Jaafar Jaafar
The recent criticism by Jaafar Jaafar of an interview conducted by Ali Jita has once again brought to the fore a growing tension in Nigeria’s evolving media landscape: the uneasy intersection between professional journalism and the fast-rising world of entertainers-turned-interviewers and social media content creators.
At the heart of the debate is a fundamental question: Who gets to be a journalist in the digital age—and what standards should apply?
Jaafar’s critique—that public-facing interviews, regardless of platform, must adhere to basic journalistic ethics such as accuracy, sensitivity, and editorial oversight—is difficult to fault. In an era where a single video clip can travel across continents within minutes, the consequences of careless communication are far-reaching. Words can misinform, inflame, or even damage reputations.
Yet, while the substance of the criticism holds merit, its framing reflects a deeper struggle within traditional journalism: the loss of its long-held monopoly over information production and dissemination.
Across Northern Nigeria, particularly within the Kannywood ecosystem, figures such as Hadiza Gabon have carved out new spaces for storytelling through platforms like Gabon’s Room. These platforms thrive not because they mimic traditional journalism, but precisely because they do not. They are informal, emotionally engaging, and culturally grounded. They speak in a language and tone that many audiences find more relatable than the often rigid format of conventional media.
To dismiss them outright as substandard is to misunderstand their appeal—and their relevance.
However, this does not absolve them of responsibility.
The more pressing concern lies in the broader media shift now underway, where social media content creators—many with no formal training in journalism—are increasingly displacing trained professionals in visibility, influence, and even access. Today, it is not uncommon to see event organizers prioritizing influencers over reporters, inviting them to “cover” functions. The result is predictable: timelines flooded with polished photos and short video clips, but little in the way of coherent reportage, context, or critical analysis.
In this emerging order, virality often trumps verification. Speed overshadows depth. And visibility is mistaken for credibility.
This shift is not entirely accidental. It is driven by a combination of factors: the economic struggles of traditional media houses, the immediacy of digital platforms, and a growing public preference for personalities over institutions. Audiences increasingly trust familiar online figures who appear authentic and accessible, even if they lack the rigor and discipline that journalism demands.
But therein lies the danger.
When content replaces reporting, society risks losing more than just professional standards—it risks losing its capacity for informed discourse. Journalism, at its best, does not merely document events; it explains, interrogates, and holds power to account. A thousand photos cannot replace a single well-researched report.
Still, it would be a mistake to frame this transformation as a simple takeover of journalism by amateurs. What is unfolding is more complex: a redefinition of media itself. The boundaries between journalism and entertainment are blurring, creating hybrid forms that neither fully conform to nor completely reject traditional norms.
The way forward, therefore, is not through gatekeeping, but through adaptation and engagement.
Critics must move beyond condescension and offer constructive pathways for improvement. Basic training in media ethics, interviewing techniques, and content responsibility should be encouraged—not as a barrier to entry, but as a tool for growth.
At the same time, content creators and entertainers must recognize that influence carries obligation. Once one steps into the arena of public discourse—asking questions, shaping narratives, and reaching mass audiences—one inevitably assumes a degree of journalistic responsibility, regardless of labels.
Traditional media, too, must confront its own shortcomings. To remain relevant, it must evolve—embracing digital storytelling, improving audience engagement, and rebuilding public trust.
Ultimately, the issue is not who holds the microphone, but how it is used.
In a world where everyone is “media,” standards must not disappear—they must expand.
If journalism is to survive this transition, it must do more than defend its turf. It must lead by example, adapt with humility, and find common ground with the very forces that now challenge it.
Only then can it remain not just relevant, but indispensable.
Tags
Articles