Towards aCo-regulatory FrameworkFor the Nigerian print Media

BEING A SEMINAR PAPER SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF THEATRE ARTS UNIVERSITY OF ABUJA. IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF A PHD IN MEDIA ARTS MARCH 2013

BY: AUSTIN MAHO NO.09523018

Abstract

Purpose –The problem of media regulation iscontentious and often divisive. Generally, there isagreement that the media needs some level ofregulation; it is the type and manner of regulationthat has remained a burning issue over the years.While some stakeholders have rooted for internalregulation others have called for externalregulation. This paper explores the problem ofregulation in the Nigerian print media; Withreference to the standoff between NUJ and NPAN asregards the NPC Act. The paper proposes a co-regulatory framework as a way of getting round theimpasse.

Design/methodology/approach – The paper combinesnarrative and analysis of interview data with keystakeholders. Examines the sundry arguments that haveled to a deadlock in the attempt by stakeholders toagree on a common regulatory framework for the printmedia in Nigeria.

Findings – the data suggests that the print media inNigeria since the return of democracy in 1999, isunregulated. Attempts to regulate the media are atbest ad hoc and have largely failed. Unprofessionalconduct by practitioners is hardly sanctioned. Thishas given rise to a lot of unethical conduct in theindustry. The tripartite squabble amongst criticalstake holders in the industry has not help matterseither. NPAN, NUJ and the government through the NPCover the years have been unable to agree on the best

way to professionalise and institute ethicalstandards within the Nigerian print media.

Originality/value – An exploration of the issue ofmedia regulation and ethics following the impasseamongst stakeholders in the Nigerian print media. Thestakeholders identified are the: NUJ, NPAN and thegovernment owned NPC.

Keywords: News media, print media, press publicTrust, public interest regulation.

Paper type: Seminar

1.1. Introduction

Regulation refers to the whole process of control or

guidance, by established rules and procedures,

applied by independent bodies, governments and other

political and administrative authorities to all kinds

of media activities. Thus regulation especially of

the print media, which is our focus in this paper, is

always a potential intervention in ongoing activities,

usually for some stated "public interest" goal,

Regulation takes many forms, ranging from statutory

to the non- statutory to the administrative.

Regulation can be internal as well as external. In the

former case, we are usually speaking of `self-

regulation', where internal controls are the norm,

sometimes in response to public pressure or criticism

from outside. External regulation on the other hand

is usually applied by an independent body usually set

up by government.

In Nigeria attempts to regulate the print media can

be traced to the colonial newspaper ordinance of 1903

and subsequent legislations put in place by the

colonial administration to fetter the press. The

lndependence constitution guaranteed press freedom in

Nigeria, in line with global democratic standards.

Since 1960, when Nigeria gained sovereignty, the

print media has remained largely unregulated except

during military regimes when some obnoxious laws were

promulgated with the aim of regulating the press. The

return of democracy in 1999 has seen a repeal of many

of these laws and a renewed call for the regulation

of the print media in order to check alleged

excesses. However desirable, the impasse between

critical stakeholders has not allowed for the

effective institution of a regulatory framework for

the Nigerian print media.

1.2 The historical background and media regulation inNigeria.

The history of media regulation begins with the

application of the printing press to book production

from the mid-15th century onwards in Western Europe.

Initially, printing was simply a more productive

alternative to the copying of manuscript texts by

hand, which had not been formally regulated, although

in practice it took place mainly under the oversight

of authorities of church or state. As the printing

trade and industry expanded, especially after 1500,

both church and state took an increasing interest in

the content of what was being printed and published,

especially with a view to combating heresy or

dissent. Between the 16th and 19th centuries in

Western Europe and North America, the history of

media regulation was one of struggle against

restrictions on publication waged in the name of

political freedom and human rights, but also on

behalf of the printing trades and industries,

including the rights of authors.

The first amendment and the American bill of rights

guaranteed freedom of the press in the USA. The

freedom to publish was achieved by gradual change in

Britain and by revolution in France at the end of the

eighteenth century. For most of the world during the

modern era, repressive and punitive media regulation

in the interest of state power has been the norm.

In Nigeria the history of media regulation dates back

to the colonial newspaper ordinance of 1903. The Lord

Fredrick Lugard led Colonial government is accused of

using the Newspaper Ordinance of 1903 to regulate the

media. which was further strengthened in 1907 to

control the articulate anti-colonial and anti-Lugard

Local Press which were later supported with the

Seditious Publications Act of 1909 and solidified with the

introduction of the Criminal Code in 1916 with specific

sections of it making any form of criticism of the

government a seditious offence.

The independence constitution of 1960 gave some

leverage to the press in line with global best

practices. Section 24 sub- section (1) provides for

freedom of expression and states inter alia:

Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, includingfreedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas andinformation without interference.

