Patriotism in the Digital Age: Lessons From Visit to VON
By Abdulmalik Magwe Bello
A nation can hardly flourish when its citizens have completely lost faith in it. Patriotism—the willingness to contribute to the progress of one’s country while honestly confronting its shortcomings—remains an important ingredient of nation-building.
This was one of the strongest lessons I took away on Wednesday, August 19, 2026, when members of the PRNigeria Young Communication Fellowship, Abuja Centre, visited the headquarters of the Voice of Nigeria (VON) in Abuja.
The visit formed part of our fellowship programme organised by Image Merchants Promotion Limited (IMPR), publishers of PRNigeria and Economic Confidential.
We were received by the Director-General and Chief Executive Officer of VON, Malam Jibrin Baba Ndace, a seasoned journalist and media administrator whose interaction with us became less of a formal courtesy engagement and more of a conversation about journalism, patriotism and the responsibility that comes with possessing a voice in the digital age.
I left his office thinking about a simple question: What does it mean to be patriotic when virtually everyone has become a publisher?
That question matters because technology has dramatically democratised communication. A smartphone can now give an ordinary citizen access to an audience that would once have required a newspaper, radio or television station.
That is progress. But power without responsibility can also become dangerous.
Social media platforms have created unprecedented opportunities for Nigerians to tell their stories, expose wrongdoing, demand accountability and participate in national conversations. Unfortunately, the same platforms can be used to circulate misinformation, inflame ethnic or religious tensions and deepen political divisions.
This is where patriotism and responsible communication must meet.
Patriotism should never mean pretending that everything is perfect. Nigeria has serious challenges, and citizens have every right to question leaders, expose wrongdoing and demand better governance.
In fact, constructive criticism can itself be patriotic.
But there is a difference between criticising a country because you want it to improve and deliberately spreading falsehoods that damage social cohesion or endanger lives.
That distinction becomes increasingly important in an age where a misleading post can travel across the country within minutes.
One of Ndace’s statements during our interaction captured this responsibility perfectly:
“If you are not sure, don’t share.”
Those few words should probably be displayed wherever people access social media.
Before forwarding a message, posting an allegation or sharing a disturbing video, we should ask: Is this true? Where did it come from? Is the context accurate? Who could be affected if it is false?
Journalists understand—or should understand—the importance of verification. But social media has expanded that responsibility beyond professional newsrooms. Every citizen with a smartphone now participates, however informally, in the information ecosystem.
The consequences of irresponsible communication can be severe.
Nigeria’s #EndSARS protests in October 2020 demonstrated both the extraordinary power of digital mobilisation and the dangers of an information environment filled with rapidly competing claims, emotions and narratives. The protests began with legitimate demands over police brutality and accountability, but the period also witnessed violence, deaths, destruction and widespread controversy over what occurred at different locations.
The lesson should not be that citizens must remain silent when confronted with injustice. Nor should legitimate protests be blamed simply on social media.
Rather, the experience demonstrated why information becomes especially sensitive during a crisis. When tension is already high, unverified claims, inflammatory content and misleading information can worsen an unstable situation.
This is why the media must remain a tool for effective rather than destructive communication.
The media possesses enormous power to expose injustice, educate citizens, promote accountability and encourage development. But the same power can deepen polarisation when used irresponsibly.
Read Also:
A journalist can investigate corruption without hating Nigeria. A citizen can criticise government without wishing the country failure. A communicator can challenge an institution while remaining committed to national development.
Indeed, patriotism without accountability can become blind loyalty, while criticism without responsibility can become destructive.
Nigeria needs neither extreme.
What we need is a form of citizenship that is courageous enough to confront our failures and hopeful enough to believe they can be corrected.
No country is without problems. Developed societies also experience political divisions, crime, inequality, institutional failures and social tensions. The important question is not whether a country has challenges but how its institutions and citizens respond to them.
This is why nation-building cannot be treated as the responsibility of government alone.
It is easy to ask what the President, governor, minister or local government chairman has done. Those questions are legitimate and necessary. But citizenship also requires another question: What have I contributed?
What have I done in my community? How do I treat public property? Do I verify information before sharing it? Do I respect people from backgrounds different from mine? Do I demand accountability based on facts or simply circulate whatever confirms my existing beliefs?
National development is ultimately the accumulation of institutional actions and individual choices.
My visit to VON also broadened my understanding of how communication can project a country’s identity internationally.
VON broadcasts Nigeria’s stories to audiences within and beyond Africa through several languages. We also learnt about efforts towards expanding its international language services, including Mandarin.
For me, this represented more than the addition of another language. It demonstrated the importance of Nigeria speaking to the world rather than merely allowing the world to speak about Nigeria.
In international communication, countries compete not only economically or diplomatically but also through narratives. How a country is understood influences tourism, investment, diplomacy and even how its citizens are perceived abroad.
This does not mean a national broadcaster should hide uncomfortable truths in the name of patriotism. Propaganda eventually destroys credibility.
The stronger approach is to tell Nigeria’s story truthfully and comprehensively—acknowledging its challenges while also reflecting its culture, innovation, achievements, diversity and possibilities.
That, to me, is responsible national communication.
The visit also challenged some of my own assumptions.
There have been moments when I have felt deeply pessimistic about Nigeria’s prospects. Many young Nigerians probably understand that feeling. Economic hardship, insecurity, unemployment and disappointing leadership can make optimism difficult.
But pessimism should not become permanent surrender.
My interaction at VON reminded me that institutions are still working, professionals are still trying, reforms are still taking place and citizens are still contributing to national development, even when their efforts do not dominate social media conversations.
That does not mean Nigeria is where it should be. It means there are still reasons to participate in making it better.
The visit was therefore more than a courtesy call. It became an encounter with experience, responsibility and purpose.
It reminded me that the media is powerful, but the choices made by the people using it are even more consequential.
Every post, broadcast, headline and commentary contributes something to the information environment in which our society operates.
The question is what we choose to contribute.
Patriotism should therefore be cultivated among younger generations, but it must be a thoughtful patriotism—one that does not demand silence in the face of wrongdoing, but encourages citizens to criticise constructively, verify before sharing and recognise that their country belongs to them too.
Ndace’s message remains with me: if you are not sure, don’t share.
Perhaps we should add another question before pressing the send button:
Will what I am about to share help people understand the truth, or will it simply add to the confusion?
In the digital age, responsible communication is not merely professional ethics.It is an act of citizenship.
Abdulmalik Magwe Bello is a PRNigeria Fellow and can be reached at [email protected].
