NewStats: 3,262,135 , 8,176,170 topics. Date: Saturday, 31 May 2025 at 09:52 PM 14t4q

Viewpoint: Why Twitter got it wrong in Nigeria

4 hours ago



In our series of letters from African writers, Nigerian journalist and novelist Adaobi Tricia Nwaubani considers Twitter's power and the Nigerian government's moves to curb it.

It has been two months since the Nigerian government banned Twitter after the tech giant deleted a post by President Muhammadu Buhari for violating its rules on abusive language.

Despite the global outrage that followed, including strong words of condemnation from top foreign diplomats in the country, the government remained adamant.

However, it announced on Wednesday that it was finalising an agreement with Twitter and the ban would be lifted in a few days or weeks.


Many Nigerians were angered by the Twitter ban

Much of the comment that followed at the time focused on the ban's negative impact on freedom of speech and the economy.

Many Nigerians use the platform to amplify their grievances against the government and to reach more customers for their businesses.

But Twitter's decision to delete President Buhari's post - in which he threatened violence against a separatist movement - was ill-advised. This has also become a point of debate in other parts of the world, including India.

The US-owned, private firm appeared to be interfering in the internal affairs of a sovereign African state without enough background knowledge to understand the consequences of its actions.

Neo-colonialism

At the time, Twitter said the post was in violation of its rules.

The company has the right to enforce its regulations, but Mr Buhari's post was an official communication from the Nigerian president to his people, tweeted from a government .

The same message was also broadcast on other media platforms across the country.

Is it right that a private American firm has the power to edit, without permission, the official communication of a democratically elected president of an African country? It doesn't get any more neo-colonial than that.


President Muhammadu Buhari, 78, has been in office since 2015

Nigerians have the right to be aware of their leader's plans and strategies, irrespective of how reckless his choice of words might be. They have a right to know even if he is planning something as heartless as unleashing violence on them.

Similarly, Nigerians have the right to respond to him as part of the interaction between the government and its citizens.

Mr Buhari's tweet threatened violence against the Indigenous People of Biafra (Ipob) movement, which is seeking a breakaway state in south-eastern Nigeria, home to the Igbo people.

Ipob was outlawed in 2017 - the group fought the ban in court and lost.


Amplifying divisions

While many Igbos believe they have been marginalised in many ways, such as being left out of key national leadership positions, the majority do not Ipob's desire for secession.

Neither do they like its violent rhetoric against other ethnic groups - often referred to as wild animals by Ipob leader Nnamdi Kanu, who is facing treason charges.

In February, Facebook deactivated Mr Kanu's for its hate speech, but he remained active on Twitter.

By deleting Mr Buhari's threats, Twitter was inadvertently taking sides with Ipob, and the group's ers wasted no time in celebrating this assumed show of solidarity.

Following the backlash from the government in June, a few of the Ipob leader's tweets were removed by Twitter.


Some of Nigeria's minority Igbo ethnic group have waged a long-running campaign for secession

Similarly thoughtless involvement by Twitter amplified the divisions that derailed Nigeria's #EndSars movement that oversaw protests against police brutality in October 2020.

Different groups were involved in planning and fundraising for the protests that began online and poured into the streets of cities across Nigeria for about two weeks.

But when Twitter verified the of one group and not of others, it led to bitter mudslinging and the withdrawal of some groups from the movement.

"Twitter had inadvertently selected the leaders of Nigeria's social movement against police brutality and effectively escalated the rivalry that had already fractured the movement," wrote Nigerian journalist Ohimai Amaize.

Attempt to stifle criticism

The tech giant trod where even seasoned foreign diplomats and global bodies fear to go.

Many well-meaning outsiders have learned never to be too quick to meddle in the affairs of African countries, like Nigeria, where issues are often more complicated than meets the eye. They are increasingly embracing the trend of deferring responsibility to local organisations that better understand local dynamics.

Twitter's decision to set up a West Africa headquarters in Ghana is a good step in developing cultural competence.

[img]http://www.bbc.com/ws/includes/idt2/7e7ff505-0c05-4a5e-a2c6-4669051c67f5/image/640[/img]

"If it was authoritarian to ban Twitter, it was even more problematic for an American in Silicon Valley to poke their finger in the affairs of a sovereign state" - Adaobi Tricia Nwaubani Nigerian novelist

The Nigerian government's conditions for lifting the ban include that Twitter must its business in Nigeria and have a staff presence in the country.

