Paper Presented By
Mr. John Momoh(OON)
Chairman/CEO, Channels Television
At The National Defence College Lecture, Abuja On January 13, 2016.
First, I’d like to express my appreciation to the National Defense College authority, for extending this privilege and honor to me, by allowing me to be part of this historic occasion. There couldn’t have been a more opportune time to discuss the subject of national security vis-a-vis, the role the media can play, in ensuring that we are secured as a nation. The subject is even more compelling, in view of the distressing and challenging times being experienced all over the world, and the struggle to contain the evil called terrorism and other life and peace-threatening activities and incidents.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
There is no single universally accepted definition of national security. The variety of definitions provides an overview of the many usages of this concept. The concept still remains ambiguous, having originated from simpler definitions which initially emphasised the freedom from military threat and political coercion, to later increase in sophistication, and include other forms of non-military security as suited the circumstances of the time.
A broader concept of National Security is that a government, along with its parliaments, should protect the state and its citizens, against all kind of “national” crises, through a variety of power projections, such as political power, diplomacy, economic power, military might, and so on.
As you probably know, the concept developed mostly in the United States after World War II. Initially, it focused on military might, but over time, encompasses a broad range of facets, all of which impinge on the non-military or economic security of the nation and the values espoused by the national society. Therefore, in order to possess national security, a nation needs to possess Economic security, Energy security, Environmental security, etc. Security threats involve not only conventional foes such as other nation-states, but also violent non-state actors like narcotic cartels, multinational corporations and non-governmental organisations; and natural disasters. With this as a backdrop, perhaps it will augur well for us to focus more on military security, which, by your calling, should be your pre-occupation at all times. A nation must possess the capabilities to defend itself, and/or deter military aggression
The movement of time has seen the world scene marked by great turmoil, fears, uncertainties, and ever-changing nature of relationships among states, as well as intra-state conflicts (occasioned by ethnic bigotry, religion, tribalism, nationalism, and such other things). Just when the world was nurturing a sense of optimism regarding peace, waiting in eagerness to welcome an era of peace, and even with world leaders going ahead to declare an annual World Day Of Peace, tragedy struck on September the 11th 2001. The world was upended in upheaval; the U.S was viciously attacked by terrorists.
The attack heralded a new concept of war. The War against terrorism was redefined. No longer was it targeted at a state or states occupying a particular geographical location. The citizens of the Terror-State are scattered across the globe without any geographical traceability.
Added to this phenomenon, was the emergence of information-age technology. The world rose in welcome applause for it and immediate and rapid exploitation of its values and possibilities began in earnest. This gave birth to what is known as the new media, appearing and proving more efficient and dynamic than the traditional media, albeit in a cancerous fashion. All too soon, this technological breakthrough increased the intensity of the existing turmoil, by creating and facilitating international terrorism, rising threats, and drug cartel-ism.
So what we have today. Threats facing our country from different directions. We are facing threats from the terrorist who kills, maims and seeks to spread fear. The extremist who exploits our commitment to freedom of speech to incite hatred and violence. The drug dealer who lays waste to our communities and the cyber fraudster who steals our data and our money. Different perpetrators, causing harm to their victims for different reasons and in different ways. But these threats also have something in common: all of them threaten our way of life and more so, the freedoms we hold most dear.
Our freedom to live.
Our freedom to move about.
Our rights to privacy and to free expression.
These freedoms are fundamental to the nature of our society. They have been threatened in the past. They are fragile and hard-won. And they remain under threat today.
INFORMATION AS A TOOL
Turning our attention to one of the keywords of today’s topic – Information; which is the life blood of any media organisation. has been defined by an author as “stimuli that have meaning in some context for its receiver.” By this definition, information and the meaning conveyed therefore is contextual, depending on the particular circumstance and people involved. When information is fed into and stored in a computer, it is generally referred to as data. After data processing (such as formatting and printing), output data can again be referred to as information. Furthermore, when information is packaged or used for understanding or doing something, it is known as knowledge.
In furtherance to the description above, another author defines information as “data that is accurate, timely, specific, organized for a purpose, presented within a context that gives it meaning and relevance, and can lead to an increase in understanding and decrease in uncertainty.” Information is therefore a valuable tool because it can affect behavior, a decision, or an outcome. For example, if a manager is told his company’s net profit decreased during the last quarter, he may use this information as a reason to embark on cost containment and cut financial spending for the next quarter. A piece of information is considered valueless if, after receiving it, things remain unchanged. With this in mind, we can safely say that good and relevant information has the capability to cause a noted change in attitude about security, about safety and in the perception of governmental authority’s efforts in curtailing crimes.