(It should be noted that this same provisions was

replicated in subsequent constitutions: section 36

sub- section one of the 1979 constitution and section

39 sub- section one of the 1999 constitution as

amended).

However the military incursion in government changed

everything. As with despots the world over General

Yakubu Gowon who succeeded General Aguiyi-Ironsi in

1966 promulgated the Emergency Decree of 1966 which made

arrest and detention of Citizens without warrant,

lawful and also empowered the Inspector - General of

Police and other Officers of the same or higher rank

to search any Newspaper Office or Premises in Nigeria

without warrant or notice;

The administration also proceeded in 1967 to

promulgate another Decree titled the Newspaper

Prohibition of Circulation Decree 1967 which empowered the Head

of Federal Military Government to restrict from

circulation of any newspaper in Nigeria where he

satisfied that it is detrimental to the interest of

the federation or any State thereof within the

federation which may subsist within 12 months unless

restricted or extended by the Head of State as the

case may be and refusal to comply entitled such

journalist to 6 months imprisonment and or N500 fine.

Trade Disputes {Emergency Provision} Amendment Decree No 53 of

1969 was also promulgated which made it an offence for

any person to publish in a newspaper, television or

radio or by any means of mass communication, any

matter which by reason of dramatization or other

deflects in the manner of its presentation was likely

to cause public alarm or industrial unrest.

The Military administration of General Olusegun

Obasanjo promulgated a Decree on 8th April 1979

titled the Newspaper Public Official Report Decree which

provided that any person who published or reproduces

in any form whether written or otherwise; any

statement, rumour or report alleging that a public

officer has in any manner engaged in corrupt

practices or has in any manner corruptly enriched

himself or any other person being a statement, rumour

or report which is false in any material particular,

shall be guilty of an offence and be liable on

conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2

years without option of fine.

The civilian administration of Alhaji Shehu Shagari

gave the media some respite. The 1979 constitution,

as stated above provided for freedom of expression

and of the press. However, with the coming of the

General Buhari government on 31st of December 1984

through coup d’état, the media once again came under

draconian regulation. Decree No 4 of 1984 orderwise

known as the Public Officers {Protection against False Accusation}

was promulgated. The Decree made it an offence for a

Newspaper or any Wireless Telegraphy Station in

Nigeria to publish or transmit any message, rumour,

report or statement which is false against any Public

Officer.

The Decree also made any person found guilty of this

offence to be liable on conviction to imprisonment

for a term not exceeding two years without the option

of fine and in the case of a corporate body to a fine

not less than N10, 000. The Decree also provides

that where the offence is committed by a Corporate

Body, every person who at the time of the commission

of the offence was the Proprietor, Publisher, General

Manager, Editor, Secretary or other similar Officer

of the Body Corporate or was purporting to act in any

such capacity shall be deem to be guilty of that

offence unless he proves that the offence was

committed without his consent or connivance and he

had acted to prevent such an offence. Nduka Irabor

and Tunde Thompson of the Guardian Newspaper were

jailed under this Decree and the paper was ordered to

pay N50, 000 as fine.

The regime of General Buhari was brought to an end

on 27th of August 1985 by General Ibrahim Babangida

led administration which in a populist move released

Messrs Tunde Thompson and Nduka Irabor that were

jailed during General Mohammed Buhari’s

administration.

Barely a year after this populist posture the

Babangida administration began its own regulation of

the press. The administration repealed Decree No 2 of

1984 and re-introduced another Decree titled the State

Security {Detention of Persons} Decree 2 of 1984 which was used to

deal ruthlessly with the Press. Newswatch Magazine

suffered immensely from this decree.

The administration also promulgated the Nigerian Press

Council Decree No. 85 of 1992 which established the Nigerian

Press Council to deal with complaints by members of

the public against the conduct of Journalists in

their professional capacity.

Also the administration under the Newspapers Publication

{Proscription and Prohibition from circulation} Decree No 14 1992

proscribed several newspaper. Prominent amongst which

is the concord newspaper and other publication in its

title. The administration also proscribed the

publication as well as prohibit from circulation the

following Newspapers around 1993. The Punch, Saturday

Punch, Sunday Punch, Daily Sketch, Sunday Sketch and Nigerian

Observer. All these was in response to the June 12

crisis.

The subsequent Abacha regime did not rely much on

promulgation of any draconian Decrees to regulate the

press, instead he relied on brute force and

intimidation of journalists.

