Why Nigeria’s Media Must Separate Crime From Tribe

One of the most persistent challenges confronting Nigeria’s fragile peace is how the media reports crime and conflict. Time and again, news headlines attribute violence and criminality to the ethnic or religious background of the alleged perpetrators. Such reporting practices turn media logic upside down, disregarding journalism’s fundamental principles of objectivity and fairness. They fuel suspicion, entrench divisions, and distract society from addressing the real issue – criminality.

The matter was highlighted in a recent media training programme in Plateau State organised by Amnesty International Nigeria. Many journalists admitted to the widespread practice of qualifying criminals by their ethnic or religious identities. When asked to reflect on this approach, they conceded that it does little to serve the cause of justice or peace. Indeed, framing bandits, kidnappers, or arsonists in terms of tribe or faith inadvertently protects crime by shifting public anger from individuals to entire communities. Worse still, it inadvertently legitimises reprisal and cycles of violence.

Crime has no tribe, and terrorism has no religion. Every Nigerian should be concerned when reporting practices suggest otherwise. When a thief is described first as belonging to a faith or ethnic group, the message is not about the crime but about identity. This dangerously distorts the purpose of journalism, which is to inform, educate, and hold accountable, not to divide.

The persistence of this harmful framing cannot be dismissed as mere oversight. Media narratives are not produced in a vacuum. They are products of the political economy of communication – shaped by ownership interests, political pressures, and in many cases, the hidden hand of those who benefit from perpetual crises. It is no coincidence that conflict entrepreneurs, warlords, and political opportunists thrive in an atmosphere where suspicion among ethnic and religious groups is constantly stoked. By reproducing such divisive frames, the media, wittingly or unwittingly, becomes an enabler of crisis rather than a peace facilitator.

Nigeria’s diverse society requires a more responsible journalism ethos. To repeatedly reduce citizens to markers of identity when reporting crime is to ignore the principle of individual responsibility. Criminals must be held accountable as individuals, not as representatives of a faith or ethnic group. The media, therefore, must adopt a deliberate editorial policy that prioritises depersonalised, fact-based reporting. Instead of “a Fulani man arrested for kidnapping,” the proper framing is simply “a suspect arrested for kidnapping” “herdsmen attack Benue community” should simply put “bandits attack Benue community”. Such subtle but significant changes in language help build a society where justice is targeted at wrongdoers, not entire communities.

The National Broadcasting Commission (NBC), the Nigerian Press Council, and professional unions such as the Nigerian Guild of Editors and the Nigeria Union of Journalists must rise to this responsibility. They cannot continue to fold their arms while the very fabric of the nation is being torn apart by reckless framing. Clear guidelines and sanctions are required to ensure that media houses act with restraint, especially when reporting issues with potential to inflame tensions.

At the same time, journalists themselves must embrace ethical responsibility. The temptation to sensationalise should not override the duty to promote peace. In conflict-prone societies like ours, words are not neutral; they are weapons that can heal or destroy. Newsrooms must, therefore, invest in regular training for reporters and editors on conflict-sensitive journalism. Just as importantly, audiences must demand better. Citizens should begin to question and reject news reports that habitually stereotype perpetrators by religion or ethnicity.

It is also worth underscoring that this problem is not unique to Nigeria. Around the world, media systems grapple with the question of how to report crime in plural societies without feeding prejudice. The best practices are clear: focus on the crime, avoid generalisations, and resist the urge to assign collective guilt. In doing so, the press not only fulfils its constitutional mandate but also strengthens democracy.

This newspaper believes that the time has come for Nigerian media to re-examine its role in either deepening division or promoting unity. As the nation battles insecurity on multiple fronts, the press cannot afford to be a willing tool in the hands of those who profit from chaos. To continue framing criminals as representatives of entire ethnic or religious communities is to abandon the ethics of journalism and undermine the very peace Nigeria desperately needs.

We, therefore, call on editors, regulators, and policymakers to urgently confront this issue. Responsible reporting must become the standard, not the exception. Anything less is a betrayal of public trust. Crime is crime, no matter who commits it. The Nigerian press must rise above sensationalism and identity politics to embrace a higher duty: nation building through truth, fairness, and responsibility.