Public and private organizations have access to a vast amount of internal, deep Web and open Web information. Transforming this heterogeneous and distributed information into actionable and insightful information is the key to national security applications.
Perhaps we need to pause at this juncture and ask ourselves this question – if we refer to information as a tool for national security, what, then, is a tool? The answer is simple;
A tool is a device or implement, especially one held in the hand, used to carry out a particular function. And as Wikipedia defines it, a tool is “any physical item that can be used to achieve a goal, especially if the item is not lost in the process.”
UNDERSTANDING THE TOPIC
So putting together some of the elements of the first part of our lecture title for today, we can see clearly how information (the “light” that reveals relevant details about persons, situations or things) can be a tool (an instrument that can be used to achieve a goal) for security (the safety and protection from threats to our collective interests). The interconnection between information as a tool and the goal of achieving national security is so powerful that we now begin to ask ourselves the next question. Who will be at the head of the leadership for the provision of this tool called information, in order to achieve our national and homeland security? I leave that for you to ponder.
But not for long, for indeed, everyone of us, every citizen, has the sacred responsibility to provide the tool for or to aid the process of ensuring national security.
However, some of us, some of the units and some of the groups within our society, by virtue of being at certain vantage points, will be expected to take up the leadership and championship that will lead us to our security destinations. The media is one such unit.
THE MEDIA AS A TOOL PROVIDER:
The media, among other groups of the society, assume the critical frontline role in providing information on issues, government policies and actions, especially on the matters of security. So the media cannot afford to shrink back or shirk this responsibility. It must be insatiable in finding creative ways of gathering, processing and disseminating accurate and meaningful information in fulfilling the need for national security. The truth needs to be stated here though, that, when the political and legal atmosphere is friendly and good, the media can flourish in this role. For how does the media flourish in self-contradictory situations of government, where what is painted is a picture of clamor for national security and at the same time clipping the wings of press freedom and freedom of information? Or, how do the media succeed in this role when there is framing of mischief by government in the employment of the instrument of law designed to cause unnecessary contents regulations?
In discussing the issues of press freedom, Julian Assange, the Australian publisher and journalist and the founder of Wikileaks, has this to say:
• “Free speech is what regulates government and regulates law. That is why in the US Constitution the Bill of Rights says that Congress is to make no such law abridging the freedom of the press. It is to take the rights of the press outside the rights of the law because those rights are superior to the law because in fact they create the law. Every constitution, every bit of legislation is derived from the flow of information. Similarly every government is elected as a result of people understanding things”
So, then, people must gain knowledge made possible through information and understand “things” (issues and people involved) to be able to either support or not support government policies, especially those on security. Now, there are powerful interactions between three things; government policy, public opinion and support, and media influence in public opinion molding. Just how powerful can the media role be in national security policy? Let me illustrate this with America’s experience with Iraq War.
THE MEDIA AS PUBLIC OPINION MOLDER:
The US prosecution of Iraq War taught the nation a lesson in the importance of establishing and maintaining favorable public support during the war. Public support and endorsement was eventually seen as an essential element in the successful outcome of war. From the record, the initial period of high public support for the Iraq War was credited with President Bush obtaining Congressional support. As the war carried on, the war prosecution later challenged the ability of US and allied governments to sustain public consent for using military force; and it soon became more important to understand the role the mass media play in this kind of process.
The conduct of the Vietnam War, for example, was seen to be impaired by negative media coverage, presumably contributing to the low levels of public support present at the end of the war. The proliferation of highly sophisticated media technology transmitting live reports from the Iraq War illustrates the rising influence of modern mass media (newspapers, television, radio, internet and other media communicating messages to mass audiences) and linkage to the complex dynamics of public opinion and public policy.
So, modern mass media has become an increasingly new factor related to public opinion, relevant to maintaining public support, because a lack of this support can impair a nation’s ability to sustain its effort in national security policy formulation and implementation.
THE MEDIA AS A WATCHDOG:
An online encyclopedia describes a Watchdog this way: “Watchdog journalism informs the public about goings-on in institutions and society, especially in circumstances where a significant portion of the public would demand changes in response. This might involve:
• Fact-checking statements of public officials, interviewing public figures and challenging them with problems or concerns.
