When apprehended or accosted by the police, the standard operating procedure (SOP) is that you will be cautioned by the arresting officer with the following words: “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.”
With that notice, you are made aware that you are expected to speak only when your attorney or lawyer is by your side, as he or she will guide you in making statements that do not inadvertently implicate you.
The principle described above, which is universal, also applies to politicians, especially during a political season such as the one Nigeria is currently experiencing as the February 2027 general elections loom large on the nation’s political horizon.
The only difference is that this time it is not a security operative or lawyer in the court of law that would be issuing the caution, but the campaign strategist with the relevant expertise.
Unlike the caution issued by law enforcement officers, with which most Nigerians are familiar, many politicians are unaware that at times like these, they must carefully manage their public utterances and package the message in order not to become victims of misrepresentation by opponents who are often eager to twist their words to suit nefarious purposes.
Unfortunately, this lesson in political communication is being learned the hard way by members of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). Several high-ranking figures within the party, including First Lady Oluremi Tinubu, presidential spokesperson Bayo Onanuga, and Senate President Godswill Akpabio, have made comments in the public sphere over the past few weeks that have generated fire and fury, particularly on social media.
The truth is that in this difficult period, when a critical mass of Nigerians is experiencing hardship due to the sweeping socio-economic reforms undertaken by the current administration, people need hope and empathy. Consequently, any comments that, in any way, suggest that long-suffering citizens—especially those at the lower rungs of the economic ladder and bearing the brunt of the hardship—are not working hard enough to escape poverty and hunger are bound to provoke public outrage.
That is what the opposition has succeeded in passing across to the public by twisting the speeches of the governing APC and current administration’s Very Important Personalities,VIPs.
And it explains the backlash generated by recent public remarks from the trio—the President’s wife, the President’s chief image-maker, and the leader of the legislative arm of government.
A clear example of how words can be twisted and weaponized against political opponents can be found in the run-up to the 2023 general elections.
As many may recall, that was the period when various verbal slips and allegedly incoherent expressions such as “Bala Blu” and “Agbado” were repeatedly attributed to then-candidate Bola Tinubu in an attempt to create the impression that he was suffering from speech and cognitive impairments that rendered him unfit to become President of Nigeria and, therefore, unelectable.
However, discerning observers must have noticed that immediately after Tinubu won the election, allegations about his supposedly impaired speech suddenly disappeared.
The question that may have crossed the minds of non-partisan and apolitical Nigerians is this: if Tinubu’s speech during the campaign was indeed as incoherent as his critics claimed, how was it that immediately after his victory, he no longer appeared impaired and suddenly seemed medically stable?
Did Tinubu experience a miracle of the sort that his wife, a pastor in the Redeemed Christian Church of God, might testify about publicly?
That is not likely.
The reality is that the negative portrayal of Tinubu was largely the product of deliberate efforts by political opponents to present him as an unelectable candidate through a carefully curated and orchestrated social media campaign.
The reference to the contrasting portrayals of Tinubu before and after the 2023 election serves to illustrate a fundamental truth about politics: virtually every weapon is deployable in the pursuit of political advantage.
My objective in this intervention is to enlighten Nigerians about the need to be wary of politicians and political actors who will stop at nothing—whether by hook or by crook—to gain an advantage over their competitors through blackmail, misinformation, or by taking opponents’ words out of context.
This is precisely what has happened to statements made by Oluremi Tinubu, Bayo Onanuga, and Godswill Akpabio. Their comments have repeatedly placed them at the center of public controversy in 2024 and 2025, and the pattern is being repeated in 2026, largely because the ruling APC appears not to have fully learned from its previous communication and messaging debacles.
Even I have been a victim of that clipping of video using it out of context when during the launch of my book “Leading From the Streets. Media Interventions By A Public Intellectual 1999-2019” on May 8th 2023 at Mike Adenuga Centre/ Alliance Francaise in Lagos, and a panel discussion themed Tinubunomics: Whats Working, What’s not and Why , a clip of the video of a panelist who claimed that Nigerian economy is in red went viral and almost overshadowed the message in the book which is that we can can all be leaders in our various spaces without necessarily being in the corridors of political power in Aso Rock villa, National Assembly as Senators and members of House of Representatives , ministers and state governors in the various government mansions as well as members of state Houses of Assembly nationwide.
But we were able to follow up with the full video of the book presentation which enabled us to counteract the negative messaging by the impostors.
By and large, the purpose of this essay is to highlight the potentially catastrophic consequences of poorly curated political communication and to underscore why it is the responsibility of strategists and communication advisers to guide leaders—both in the public and private sectors—on what to say, how to say it, and when to say it, particularly during periods of intense political competition such as the one currently unfolding in Nigeria.
Before delving further into the actions of the political actors involved and how they can mitigate the negative consequences of having their comments weaponized by opponents, it may be useful to cite another example from Nigeria. If nothing else, it will demonstrate how easily public statements can be turned against those who make them by individuals who understand the rules of the political game.