A major highlight of the General Abdulsalam Abubakar

administration, which took over from the Abacha

government, was the amendment of the Nigerian Press

Council Decree No. 85 of 1992, few days to the end of

the administration. The new Decree titled the

Nigerian Press Council (Amendment) Decree No. 60 of

1999 empowered the Council to be in-charge of

registration of journalists and newspapers as well as

magazines annually and also provided for the

imposition of heavy sanctions on the proprietors and

publishers of any newspaper and magazine which fail

to register in accordance with the provisions of the

Decree.

Legislation has played a major part in print media

regulation in Nigeria as evident from the analysis

above. However the first major attempt at developing

a structural or institutional framework for

regulation in the Nigerian print media can be traced

to the Ekineh Committee on the print media which was

set up by the Yakubu Gowon administration in 1968.

Although the work of the Committee was never made

public (Momodu,2000) it is usually seen as the

precursor to the coming into being of the Nigerian

Press Council Decree 31 of 1978.The Decree eventual

birthed the Nigerian Press Council. An institution of

government for print media regulation.

1.3 Summary

On the basis of this analysis we can conclude that

the history of print media regulation in Nigeria has

been largely negative and reactive. Most of the

regulatory framework developed by government starting

from the colonial newspaper ordinance of 1903 through

decree 10 of 1984 to Abdusalami Abukabar’s

resurrection of the Press Council Decree of 1999,

were designed to counter threats to press freedom and

diversity, just that some where more draconian than

others.

No wonder media stakeholders in the country have

always viewed external regulation by government with

suspicion. However this is not to discountenance the

fact that regulation can be positive and be a tool

for enhancing public trust in the media.

2.1 Why are media regulated?

There is an incongruity inherent to the notion of

regulating what are supposed to be the free means of

expression and information in a democratic society.

Regulation by its very nature sets limits to the

constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression and

the press, which is a basic principle of modern

societies. At the very least, there have to be clear

and convincing reasons for regulation, and although

we can give general justifications for regulation

that help to reconcile it with principles of freedom

and democracy, we cannot escape from this underlying

tension.

There is no single or simple answer to the question

“why regulate the news media?” and often the surface

reasons given conceal their actual purpose, which is

often not in the public interest but rather to

protect the state institution.

Following Feintuck, M. (1999), six general reasons

for media regulation can be identified as follows:

1.The management of what is arguably the key

economic resource in the emerging “information

society” with a very high dependence on all forms

of communication.

2.The protection of public order and support for

instruments of government and justice.

3.The protection of individual and sectional rights

and interests that might be harmed by

unrestricted use of public means of

communication.

4.The promotion of the efficiency and development

of the communication system, by way of technical

standardization, innovation, connectivity and

universal provision.

5.The promotion of access, freedom to communicate,

diversity and universal provision as well as

securing communicative and cultural ends chosen

by the people for themselves.

6.Maintaining conditions for effective operation of

free markets in media services, especially

competition and access, protection of consumers,

stimulating innovation and expansion.

We find the points raised by Feintuck in number 2,3

and 5 of particularly relevance to our discussion.

This is because they not only highlight the public

interest function of the news media but also the

protection of the individual, group and the society

from the unrestricted freedom of the media.

2.2 Types of Regulation

Regulations are formal and compulsory instructions

about the structure, conduct or content of the media.

(source). Regulation comes in different forms it can

be formal or external regulation or informal or self

regulation. Regulation is all about accountability

which Dennis McQuail has defined as "all the

voluntary or involuntary processes by which the media

answer directly or indirectly to their society for

the quality and/or consequences of publication"

(McQuail, 2005). Voluntary in this sense equates self

or informal regulation while involuntary denotes

external or formal regulation.

Available literature suggests that media regulation

takes an ascending order. At the highest point of

regulation is government regulation this is followed

by other forms of regulation, like NGOs, pressure

groups and others. At the lowest level is self

regulation.

The legal system provides an important category of

formal or external regulation for the news media.

Legal requirements that de facto help to regulate the

media include laws against libel and defamation, laws

protecting privacy, laws concerning intellectual

property rights, and prohibitions against incitement

to violence or racial hatred, pornography or

obscenity or the Child Right Act. Generally the

justice system protects itself by law against media

activities that might pervert the course of justice,

otherwise generally referred to as contempt of court.

Sanction can be achieved through fines and in some

cases jail terms.

Most informal or self mechanisms of regulation on the

other hand, rely on voluntary compliance, and usually

achieved through a code of conduct. Sanction carries

a lighter weight, does not carry any material penalty

and in the print media it is usually through

retraction and or apology.

While regulation can cover a wide range of issues our

focus is on conduct of journalists or print media

organizations with emphasis on journalistic ethics.

2.3. Theoretical Framework –What is Co-regulation?

While regulation falls into the two broad categories

of formal and self regulation as highlighted above,

there is a third dimension in the literature which is

generally referred to as co-regulation.

