A CAUTION ON JOURNALISM AND PARTISAN POLITICS

By Mustapha Abubakar 

Journalists, like every other citizen, have the right to hold political opinions and participate in democratic activities. However, when a journalist openly identifies with and actively supports a political party or candidate while continuing to function as a reporter for a recognised media organisation, professional caution becomes necessary.

The Nigerian Code of Ethics for Journalists reminds us that “journalism entails a high degree of public trust” and that journalists and news organisations are expected to observe high professional and ethical standards. This is the foundation upon which the credibility of the profession rests.

There is, indeed, a good side. A journalist is also a citizen and cannot be stripped of his civic rights simply because of his profession. Having a political preference, voting for a candidate or holding personal political views does not, in itself, make someone unfit to be a journalist.

The concern begins, however, when personal political preference becomes openly intertwined with professional responsibility. The Code of Ethics places editorial independence among its fundamental principles, while factual, accurate, balanced and fair reporting remains central to public trust and confidence.

This becomes particularly relevant in political reporting. The Nigerian Press Council, in its guidance on election reporting, has advised journalists to “avoid conflict of interests so as not to compromise truth, integrity and their safety.” That principle is important because a journalist who is openly campaigning for one political side may inevitably face questions about how independently he can report on that side or its opponents.

The ugly side emerges when political support moves beyond personal preference into active campaigning, mobilisation, partisan advocacy or the use of one's public journalistic identity to advance a political cause, while still presenting oneself as an independent reporter. At that point, the distinction between the journalist and the political actor becomes increasingly blurred.

Advertisement

This is not an attack on anyone's political choice, nor an attempt to deny anyone the right to participate in politics. It is simply a professional caution. The Press Council monitors media activities to ensure compliance with professional and ethical standards and pays attention to political coverage, including trends, slants and unprofessional handling of news.

The Council has also cautioned journalists against allowing political actors to dictate the media agenda and has urged political reporters and columnists to exercise particular care in their language, professionalism and conduct.

Therefore, the issue is not whether a journalist is allowed to have a political opinion; the issue is whether active partisan engagement is compatible with the independence expected of a practising news reporter.

A journalist may support a political party as a citizen. But when that support becomes open, active and partisan, while the person continues to report political affairs for a recognised media organisation, it is reasonable to expect a careful separation between the two roles.

At this point, perhaps every journalist should ask himself or herself a simple question: If the political party or candidate I openly support were to become the subject of my next major news report, could I honestly say that my political loyalty would have no influence whatsoever on my professional judgment?

And perhaps the deeper question is this: If I cannot convince myself that I can remain completely fair, independent and truthful, should I continue to occupy the position of an independent reporter while actively campaigning for a political cause?

Ultimately, journalism is sustained not merely by the ability to report facts, but by public confidence in the independence and integrity of the person reporting those facts. As the Nigerian Press Council puts it, “Truth is the cornerstone of journalism.”

That is the caution,not an attack, not a condemnation, but a reminder to every journalist that, sometimes, the most important editor is one's own conscience.