Mr Buhari's istration has shown little respect for the rule of law and freedom of speech, with a number of journalists and activists locked up simply for criticising the government.

Banning Twitter completely is a barely concealed attempt by the government to stifle voices of criticism, and Nigerians have good reason to be worried.

But the power of Big Tech to make arbitrary decisions about who gets to say what, when and how, is equally troubling.

It raises questions about policing speech and censoring unpopular voices, amid the need for open public debate in a free democratic society.

If it was authoritarian for the Nigerian government to ban the use of Twitter, it was even more problematic for an American swivelling in a chair in Silicon Valley to poke their finger into the internal affairs of a sovereign African state.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-58175708.amp

BBC is evil, nothing but evil.
Would they allow Boris Johnson to threaten them like that. Scotland got referendum but nobody threatening them or killed them.

Just get a VPN

Adaobi Tricia Nwaubani look at where i threw your opinion

story

Truth be told, govt around the world must curb social medias power, they are becoming to strong,gaddafi,mubarak of Egypt and even Jonathan were all removed with the help of social media and if they allowed them to continue,then our future lies in silicon Valley

That's their problem. Next update, please

This is disappointing to read and quite hard to believe it was featured on BBC. Twitter didn't ban the genocidal threat tweet of Buhari. It was Nigerian Tweeps that reported it enmasse for violation. Trump was banned on the same platform for using it to instigate violence after his loss. And note, the official POTUS handle was never banned, it was that of Trump that was banned, just as that of the Nigerian government wasn't banned. Buhari wasn't even banned, the particular tweet was only deleted when he should have been banned.

But some misfits in their usual 'noli me tangere' attitude saw it as a slap on Nigeria that Twitter removed a President’s tweet.

A foreigner visiting Nigeria is subject to the laws of Nigeria, not his country of origin. Twitter has policies that every submits to consciously or unconsciously. Buhari threatened a people directly and others reported it on a platform where policies work.

Shameful that the government-sponsored with the intention that Nigerians would embrace it after Twitter's predicted ban. But of course, it is not Twitter that is desperate. It is the APC and the Nigerian government. Twitter played an active role in their win against Jonathan and Buhari. Elections are getting closer and campaigns will start soon. They need Twitter to run their lies and $1 to N1 again.

Failed country.

mcbreeze:
[b]BBC is evil, nothing but evil.
[/b]Would they allow Boris Johnson to threaten them like that. Scotland got referendum but nobody threatening them or killed them.

Always endeavour to read before you comment
Illiterate Peoples of Biafra

This same Twitter was used by this government before coming to power, A platform used to highlight the inadequacies of the previous government. I don't coming online to post unsubstantiated stories,but has become a regular occurrence to read of dissenting voices,from local to state government,clamped to jail for airing their opinions.

tamdun:
Truth be told, govt around the world must curb social medias power, they are becoming to strong,gaddafi,mubarak of Egypt and even Jonathan were all removed with the help of social media and if they allowed them to continue,then our future lies in silicon Valley

Jonathan was removed through the help of America, specifically Obama. The APC and Buhari won on the back of social media because the relic was presented as a refurbished democrat.

Social media platforms are not strong or powerful as people assume. Crowwe is a social media platform, isn't it? How powerful is it? Why is not seen as a threat to Nigeria? That is because humans give it power! Crowwe, today, is worthless that I doubt it has 500 daily visitors. And this is a government-sponsored social medium o.

And just because a despot as Buhari got its Tweet removed does not mean Jack has power. Nigerians do. They reported it enmasse and it was removed. Trump used social media to rile up his followers until they got violent and attacked the capitol. It wasn't until he got banned that questions started flying around.

Politicians should be able and sensible in the way they talk and address their people. Using a platform to cause chaos and turn people against themselves is a greater threat than natural disasters.

The same social media that BMCs, the APC and Lai are crying over today was instrumental to their win. The government only wants less of Fulani Herdsmen reportage and almost everyone can get the story out through social media without having to write a media house. If Nigerians were treated fairly and equally, and Buhari was true to his campaign promises, most Nigerians won't be bitter and feel excluded as they are now.