Co-regulation is the combination of “intentional

self-regulation” with the state sanction in reserve

which results in self-regulation which is “regulated”

by the possibility of state intervention. J. J.

Boddewyn, (1988) Advertising Self-regulation and Outside

Participation.

At the Birmingham “Audiovisual Assizes” in 1998,

schulz and Held used the formulation as: “Self-

regulation that fits in with a legal framework or has

a basis laid down in law”.

The term “co-regulation” also gives a sense of the

joint responsibilities of market actors and the

State, short of outright command-and-control, in the

activity under evaluation.

The term also has been used by the UK’s telecom

regulator to suggest a state role in setting

objectives which market actors must then organize to

achieve – with the threat of statutory powers invoked

in the absence of market self-regulation. (Richard

Thomas 2004)

Schulz and Held also suggest that “regulated self-

regulation” can be any of these categories: co-

regulation, intentional self regulation, or a third

category – “audited self-regulation”.

Also drawing from the European Commission (2004)

second evaluation report on the protection of minors

and human dignity as it relates to co-regulation, the

commission notes that: “A co-regulatory approach may

be more flexible, adaptable and effective than

straightforward regulation and legislation.” It went

further to observe that:

co-regulation can often better achieve the given

aims. Co-regulation implies however, from the

Commission’s point of view, an appropriate level of

involvement by the public authorities. Co-regulation

expresses a dialogue process between stakeholders,

which results in a form of regulation which is

neither state command-and-control regulation in its

bureaucratic central, but is also not “pure” self-

regulation

Evidently , co-regulation is used in such a wide

variety of circumstances that its specific meaning

must be adapted to suite specified purpose. From the

literature we can deduce that the State and

stakeholder groups, including consumers, form part of

the institutional setting for co-regulation. Co-

regulation therefore constitutes multiple

stakeholders, and this inclusiveness results in

greater authority and credibility.

The most important element in co-regulation however

is that stakeholders come together to develop an

agreeable framework for regulation.

3.1 Situation Analysis

The return of democracy in 1999 gave a lot of respite

to the media. In a democratic setting Media

regulation is largely frown at because the very

essence of any democracy is freedom of expression and

of the press. However there are still pocket of laws

in the statute books whose status is uncertain by

virtue of section 39 of the 1999 constitution which

guarantees freedom of expression and of the press.

A prominent one is the Nigeria Press Council Decree

No. 85 of 1992 as amended by Nigerian Press Council

(Amendment) Decree No. 60 of 1999.

The existence of the Press Council Act has since 1999

pitched key stakeholders in the print media industry

against one another. The battle has been between

those who are in favour of external regulation as

provided for by the Act and those who believe that

press freedom has been settled by constitutional

provisions and as such should be allowed to regulate

itself.

The battle has been between the Nigerian Union of

Journalists,NUJ, who favours external regulation as

provided for in the NPC Act and the duo of the

Newspapers Proprietors Association of Nigeria and the

Nigerian Guild of Editors who believe that the print

media should regulate itself and the law setting up

the NPC be scrapped forthwith because it is

antithetical to the provisions of sections 39 sub-

section (1) of the 1999 constitution as amended which

provides for freedom of expression and of the press.

The Newspaper Proprietors Association of Nigeria

(NPAN), in 2003 challenged the constitutionality of

the Act setting up the Nigerian Press Council, by

taking its case before a Federal High Court in Lagos.

The body among other demands had asked the court to

declare null and void the NPC Act in view of Section

39 of the 1999 constitution. The court decided in

favour of the NPAN in line with the constitutional

provisions, of section 39 in a judgement it

delivered in June 2011. The court judgement did not

go the whole hog in repealing the NPC Act, what the

judgement did was to largely curtail the powers of

the NPC to register print media practitioners and

organisation as required by the Act.

With this judgement the NPAN in response to growing

calls for print media regulation instituted the

office of the Ombudsman, a self regulatory mechanism,

as a way of addressing and redressing unethical

conduct by media practitioners and media

organisation.

While the Nigerian Guild of Editors, (NGE) gave its

tacit support to the establishment of the office of

the ombudsman, the Nigerian Union of Journalists

(NUJ) kicked against it. The NUJ based it argument on

the premise that the NPAN cannot be a judge in its

own case. In the views of the NUJ, the media would be

better off with an external regulatory body. To this

end the NUJ threw its weight behind the NCP Act

albeit with a little amendment to the Act, to remove

grey areas on the basis of this, interviews were held

with representatives of the main actors to elicit

their views on the controversy.

