What does not exist in the media does not exist in public mind. Politics
is based on a socialized communication and on the capacity to influence
people’s minds. In other words, politics
amidst its cacophonous matrix, permutation and combinations is calculatedly
stage for the media. The workings of the political system are staged for the
media so as to obtain the support, or at least the lesser hostility of citizens
who become the consumers in the political market. On the one hand, the media
acts as bridge between government and public. On the other hand, political
communication is the connection between politics and citizens and the
interaction modes that connect these groups to each other. Calculatedly,
political communication is often manipulative in intent vis-à-vis what should be communicated and what should be withheld, with the aim
of taking into account and influencing public opinion, and creating strategic
alliances and an enabling information infrastructure and public acceptability
templates for both domestic and foreign policies of the government.
Following the rumour spree of the purported death of president Buhari; a
censorious analysis of the political communication strategy of Buhari’s
government vis-à-vis it’s Machiavellian, iconic,
ritualistic, laudatory and dramatist mode shows intrigues, nuances,
injudiciousness, discordant cognition and complexities. In another shade, critical
look on Buhari government shows that nonverbal communication including body
language, silent reactions, the use of pictures and music in political
communication, etc. is used more extensively than direct verbal communication
to convey political messages in the mass media.
President Buhari has kept silent about the state of his health, though;
his aides and cohorts such as Femi Adesina, Saraki, Garba, etc have been
speaking on his behalf. But why is the president not speaking for himself? Is
the purported sickness affecting his vocal cavity? No, that’s far from the
truth. After all, the president has been speaking to his Acting President (I
mean his VP) and others. At least the president spoke with the most powerful
president in the world (Trump). Hence, if PMB has been speaking to some
individuals, then, his silence or refusal to speak to Nigerians must be a
political communication strategy. Evidently, Silence considered as an absence
of speech or noise – has been generally ignored as a form of communication in
political domain because it represents inaction or non-behaviour. Silence is
neither not necessarily inaction nor is silence, as many believe, a failure to
communicate. Traditionally, silence is a powerful form of communication.
Sometimes it could mean someone is still cogitating a response to a hard nut question.
It could mean a sign of fret, agreement, dissent, frustration or anger.
There’s a popular parlance that says that ‘silence is the best answer
for a fool’, hence, silent insults. Some opine that Nigerians do not have any
business to do with Buhari’s health. They claim it’s the president private
matter. But can we say Buhari as the president still largely has a private life
except the issues of national security or can we also claim that Nigerians got
no constitutional rights to know the health status of their president. Can we
conclude that PMB does not hold Nigerians in high regards? After all he’s
speaking to those he holds in high regards. Is PMB considering the masses of
Nigeria as fools, since silence is the best answer for a fool? No doubt,
Buhari’s silence is insulting the mass of the people that voted for him.
If indeed we must buy in into the developing theory by a school of
thought in Nigeria propounding that Buhari’s vacation particularly his refusal
to speak to Nigerians (silence) is a political strategy, what are the
deductions we can make from this? Should we accept the claim that Buhari left
the scene for him and the nation to have time out to cool off tensions? Should we
accept the verdict that Buhari got no remedy for Nigeria’s problem, hence, the
need to go off field of politics (just as basket ball players use to do)
waiting for an opportune time to stage a comeback? Is it true that his face is
not adding ‘human face’ to government policies thereby attracting frustration,
reactions, counter reactions, militancy, insurgency, secession attempts, etc?
In this direction some have claimed that Osinbajo carries a face that is
acceptable across the six geo-political zones of Nigeria. Can we accept all these
assertions?
Paradoxically, some Nigerians claim that Buhari’s absence and silence
are golden, hence beneficiary to Nigeria. They further claim that since he left
the scene, it’s been good for the nation but not for the people yet. After all,
Osinbajo’s visits to Niger Delta had muted vandalization of oil pipelines
thereby resulting to increase in the barrels of oil being exploited daily in
the country. Also, there have been dramatic decline in herdsmen attack in the
country. In addition, Naira is picking up against the Dollar.
It is pertinent to say at this juncture that silence is sometimes golden
especially if opening your mouth can cost you your reputation, job and good
will; or if speaking could be injurious to the common good of the generality of
the society. Can’t we begin to see the benign and hidden benefits in Buhari’s
silence and absence? Can’t we see it as an opportunity for the president to
launch a better and stronger comeback in order to serve the nation more effectively?
Remember, failing to pay close attention to the silent fraction of a tête-à-tête
can result in missing a crucial part of communication. So, I suggest that
Nigerians should pay full attention to Buhari’s silence towards the masses.
What are the lessons the masses can pick from this? Let the public assume
not to have the consciousness of the fact that he had chosen only to speak to
the political elites who he assumed put him in power. Astute and active
listeners watch for silence vis-à-vis gaps, pauses, and hesitations. Deliberately, they carry out
diagnosis and prognosis of silence particularly within political milieu. They
treat silence as a corollary and a paradox as well as analogous to a beeping
yellow traffic light at a crossroads (orita). Surely they pay rapt and apt attention
to what comes next after silence. Hence, I modestly submit here that Nigerians
should think ahead about what come next after this impermanent silence of
Buhari and they should also prepare for what come next. Because, this could be
a case of ‘agbo to tadi moyin, agbara lo lo
mu wa’ (a ram that take a reverse
or withdrew from a battle line, will surely return with profound firepower).
This silence could be a time of recess, reset, reassessment and restart for a
better Nigeria. The return of the president to governance and talking mode
could provoke an opportunity for the so-called enemies of progress in Nigeria
to be silent by the ‘silencer’ himself.
No comments:
Post a Comment