and write more books reiterating their earlier stand that
war is an ill wind that blows no one any good. But if the media under report
the carnage of war, for the simple reason that cold facts would hit the wrong
nerves, then institutions like the World Health Organization (WHO) the Red
Cross, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) would not know the extent
to which their services are required. Under-reporting of, if you like, the
carnage of war' would deny the victims of war the services of humanitarian
organizations which would have gone a long way to
alleviate the effects and also set in motion plans of rebuilding the country.

On another hand the screening of the realities of war and human-angle stores
alone have severally shown that war should be the last resort. Media reportage
of the effects of war have been able to persuade the people to source other
methods to resolve disagreements. The reportage of the entire human, economic,
social and political consequences of the use of force can also help persuade
government officials and dictators to be more responsible as their actions can
bring untold
hardship on their own peoples.

On a final note the media who are not only fond of demanding responsibility from
the people but also public understanding of the constrains of their job should
be on their toes and rise to their duty with the highest sense of judgment and
professionalism based solely on the ethics of the profession.

Ochela Anthony writes from Abuja

LOOKING BACK AT THE POLITICAL DEBATES, AN INSIDE STORY.
Vanguard, May 7, 2003.
DAAR Communications Limited operators of AIT, RayPower 100.5 and RayPower
106.5Fm as part of its avowed commitment to the growth of democracy, the
enthronement of enduring democratic cultural values in 1999, at the threshold of
exit of the military after about 16 years of military rule, organised a
presidential Debate.

With the benefits of hindsight couple with the need to correct some wrong
information making the rounds because of posterity and history, elaborate effort
was put in place in 1999 for a grand debates involving the Presidential
candidates of both PDP - Chief Olusegun Obasanjo and the joint AD/NPP - Chief
Olu Falae though the latter failed to attend.

Both Alhaji Abubakar Atiku and Alhaji Umaru Shinkafi, the Vice President
Candidates of both PDP and AD/APP met each other at the Alagbado - Lagos studios
of DAAR other at the Alagbado - Lagos studio of DAAR COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED for
a live debate which was transmitted across the country.

The Board of Directors of DAAR COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED, while reviewing the
operations of the organisation, the state of the nation especially as it relates
to the April 2003 general elections the most important national/continental
event in the year 2003 at its Board meetings in Lagos in 2002, Abuja and
Port-Harcourt earlier in 2003 resolved that; Presidential, Vice Presidential and
Gubernatorial debates should be organised by the Organisation.

With the debate Nigerians will have the opportunity of hearing their Political
leaders and assess them based on the issues, plans and policies that they have
for the betterment of the lots of our people.

Towards ensuring a most successful debate, the necessary approvals were obtained
from the Security Agents, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)
and all other relevant Agencies.

Having accomplished the most crucial preliminary work with the active
collaboration of the Civil Liberties Organisation (CLO), in order to give the
debate/broadcast, national spread, when the
Director-General of Voice of Nigeria (VOA) and the Chairman of Broadcasting
Organisation of Nigeria (BON) - Mr. Taiwo Alimi paid a courtesy visit to DAAR
COMMUNICATIONS complex at Alagbado - Lagos, in pursuance of the coverage of the
2003 General Elections, by the Broadcasting Stations who are all members of the
Broadcasting Organisation of Nigeria (BON), the Management of DAAR
COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED briefed the delegation on the proposed debate and all
other plans and strategies of the organisation for the coverage of the
elections.

The broadcasting Organisations of Nigeria (BON) Chairman there and then promised
to involve BON and indeed the entire Nigerian media in the actualisation and
most especially the coverage of the debate. Though he advised that it would be
better, tidy and patriotically reasonable for the entire media in Nigeria to
organised only one and centralised debate rather than allow unnecessary plethora
of debates by the different stations.

A meeting was called for this purpose. At the meeting which was attended by the
President of the Newspaper Association of Nigerian (NPAN) - Mr. Ray Ekpu, the
President of the Nigerian Guild of Editors, - Mrs Remi Oyo, the President of the
Nigerian Union of Journalists, Mr. Smart Adeyemi, the Executive Chairman of DAAR
COMMUNICATIONS - Dr. Aleogho Dokpesi, the
Chief Operating Officer, Ladi Lawal, Mr. Chima Ubani of Civil Liberties
organisation (CLO) and other stake-holders, the concept of the debate was
appraised and the need for a nationally organised/televised debate was generally
agreed and acceptable.

But one important and very sensitive aspect for the debate that has generated
controversy is the
administration of invitation to the candidates. Some candidates claimed that
they were not formally
invited. According to them, they only heard/read the debate in the media.

This is not correct. All the candidates were duly invited. DAAR COMMUNICATIONS
that initiated the debate four weeks before the debate contacted all the
Candidates and obtained confirmation/assurances of attendance. When BON took
over, appropriate letters were again written to all the Candidates. In addition
to the letters that were duly acknowledge, the
personal contacts were also established with the candidates and their respective
Campaign Officials.

For the sake of posterity and the Almighty Lord that we all serve, ALL the
Presidential and Vice
Presidential Candidates were all formally invited for the debates. Anyone that
claimed he was not duly invited is only trying to cling to a straw while
drowning in the sea of reality and the unexpected success of the debate. The
Broadcasting Organisation of Nigeria (BON) is not the Voice of Nigerian (VON).
BON is not a government Agency as construed by some media reports. Mr. Taiwo
Alimi is the Director-General of VON and also the Chairman of BON which is the
umbrella body of all broadcasting Organisation operating in the Federal Republic
of Nigeria, both public and private stations.

Finally, judging from the huge success of the debate coupled with the political
enlightenment that it was able to promote, it will be necessary and relevant for
the incoming National Assembly to consider promulgating a law for the
establishment of a body to be called the National Debates Commission to be setup
so that anyone aspiring to public office must be ready to tell the Nigeria
people what he/she wants to do when eventually given the mandate. Service and
accountability are the hallmarks of Democratic Governance. The National Debates
Commission too should be one of the Agencies like INEC that will participate in
the electoral process. Come 2007, by the grace of the Almighty, Presidential
debate will be organised again. It can only be better.

This material was sent in from Abuja by a member of the Presidential Debate
Steering Committee

TO OUR DEAR READERS:
1 Media Monitor is designed as a dialogical project. We expect its
contents to elicit reactions from its readers. And we encourage you to share
your feelings with others on its pages. Letters not longer than 200 words and
addressed to The Editor, Media Monitor, should be sent to: [email protected]
2. It is our desire that Media Monitor gets to all locations where people
believe in the cause of free
expression, democracy and freedom. We are working to extend the reach of the
publication. And we implore you to support this endeavour. How? Simply compile
and e-mail to us a list of persons and organisations who you believe would find
this publication useful for their work. We will promptly put them on our mailing
list.
Our target audience includes media, free expression/human rights bodies, NGOs,
diplomatic/policy centres, professional associations, departments/school of
journalism/mass communication/government/political science/African studies, and
other strategic circles.

MEDIA MONITOR IS PUBLISHED WEEKLY AND CIRCULATED WORLDWIDE BY INDEPENDENT
JOURNALISM CENTRE (IJC) 27 ACME ROAD, OGBA, P. O. BOX 7808, IKEJA, LAGOS,
NIGERIA, WEST AFRICA. PHONE/FAX: 234-1-4924998; E-MAIL: [email protected]

**The information contained in this autolist item is the sole responsibility of
IJC**