The Villa and its presidential spokespersons

By Lanre Idowu

The Aso Villa, seat of Nigeria’s Presidency, continues to elicit public interest. As Leon Usigbe of the Nigerian Tribune, June 1, reminds the reader, “It is the seat of power, a security zone, highly sensitive and secretive”; an “esoteric conclave” where news hunt “may mean digging for trouble”.

In his piece, “The Villa and the media”, Usigbe provides useful material on the challenges of information management for the media and the presidential spokesperson. He reminds readers that the spokesperson’s job is seen as glamorous because of the visibility and access the demands of the office confer on the occupant. The downside is the frustrations the spokesperson faces from meddlesome colleagues who fancy themselves all as experts on the media and are ever ready to offer gratuitous advice to the President but who are not called to answer for the failure of such counsel. He posits that the situation is worse where a spokesperson lacks “strong personal relationship with the President (and) is not able to counter the forces against him by exploiting his personal contacts with the President”.
Usigbe highlights various former presidential spokespersons and gives his verdict on their place in Villa history. Three things are of interest to me in his article: The official designation of the head of the President’s media team, the media’s expectations from the officer, and the issue of welfare of journalists. He reminds us that the designation now reads Special Adviser (Media and Publicity) as against the previous Senior Special Assistant. Beyond the routine organisation of press briefings after the weekly Federal Executive Council meetings and issuance of press releases, Usigbe identifies people-management skills as it involves the State House correspondents as most important for a spokesperson to succeed. “The success or failure of the Adviser on Media starts with the way he deals with members of the State House Press Corps who necessarily feed virtually all the news outlets around the country and throughout the world,” he submits.

Usigbe decries snobbery, accusing Reuben Abati, the immediate past occupant of the office, as spurning “the opportunity for a productive relationship with members of the State House Press Corps, who as the primary sources of direct news of the President and his wife, could have helped to manage the more sensitive aspects of such stories before they became distractions for the First Family”. He charges that “there was not a single meeting between Goodluck Jonathan and the State House correspondents in his five years as President, not even for a press conference.”

The third issue was the charge of lack of attention to correspondents’ welfare, which Usigbe said “was enough motivation for many to turn against the President and become susceptible to the machinations of the then opposition.”

At the appropriate time, I am sure Abati will oblige the public with an account of his years in government, explaining why he did what he did and didn’t do. As a professional with an abiding interest in the state of information flows, I have heard stories of correspondents with exaggerated importance of their mission. I have heard of subtle and not subtle attempts at blackmail to make spokespersons do their bidding. The issue of welfare in government circles often revolves round getting some under-the-counter benefits beyond legitimate income and I wonder how it has grown to nurture a sense of entitlement. I recall that the issue also featured in The Guardian’s May 28 front page report, “Inside Jonathan’s Aso Villa” where the newspaper’s duo of Madu Onuorah and Mohammed Abubakar tell us of despondency in the Villa on learning “there is not going to be any parting gift for them” in the twilight of the Jonathan administration.

We must thank Usigbe for sharing his perspective. Perhaps, we should encourage him to go a step further to throw new light on issues hinted at by emulating a former State House correspondent, Orji Ogbonnaya Orji, who shared his experience in the 2003 book, Inside Aso Rock. Such books by our journalists are not only necessary for their professional accomplishments, they equally help to deepen public understanding of our public institutions and how they can be strengthened to serve the public better.

That is in the future realm. The matter at hand now is that the President Muhammadu Buhari administration has announced two appointments for the media office combining the two designations in two officers. Whilst Femi Adesina is the special adviser, Garba Shehu is the senior special assistant. It is not clear who will be doing what in the long run, but so far Shehu is the one issuing most of the releases about the President’s activities and clarifying issues. I recall that in recent years, it was during the Umaru Yar’ Adua Presidency, 2007-2010, that we had a cabinet-status adviser in Segun Adeniyi; a position retained by Jonathan in appointing Abati. Both men were served by other aides who operated behind the scene. Now under Buhari, both offices indicative of departmental headship are to be occupied for the first time by two different individuals with interesting credentials. Both have headed their professional bodies, the Nigerian Guild of Editors; Shehu, 1995-98, and Adesina, 2012-2015. Whilst Shehu was part of former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar’s blistering media team, 1999-2006, Adesina was Managing Director and Editor-in-Chief at the Sun newspapers, 2011-2015. Whilst Shehu’s previous experience at the Villa and his coordination of candidate Buhari’s media campaign confer some advantage, Adesina’s recent position as the NGE president gives him close access to current gatekeepers that can be well utilised.

How to blend the great attributes of both gentlemen into a cohesive whole to run an effective information machinery for the Presidency is a challenge that must be settled early. Otherwise, it may prove a handful placing two presidents under the same roof.