• Investigative journalism, which involves information-gathering on a single story for a long period of time.
• Like a literal guard dog that barks when it notices an intruder, a “watchdog” role involves alerting others when a problem is detected. Common subjects are the government decision-making process, illegal activity, immorality, consumer protection issues, and environmental degradation.
• Watchdog journalism can be located in a variety of news media, such as radio, television, Internet, and print media where it may be seen as “a unique strength of newspapers”, and additional new media and concepts such as weblogs and citizen journalism. Watchdog journalists also are called “watchmen”, “agents of social control”, or “moral guardians.”
So, based on the description above, we see that every system needs watchdogs and whistleblowers; genuine whistleblowers who swing into immediate and meaningful action at the slightest hint of threats and not false alarmists.
HOW WE HAVE FARED AT CHANNELS TV
One of the key strategic drivers of Channels TV vision as contained in our mission statement is: to perform the role of a true watch-dog of the government and its policies, and hold public officers accountable to the people.
We pursue this mission, among others, with vigour and zeal, because we realise we no longer own ourselves.. But rather, the public has come to own us. Their fate in knowing and understanding the WHO, the WHAT, the WHERE, the WHY and the HOW of knowledge lies in our hands. Simply put, we operate in public trust.
THE POLICE COLLEGE STORY:
For example, we still all vividly remember Channels Television’s role as a true watchdog and whistleblower in the case of Police College Ikeja. Through thorough investigative journalism, we came face-to-face with shocking pictures and deplorable sight of decadence that has engulfed the former pride of the Nigerian Police and the Nigerian people.
COVERAGE AND REPORTAGE OF ARMED FORCES OPERATIONS:
Because we respect the seriousness of timely news and information, no matter who’s or what’s involved, we, at Channels TV, have not let down our guard on our special reportage on crimes and the activities of the Armed Forces. We established within our system a special crime desk and endeavor to provide timely crime and security information for the benefit of the public. Our sacrificing and undying spirit for covering crime, militancy, political violence as well as terrorist incidents is well noted by the public whose power-to-know we seek to safeguard. In some cases, this journalistic doggedness has earned us a handful of saddening consequences, sometimes of having our journalists and valuable broadcast equipment brutally and viciously assaulted; and sometimes too, leading to death as was the case with one of our foremost reporters who was killed by Boko Haram in January of 2012.
THE NEW MEDIA AND SECURITY
The information landscape has grown in quantum leap with its overwhelming impact on daily life; in fact, its existence has become an integral part of living of the majority of mankind. Simply put no information, no knowledge and no knowledge, no power. There is now created a new microcosmic world order that is highly networked, virtual and powerful; even inescapable by the larger,macrocosmic world. The proliferation of social media has ramifications for national security. Failure to adopt these tools may reduce an organization’s relative capabilities over time. Globally, social media is being used effectively by businesses, individuals, activists, criminals, and terrorists. Governments that harness its potential power can interact better with citizens and anticipate emerging issues (Drapeau and Wells, 2009)
Since the rise of the Internet in the early 1990s, says (Shirky, 2011), the world’s networked population has grown from the low millions to the low billions. Since then and until now, social media have become a fact of life for civil society worldwide, involving many actors – regular citizens, activists, nongovernmental organizations, telecommunications firms, software providers, governments, etc. As the communications landscape gets denser, more complex, and more participatory, the networked population is gaining greater access to information, more opportunities to engage in public speech, and an enhanced ability to undertake collective action. These increased freedoms can help loosely coordinated public demand change.
Opinions are first transmitted by the media, and then they get echoed by friends, family members, and colleagues. It is in this second social step that political opinions are formed. This is the step in which the Internet in general, and social media in particular, can make a difference. As with the printing press, the Internet spreads not just media consumption but media production as well; it allows people to privately and publicly articulate and debate a lot of conflicting views. For political movements, one of the main forms of coordination is what the military calls “shared awareness,” the ability of each member of a group to not only understand the situation at hand but also understand that everyone else does, too. Social media increase shared awareness by propagating messages through social networks (Shirky, 2011)
For example, what do we make of organized and well-coordinated events leading to the Obama’s electoral victory in 2008; Oscar Morales of Colombia starting a Facebook group against the revolutionary guerrilla group FARC, drawing over 1 million people from over 40 countries; Facebook Vs. Egyptian Government in April, 2008, where through social media a group had a protest of political dissent, and posted photos online of the violence that ensued. State security was taken by surprise by the number of participants. Surely, online social movements have changed the dynamics of political activism. Possibly as a result, Syria has recently blocked use of Facebook by its citizens.