In 2024 and 2025, audio clips of comments made by Oluremi Tinubu, Bayo Onanuga, and Godswill Akpabio were edited, distorted, recycled, and amplified across social media platforms. This phenomenon can aptly be described as the “Clip, Twist, Trend” Cycle.
Even a cursory review reveals that this is essentially the same playbook that was deployed against Tinubu before the 2023 election—perhaps by different actors, but using remarkably similar tactics.
Here is how it works:
The first step is to isolate a 5–8 second clip from a 20-minute rally speech which is usually unscripted.
The second step is to ridicule it by adding captions, sound effects, and labels such as “Bala Blu,” “Agbado,” and “50 million youths.” The latter was inaccurate, as Tinubu’s team had later clarified that he meant 50,000 youths, not 50 million, but the train had already left the station as it were. However, as the saying goes, a lie travels faster than the truth. Consequently, the Bala Blu and Agbado narratives became embedded in the public consciousness and stuck to Tinubu.
The third step is to medicalize the situation by framing the target as “unstable,” “incoherent,” or “unfit.”
The ultimate goal is to make the politician the meme rather than the manifesto. Such tactics enable opponents to win online, even if they cannot prevail in policy debates as the case of Tinubu who prevailed at the polls. In Tinubu’s case, many Nigerians came away with the impression that he was physically and mentally incapacitated. Yet the past three years of his presidency have demonstrated that concerns about his health prior to the 2023 election were significantly exaggerated.
The same “clip-and-twist” template was later repeated with new targets—Oluremi Tinubu, Bayo Onanuga, and Godswill Akpabio—in 2024 and 2025.
For Senator Oluremi Tinubu, the controversy centered on the statement, “We don’t need prayers…” which was framed as evidence that she was “anti-prayer” and “arrogant.”
The actual context was that she was speaking at an interdenominational event where she said: “We don’t need only prayers. We need action and prayer. Nigerians must work.”
In essence, it was a message advocating both prayer and hard work. However, following the clipping and selective editing of the video by political opponents and critics, she trended negatively across social media.
Regarding Bayo Onanuga, the presidential spokesman, certain X (formerly Twitter) posts concerning the economy and fuel prices were portrayed as “insensitive” and “elitist.”
In reality, he was presenting data relating to fuel subsidy removal, inflation trends, and foreign exchange reforms. However, critics lifted isolated lines from longer explanations, stripped them of context, and portrayed him as indifferent to the suffering of ordinary Nigerians. The result was a torrent of public backlash.
As for Senate President Godswill Akpabio, his statement, “Let the poor breathe…” made during plenary, was actually part of a parliamentary exchange in which he was urging colleagues to support measures aimed at cushioning the hardships being experienced by Nigerians.
Yet the three-second clip was presented as though he was mocking the masses. The video went viral, and Akpabio continues to suffer reputational damage from that incident.
There are reasons why this strategy works politically. In fact, there is a science behind it that many political actors fail to understand.
Unfortunately, it often appears that political leaders do not conduct meaningful post-election reviews, whether after victories or defeats, in order to identify lessons and improve future performance.
Otherwise, how does one explain the fact that the same mistake—speaking extemporaneously without adequate message discipline—has occurred not once, not twice, but repeatedly within the same political cycle, as evidenced by the controversies surrounding the statements of Oluremi Tinubu, Bayo Onanuga, and Godswill Akpabio in 2026?
Believe it or not, in today’s attention economy, a seven-second social media reel can overwhelm the intended impact of a seven-page policy paper.
If nothing else, such clips serve as confirmation bias. If people already believe that the “Tinubu camp is out of touch,” then a selectively edited clip appears to confirm that perception.
There is an old saying in the media industry: bad news is good news. No corrective statement travels as fast or as far as a damaging narrative. A politician’s full speech rarely trends; the meme does.
This dynamic is also reinforced by the “push and pull” tactics commonly employed by communication strategists and political operatives. This means that the good news has to be pushed to gain traction even as the gain news is self propelling.
This is precisely why, in 2023, Tinubu’s opponents transformed “Agbado” into a political diagnosis during the presidential campaign. In 2025, “prayer and hard work” was reframed as arrogance on the part of Oluremi Tinubu. Around the same period, a parliamentary side talk by Akpabio was turned into evidence of alleged mockery.
Now, in 2026, it is disappointing that the cycle is repeating itself. The First Lady’s comments about empowering women through small-scale enterprises such as akara frying, roasted corn sales, and kunli,kunli production have been portrayed as evidence that the government is disconnected from the realities of hardship. Similarly, Bayo Onanuga’s alleged statement that there is no hunger in Nigeria, as well as Godswill Akpabio’s assertion that Nigeria will never be the same after Tinubu completes his reforms, have generated intense reactions across social media.
In my view, what the governing party and the current administration have yet to fully appreciate is that they are facing a communications crisis driven by the clipping and distortion of speeches. This has become a recurring problem because party leaders have failed to identify it early, seek expert advice, and develop effective countermeasures.