4.1 Summary of interview data /comments and responsesto interview questions.

The data for this paper was derived from primary

sources. Interview sessions were held with key

players in the Nigerian print media. They are the

National secretary Nigerian Union of Journalist, the

Executive Secretary Nigerian Press Council and the

National News Editor Daily Trust Newspaper. They were

selected because they represent different perspective

as it relates to print media regulation in Nigeria.

Some review and condensation has been done to the

original text of the interview for ease of

understanding of the key issues of discuss.

The three respondent that were chosen for the

interview sections represents three shades of opinion

that reflects the three group of principal

stakeholders in the Nigerian print media. Liman

Shuaibu the Secretary of the NUJ represented the

views of the Nigerian Union of Journalist. Adebayo

Atoyebi, the executive secretary of the Nigerian

Press Council represented the views of the government

established Nigerian Press Council and by extension

the views of government which supports external

control. Abdulahi Idris, the National Editor of the

Daily Trust stood in for his boss and by extension

represented the views of the Newspapers Proprietors

of Nigeria and the Nigerian Guild of Editors.

4.1.1 Shuaibu Usman Leman, National Secretary NUJ

On unethical practice in journalism:

Journalists are not isolated from the general culture

of corruption in the country. Journalists are corrupt

because there is no enabling law to punish journalist

who engages in unethical conduct. NUJ cannot stop

anyone from practising even if that person violates

ethics, even if that person is not properly trained.

Enforcing ethical violation is difficult, together

with us the NPC the body that is suppose to regulate

ethics is handicapped , Our only point of

disagreement with the NCP is the constitution of the

board

On the NPAN Ombudsman:

you cannot be a judge in your own case. NPAN cannot

set up an ombudsman and appoint a retired judge who

has never practise journalism to head it., and they

attach monetary condition to petition, an aggrieved

person needs to pay the sum of 10,000 to process his

petition. The petition is suppose to be rooted

through NUJ and we said no we support the NPC as an

instrument of regulating journalism practise. We now

said the areas of contention should be amended for

instance appointment of the chairman of the board. We

insist it should be a seasoned journalist. And the

appointment should emanate from the stakeholders, The

Guild, NUJ, NPAN, we should submit the names of three

qualified professionals to the president for

consideration. We also identified the Act that

criminalise libel we said you don’t need to

criminalise libel, rather there should be sanction

for the violation of ethics. There is also the issue

of funding we believe government should be allowed to

fund the council, if you allow the stakeholders they

are likely not to fund this. Even when we went to the

senate to defend the NPC Act these are areas we

disagreed on. That is where we were and NPAN went to

court to challenge the entire NCP Act, since then the

Act has not been amended. The NPAN set up the

ombudsman and our view as a union is that journalist

should not patronise the ombudsman as set up by NPAN.

On why the NUJ would not support the Ombudsman

The union will not support it because as we

understand it the NPAN and the Guild of Editors came

together to establish it to substitute the NPC Act

because according to them it emanated from government

and there is too much government control of the

entire press council, but if you look at the

formation of the board, the NUJ has like 4 members,

the guild is equally represented by 4 members and

NPAN I think has 2 members. If you look at it

generally a board of 15 members or so and you

discover that already you have 10 journalist on the

board, the Executive Secretary is also a seasoned

journalist, l think we can now make a case for the

Nigerian Press Council, with little amendment. The

present chairman is a seasoned journalist although

the former one was an accountant. This is our augment

why we support the NPC Act, just as you have the BON

taking care of ethics in the broadcast media we

believe that the NPC should take care of ethics in

the print media.

On Regulation

NUJ is at the vanguard of that: it always lies with

the union that journalist practise according to the

rule of the game., anytime we receive a complain we

try to investigate it, and every State Council

ideally should have a standing committee on ethics.

The moment we receive a complaint we investigate and

liaise with the respective media owners to report

that so and so have done this which we consider is

wrong and that the management should take action. We

have had cases where many journalist have been

suspended or placed on suspension, infact there are

cases were journalist lost their jobs.

We need a regulator, as it is now people benefit from

an unregulated industry that is why we have a lot of

quack journalist in Abuja going about extorting money

from people and blackmailing people. They are

criminals and that is why we said state councils

should set up committees to tracks this. If you

remember sometimes ago in Abuja about 9 of them were

arrested. But by the time you go to court that is

where the problem starts. The secretary of the union

said he would not go to court again and l asked him

why he said the judge asked him what right has he to

stop somebody from gathering information. They even

asked who is a journalist, is it only someone who

read mass communication. All these have made

regulation difficult people do a lot of things and

get away with it which is not supposed to be. That is

why we want the NPC.