Election is coming. The APC will need Twitter again.

First, this is not a BBC editorial but sn article by an independent individual second, on scanning through it, i saw where she called Igbos, minorities. I didn't bother to read.

abouzaid:
First, this is not a BBC editorial but sn article by an independent individual second, on scanning through it, i saw where she called Igbos, minorities. I didn't bother to read.

There are bastards/black sheep in very tribe, almost every family and every ethnic group. Tricia is Igbo herself but she referred to her own ethnic group as a minority. The level of sponsored contents I have seen in this APC government is second to none. I sincerely wouldn't be surprised if word gets out tomorrow that she got compensated or paid for this opinion article.

Twitter really humbled this regime

Well written article

Make dem unban themselves. Na them dey miss

People think the Nigerian government is mad. But then again, twitter has showed that it does not intend to change. Tweets like this is why twitter was banned not because they deleted a tweet.

I dare anyone of you to say this about the US government and see what will happen

Well Twitter does not pay me to pay attention, lol
Their headache...
Kindly search ELITE SPORT TRADERS on t-elegram and me on my VFL journey..

E pain bubu

The article was written by Adaobi Tricia Nwubani and published by BBC. Not BBC opinion.

She is a wise Igbo lady

Reading...


'noli me tangere'

They’re getting the message.

Twitter should do the needful or leave naija .. weldone Baba Buhari

post=104771142:
Twitter made a statement in which they said they don't know President Buhari and which country he runs.

When you're blinded by hate and self imposed narrow mindedness, you will applaud someone who is clearly insulting you.
Most Nigerians who are sympathetic with Twitter today don't know how much of an insult this comment is to even them.
They see Buhari as the target here but there are two elements in this insult.
Twitter says they don't know President Buhari.
But they didn't stop there.
They also added that they don't know the country he is leading. In other words they don't know Nigeria.

Twitter is brazenly saying they don't know Africas most populous nation and the country with the highest concentration of black people in the world. Twitter is brazenly saying they don't know a country where over 11 billion dollars of their revenue comes from with over 40 million subscribers.


Some years ago Pastor Chris Oyakhilome chose to use twitter to communicate some prayer information to Christ Embassy worldwide.
Within few weeks Pastor Chris broke the records of having the most amount of followers within such a short period.

In their arrogance, Twitter called Pastor Chris' twitter to question and described the followership as bogus.

Simply put, Twitter believed that nobody from a place like Nigeria had enough clout to garner such followership within such a short time - a feat that no Hollywood star was able to achieve -.

Pastor Chris wasn't prepared for their drama, he pulled out of twitter and challenged his church tech people to design a platform that the church can use. That's what gave birth to Yookos.

Today Yookos is a formidable competitor with Twitter so much so that ex President Barack Obama acknowledged the giant strides made by the platform within such a short time after it was launched.

Eventually twitter confirmed Pastor Chris' and "apologized" but it was too late.
Pastor Chris had moved his huge followership into Yookos.

Several years later Twitter is saying that they don't know the country that the same Pastor Chris comes from.
That's arrogance taken too far.

Any Nigerian who tolerates this insult is just a self hating sychophant.

Someone says you and your country don't matter and you're jubilating.
Is that not a serious sickness?

********************************************

On a lighter note,
*We heard someone telling his landlord that his rent money for the year is trapped in his Twitter *

*The landlord too is now abusing Buhari

Dem [/b] : AKA [b]DA truth in da building!

Truth is not bitter, just that some people are bitter to the truth.

We Rise!


You've said it all patriot.


Gbamsolutely.
Na so
END OF THREAD.

Is this not the same bbc that was attacked in the UK for misleading the public

But the power of Big Tech to make arbitrary decisions about who gets to say what, when and how, is equally troubling.

It raises questions about policing speech and censoring unpopular voices, amid the need for open public debate in a free democratic society.

If it was authoritarian for the Nigerian government to ban the use of Twitter, it was even more problematic for an American swivelling in a chair in Silicon Valley to poke their finger into the internal affairs of a sovereign African state.

There is nothing in this BBC piece that we have not thoroughly highlighted here when the issue first came up. I’m glad that foreign media platforms are now saying exactly the same thing. I agree with most of the points raised by the writer even though I disagree with the accusation that government have locked up most people criticizing the istration.