The point I am making is simple: the opposition has learned that it is not always necessary to defeat a policy if one can make the messenger appear unserious in ten seconds.
Tinubu survived these tactics after transitioning from campaign rallies to the presidency. However, Oluremi Tinubu, Bayo Onanuga, and Godswill Akpabio now find themselves trapped in similar “rally microphone moments.” They may continue to suffer from them unless competent communication strategists are engaged to prevent such avoidable reputational damage.
Lately, l have reading in the social media how the deployment of solar energy as source electricity power in Aso Rock villa implies that Nigerians are going to continue in darkness since the presidential seat of power has secured its energy need.
That is a serious negative narrative and no body has bothered to explain that solar power deployment in the villa will save the presidential seat of power a whopping N47 billion naira electricity bill and annually and it is part of the plans for Nigeria to have become a major user of alternative energy as such when its scaled up public sector wide it enable our country gain access to the global green energy funds available to the countries that demonstrate significant use of alternative energy such as solar power.
What better symbolizes Nigerias growing use of green energy that it serving as the back up in Aso Rock Villa?
How the Communications Team Should Have Prepared Trio First Lady, Presidential spokesman and senate president to prevent their unscripted speeches being twisted.
- Senator Oluremi Tinubu and the “Akara, Kunu, Corn” Remark.
What was said and clipped:
“Empower women to fry akara, sell kunu, roast corn…”
The backlash arose because it sounded to critics like a modern version of “let them eat cake” during a period of economic hardship.
A more clip-proof version could have been:
“While government is rolling out large-scale economic programmes, we must also empower women at the grassroots with low-capital businesses they can start immediately—whether in food processing, trading, or other MSMEs. From akara production to agro-processing, every naira earned at home is dignity restored. That is why we are pairing skills acquisition with access to microcredit.”
Why this would have worked better:
A. It acknowledges larger economic programmes first.
B. It frames akara as a starting point rather than an end goal.
C. It introduces concepts such as dignity, entrepreneurship, and access to finance.
- Bayo Onanuga and the “No Hunger” Narrative.
What was said and clipped:
“There is no hunger in Nigeria.”
The statement generated outrage because it appeared to deny the hardship many Nigerians are experiencing.
A more clip-proof version could have been:
“Let’s be clear about the terms. Nigeria is not facing famine or mass starvation. However, I will not insult Nigerians by pretending that the cost-of-living crisis is not affecting millions of households. That is why this administration is redirecting resources previously spent on fuel subsidies into food security, transportation support, and social interventions. The pain is real, and the goal of these policies is to reduce it.”
Why this would have worked better:
A. It eliminates the famine-versus-hunger straw man.
B. It leads with empathy.
C. It pivots quickly to solutions and policy actions.
- Senate President Akpabio and the “Reforms Are Working” Narrative.
What was said and clipped:
“Tinubu’s reforms are working.”
Many Nigerians interpreted the statement as evidence that political leaders were detached from economic realities.
A more clip-proof version could have been:
“I will not stand here and tell a Nigerian mother that food prices have fallen. They have not, and we all feel the impact. However, the data suggests that important foundations are being laid: state revenues have increased, subsidy leakages have been reduced, and the foreign exchange market is becoming more stable. The true test of reform is not today’s price level but tomorrow’s purchasing power. That is what we are working to achieve.”
Why this would have worked better:
A. It leads with empathy and acknowledgment of hardship.
B. It relies on measurable indicators rather than slogans.
C. It frames reforms as a long-term process aimed at future benefits.
Conclusion.
My decision to undertake this deep dive was driven by a desire to understand why political leaders repeatedly find themselves misunderstood in the public sphere. The evidence suggests that such outcomes are often not accidental but rather the result of deliberate efforts by political competitors to tarnish opponents through selective editing, framing, and amplification.
At the same time, this analysis demonstrates that effective political communication is not rocket science. Skilled strategists possess the expertise needed to navigate a political landscape often strewn with communication landmines capable of transforming good intentions into public relations disasters overnight.
The APC and the Tinubu administration appear to be learning this lesson the hard way. In 2023, Agbado became a meme against President Tinubu because there was no effective empathy frame. In 2026, Akara has become a meme against the First Lady for much the same reason.
Simply put, in the age of viral video clips and social media reels, empathy is the first line of defence for any leader—whether in politics, business, or religious leadership.
It is my hope that this intervention will help familiarize leaders both in politics, business and in fact all spheres of life with the value of professional strategic communication and political campaign messaging. If they do, they may come to appreciate that reputational damage and campaign crisis that could arise from distorted messaging which is often preventable, provided the right expertise is brought to bear before—not after—a crisis.
Magnus Onyibe, an entrepreneur, public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, an alumnus of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Massachusetts, USA, a Commonwealth Institute scholar, and a former commissioner in the Delta State government, sent this piece from Lagos.