4.1.2 Summary of interview with Mr. Adebayo MudashiruAtoyebi. Executive Secretary Nigeria Press Council

On the structure of the Nigerian Press Council (NPC)

The Nigerian Press Council came into existence by

Cap, 123 Laws of the FRN, Decree 85 of 1992, and

subsequently decree 60 of 1999. It has an

adjudicating body that comprises of a chairman who

must have practised journalism for 20 years, 4

journalists from the NUJ, 2 from the Nigerian Guild

of Editors, from NPAN one, from NAN one from ministry

of Information one , BON has 2 and 4 from the public

one of whom must be a lawyer and one a woman.

Mandate of the council

primarily is to ensure that journalism is practised

on purpose, that journalists also give quality

information to the public, quality education to the

public most especially the print medium, make sure

that we periodically monitor all the Newspaper to

ensure that they comply with the codes of ethics of

journalism, we research into the media industry and

advise the government properly on the direction to

go. Normally journalist are suppose to be given

access to information, where such information are not

given it becomes the duty of the Nigerian Press

Council to intervene and ensure that this is done. on

the other hand if members of the public complain of

the content of a publication, they have the right to

seek redress in a court of law or they could take the

option of writing to the editor of the medium and

where this fails the aggrieved person can come to the

council, that is where our ombudsman comes in.

Has the Council achieved its mandate?

The council have achieved its mandate, so far since

inception we have received about 240 complaints from

members of the public which we have attended to. Also

in the area of capacity building we have trained many

journalist especially on election coverage and code

of ethics, we have also had sensitization workshop on

the FOI Act, it will surprise you to know that many

journalist are not familiar with the content of the

Act.

On the promotion of ethical standards in journalism

We do this in many ways like l told you we have been

have capacity building workshop for journalist

We also collaborate with media owners to promote

ethical standards in the profession.

The code of ethics was agreed on at a conference in

1998 at Ilorin by all stakeholders so the NPC expects

all stakeholders to abide by this code.

On sanctions when ethics is breached

Sanction is an area that is mute, we are still

working on this area because once there are codes

there are likely to be breaches of the codes and

where there is no sanction there is likely to be a

lacuna. For instance when the phone hacking scandal

broke in the Uk the UK government said look this is a

sign that self regulation is not working. So let’s

have a regulatory body that can apply and enforce

sanctions, so we are going to collaborate with the

NUJ, NGE, and NPAN to learn from the UK experience.

Relationship with NPAN ombudsman.

You are well aware of the law setting up the NPC. The

NPAN went to court claiming that Decree 60 of 1999 is

a violation of the constitution and that the NPC

ombudsman was not effective. They formed their own

ombudsman and NUJ said no you cannot be a judge in

your own case and they directed their member not to

attend, you know a house divided against itself

cannot stand. There are nagging problems in the

profession. And stakeholders must sit and look for a

solution to the problems.

On government regulation through NPC

The complain of the NPAN is just a fallacy, do we

control their editorial content? Do we tell them what

to publish? We only come in when you ignite the fire,

we never say don’t ignite the fire. So where lies the

censorship? Lets get serious the president appoints

the Chief judge of the federation, does he control

him? The president appoints the INEC chairman, does

he tell him what to do? We cannot close down any

newspaper, we cannot do anything that will be

detrimental to the profession, if the government

forms the Press Council it doesn’t mean the Council

belongs to government..

The Nigerian Press Council does not operate based on

any law by the National Assembly, they operate by the

code of ethics of the Nigerian Union of Journalist

(NUJ) . come to think of it, do you know how the

Press Council came about, it was never a brain child

of government, it was Alhaji Lateef Jakande who

brought the idea thst there was a need for a

regulatory body at a congress in Benin, i think in

1972 the NUJ ratified it, the NUJ and NPAn can be

said to be the fathers of the Press Council, so why

should they be afraid of their own child?

On who should watch the watch dog

The NUJ! The Press Council do not register

journalists but the NUJ do, the law does not allow

the Press Council to register journalists. The law

establishing the Press Council was put together for

government by journalists at the time the decree 60

of 1999 was to be strengthened to compel journalists

to register with the Press Council, there was an

uproar with the NUJ and it never worked as at the

last count we had about 427 newspapers and magazines

in the country, so the NUJ should register

journalists.

On the problem with the NUJ

The problem with the NUJ is simple, it is combining

the function of a professional body with that of a

trade union, ironically it has got both wrong, you

know sometimes ago they were threatening to close

down some places that is the function of a trade

union, but once they separate the two functions l

think they will get things right.

4.1.3 Interview with Abdullahi Idris, National News

Editor, Daily Trust

On how Media Trust recruit journalists

We have an arrangement with some universities and

higher institutions, the HODs of their Mass

communication department send two of their best

graduating students to us. A reporter is trained like

a child, so that he will grow well. When employed he

is given in-house training and then assigned various

desk by the editor. The company secretary talks to

them on legal areas to avoid libel after then he is

assigned to a senior reporter who they will go out

with to understudy for about three to six months till

he or she learns to write well after then he can

start filling reports.