With this world’s new-age information dynamics, a national government and its military authorities should lead by simply embracing the social media, analyze the balance between security and sharing, and envision social media platforms as communities of conversations where government agencies can participate to influence people by providing helpful information and tactfully correcting wrong public impressions about well-intended government policies.
WAY FORWARD
• There shouldn’t be unnecessary news contents regulations for free flow of valuable information.
• Government must be true to its people-focused security agenda, seek to implement this agenda in a collective way, involving the public, the media and those other units of the society that have the capacity to provide relevant information for the achievement of national security goals.
• Government must also make the legal and political atmosphere friendly to media operations and resist the temptation of making the media a laptop dog instead of a true watchdog.
• On its part, the media should avoid getting carried away by overstating negative news while under reporting positive developments.
CONCLUSION
There is a bold and truthful saying on the main page of the Nigerian Army website which says and I quote, “If you build an Army of 100 lions and their leader is a dog, in any fight, the lions will die like a dog, but if you build an Army of 100 dogs and their leader is a lion, all dogs will fight like a lion.” No doubt, this is a saying about leadership and its quality as well as its infectious effect.
According to Schramm, affirmed, as a leading nation in Africa, our country neesd economic development occasioned by social transformation and made possible through the deployment of all our human resources in order to tackle, headlong and effectively, difficult human problems like threats to national security. We all constitute the human capital of this nation – all of us here present: the military authority, the police authority, the civil authority, the media and others. We’ve got no place else to call our own but here, and if we can demonstrate sacrificial zeal to calm the tides of some evils in West African sub-region and in Africa as a whole, we can do it more here.
That is why it is gratifying to see the collection of people at this gathering today because there is a unification of our various missions as units of society centered on national security. We have all been grafted into the implementation of this unified mission as we have been put on the frontline of this fight, so to speak, to succeed. But we need lion-like leaders who will lionize the rest of us and with no insidious intention to reduce us to dog-like participators, but will allow the mission to cascade down to the individual citizens in a contagious manner. SO HELP US GOD.
REFERENCES:
• Schramm, W. (1964). Mass media and national development: The role of information in the developing countries (No. 25). Stanford University Press.
• Sarkesian, S. C., Williams, J. A., & Cimbala, S. J. (2008). US national security: policymakers, processes, and politics. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
• Libicki, M. C. (2007). Conquest in cyberspace: National security and information warfare. Cambridge University Press.
• Sheth, A., Aleman-Meza, B., Arpinar, I. B., Bertram, C., Warke, Y., Ramakrishanan, C. & Kochut, K. (2005). Semantic association identification and knowledge discovery for national security applications. Journal of Database Management (JDM), 16(1), 33-53.
• Hallin, D. (1984) ‘The Media, the War in Vietnam, and Political Support: A Critique of the Thesis of the Oppositional Media’, Journal of Politics, 46: 2–24.
• Gilberg, S., C. Eyal, M. McCombs and D. Nicholas (1980) ‘The State of the Union Address and the Press Agenda’, Journalism Quarterly 57(Fall): 584–8.
• Sparks, G. (2006) Media Effects Research: A Basic Overview Belmont, CA: Thomson-Wadsworth. Turk, J.V. (1986) ‘Public Relations’ Influence on the News’, Newspaper Research Journal 7 (Summer):15–27.
• Noelle-Neumann, E. (1974) ‘The Spiral of Silence: A Theory of Public Opinion’, Journal of Communication 24: 43–51. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1984). The Spiral of Silence Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• Willey, B. E. (1989). Military-media relations come of age. ARMY WAR COLL CARLISLE BARRACKS PA.
• Sinai, K. C. (2004). Shock and Awe: Does the First Amendment Protect a Media Right of Access to Military Operations. Cardozo Arts & Ent. LJ, 22, 179.
• Rid, T. (2007). War and Media Operations: The US military and the press from Vietnam to Iraq. Routledge.
• Shirky, C. (2011). The political power of social media. Foreign affairs, 90(1), 28-41.
• Drapeau, M., & Wells, I. I. (2009). Social software and national security: An initial net assessment. NATIONAL DEFENSE UNIV WASHINGTON DC CENTER FOR TECHNOLOGY AND NATIONAL SECURITY POLICY.
• Wikipedia
• Nigerian Army website.