On role of NPAN in the industry

NPAN is the association of media owners their aim is

to promote professionalism, to promote the print

media business to see how they will reduce the cost

of production by meeting the authorities for

assistance, they also see how editors are faring,

what can be done to maintain integrity in the

profession.

On the ombudsman principle

Just as we have the Public Complain Commission, the

Ombudsman takes complaints from the public against

newspaper and magazines. If a member of the public

feels aggrieved by the treatment he received from a

reporter, editor, newspaper or magazine, he can write

the ombudsman about it. The ombudsman is a

professional man who knows the job, in and out. He

receives reports/petitions, evaluates and invites the

disputants; question, and thereafter, he writes his

report or recommendation to the body that sets it up.

If the report is against the newspaper, the editor is

sanctioned.

On sanction

Various type can be applied: retraction, apology. It

has no fine as it is not a law court. The ombudsman

can recommend cost to the petitioner and disciplinary

action against the practitioner or newspaper. The

ombudsman is an arbiter. In our day to day

activities, we offend people and the ombudsman comes

in.

Views on the Nigerian Press Council

The Press Council was set up by government to

regulate the conduct of media practitioners. It is a

form of government control over the media, and that

is why newspapers and editors disagreed with it.

On the way forward

We need to go back to our roots. Newspapers and

Editors should be ethical, fear God and work for the

public interest. It is not going to be easy because

of the rotten environment, that breeds unethical

conducts, but l believe with the commitment of every

one it can be achieved.

Summary of interview data

4.2. Areas of agreement.

Regulation of the press is usually contentions

because of the constitutional provision of

freedom of the press.

Unethical conduct is prevalent in the Nigerian

media

There is need for regulation to address the trend

4.3. Areas of disagreement

The mode of regulation

Who the powers of regulation should be vested on.

The NUJ supports external regulation and the NPC

Act

The NPAN supports internal regulation through its

own ombudsman mechanism

The Nigerian Press council, however believes the NUJ

should act as a professional body rather than a trade

union, and since it is the custodian of the register

of members should regulate the profession

4.4. Summary

Form all indication the contention among the

stakeholders is not unexpected. There is age long

mutual suspicion among all the players. The NUJ on

the one hand and the NGE and the NPAN on the other

hand.

NUJ over the years has lost a lot of credibility in

the eyes of the public including stakeholders. It has

no structure and it has no clearly defined role as a

professional body. As Ayotebi of the NPC rightly

observed the NUJ has over the years been behaving

like a trade union rather than a professional body in

the mode of the Medical and Dental Council or the

Nigerian Bar Association. A clear case of the union’s

lack of structure is its inability to establish a

national secretariat 50 years after it came into

existence. This is irrespective of the fact that

several fund raising activities have been held over

the years by successive executive of the union for

that purpose! It is equally on records that a former

Military Administration gave the union substantial

sum of money and a parcel of land in the FCT for that

purpose but nothing was heard of the funds or what

happened to the parcel of land. How can such a union

hold any iota of respect in the eyes of the public or

practitioners?

It is a sad commentary and an irony on the other hand

that NPAN should be the body trying to institute

regulation in the print media through the ombudsman

mechanism. This to say the least is unusual as there

is no such model anywhere in the world that this

writer is aware of. Newspapers owners ordinarily are

business men whose concern should be the bottom line.

Their interest should be the profit motive and not

ethics. However we do know that the bulk of the

newspapers owners in Nigeria are politicians and not

businessmen, so the profit motive may not be of

primary concern. The editors, through the NGE,

expectedly are only replicating the interest of the

owners by their unalloyed support of the ombudsman

mechanism.

5.1. Recommendation

Key Recommendation. In view of the unending squabble

for supremacy between critical stakeholders in the

Nigerian print media industry, l hereby recommend co-

regulation as the best and workable option for the

regulation of the Nigerian print media. The co-

regulatory approach we are proposing is one that

encourages a dialogue process among stakeholders and

is neither state controlled nor self regulation in

the pure sense of it. This will allow for more

flexibility, adaptability and effectiveness than

straightforward self regulation or legislation. It

would in effect eliminate the current atmosphere of

distrust and mutual suspicion that has made

regulation ineffective in the Nigerian print

industry. This inclusiveness would results in greater

legitimacy for mediation and help restore public

confidence and trust in the Nigerian print media.

5.2. Recommended Framework

STAKEHOLDERS ROLE EXPECTATION OUTCOME

NUJ The professional

body of

journalists

Register and Keep

an up-to-date

register of

member

The NUJ would

become a truly

professional body

that members

defer to

NPC Government

established body

for print media

regulation

Provide the

framework for the

coming together

of the NUJ, NPAN

and NGE

Detached, but

Provides the

structural,

institutional

and finances to

support co -

regulation

NPAN Association of

Print media

owners

Be supportive of

the NUJ and NGE

and hires only

professional

journalists

With equal

representation in

a co-regulatory

framework the

NPAN would be

more willing to

work with the NUJ

and NGE.

PUBLIC report all

professional

misconduct

accordingly

The public would

have more

confidence in the

print media

the question of

who watches the

watch dog will be

provided for.

5.3. Advantages:

Eliminates problem of funding and structure.

The structure is outside the direct control of

either the NUJ or the NPAN or the NGE.

Government is not directly involved.

Ensure checks and balances.

Allows for the further development of standards

and codes of professional ethical

6.1. Conclusion

The Nigerian print media cannot remain unregulated.

Effective regulation is imperative to restore public

confidence in the media. With the phone hacking

scandal in the UK a key recommendation of the Leveson

Inquiry is towards more regulation rather than less.

The British parliament is even contemplating

legislation to regulate the media since the UK’s self

regulating Press Commission has seems to have failed

to address issues of ethics in the British Media.

In view of this the best stakeholders can do is to

adopt co-regulation as a way of dealing with

regulation in the Nigerian press. To his end the NCP

Act must be strengthened to bring about a convergence

of the interests of the NUJ the NPAN and the Nigerian

Guild of Editors.

ReferencesAkdeniz, Y., Walker, C. and Wall, D. (eds) (2000) The Internet, Law and Society. London: Longman.

Bertrand, C-J. (ed) (2003) An Arsenal for Democracy: Media Accountability Systems. Creskill NJ: Hampton Press.

Castells, M. (2001) The Internet Galaxy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

van Cuilenburg, J.J. and McQuail, D. (2003) `Media policy paradigm shifts: towards a new communications policy paradigm', in European Journal of Communication, Vol.18, No.2:pp.181-208.

D'Haenens, L. and Saeys, F. (2001) Western Broadcasting at theDawn of the 21st Century. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Feintuck, M. (1999) Media Regulation, Public Interest and the Law. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh Press.

Hallin, D. and Mancini, P. (2004) Comparing Media Systems. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.

Hamelink, C. (2000) The Ethics of Cyberspace. London: Sage.

Hoffman-Riem, W. (1996) Regulating the Media. New York: Guildford Press.

Kelly, M., Mazzoleni, G. and McQuail, D. (eds) (2004) The Media in Europe: the Euromedia Handbook. London: Sage.

Lessig, L. (1999) Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace. New York:Basic Books.

McQuail, D. (2005) McQuail's Mass Communication Theory. (5th edition). London: Sage Publications.

McQuail, D. and Siune, K. (1986) New Media Politics. London: Sage Publications.

McQuail, D. and Siune, K. (1998) Media Policy: Convergence, Concentration and Commerce. London: Sage.

Momodu A.G.S. (2000) Ekineh Committee on the Future of the Press in Nigeria: Nigerian Press Council, Abuja.

Nerone, J.C. (ed) (1995) Last Rights: Revisiting Four Theoriesof the Press. Urbana IL: University of Illinois Press.

O Siochru, S. and Girard, B, with Mahan, A. (2002) Global Media Governance. Lanham NJ: Rowman and Littlefield.

Picard, R.G. (1985) The Press and the Decline of Democracy. Westport CT: Greenwood Press.

Picard, R.G. (1988) The Ravens of Odin. Ames, Iowa: Iowa StateUniversity Press.

Pool, I. de Sola (1983) Technologies of Freedom. Cambridge MA:Harvard University Press.

Salvaggio, J.L. (1985) `Information technology and social problems', in Ruben, B.D. (ed) Information and Behaviour,

Vol.1, pp.428-454. Brunswick NJ: Transaction Books.

Siebert, F., Schramm, W. and Peterson T. (1956) Four Theories of the Press. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press.

Winseck, D. (2002) `Wired cities and transnational communications: new forms of governance for telecommunicationsand the new media' in Lievrouw, L. and Livingstone, S. The Handbook of New Media, pp.393-409. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications.

Note: The Leveson Inquiry is a judicial public inquiry into theculture, practices and ethics of the British press following theNews International phone hacking scandal, chaired by Lord JusticeLeveson, who was appointed in July 2011. A series of public hearingswere held throughout 2011 and 2012. The Inquiry published theLeveson Report in November 2012, which reviewed the general cultureand ethics of the British media, and made recommendations for a new,independent, body to replace the existing Press ComplaintsCommission, which would be recognised by the state through new laws.