Paragraph 1
Imagine scrolling through your social media feed late at night, and there is a video of a respected public figure saying something outrageous. Your heart races, your fingers itch to share it, and you feel a rush of anger or disbelief. But what if that person never said those words? What if the face was not their face, and the voice was not their voice? This is the new world we live in, where Artificial Intelligence can make people see and hear things that never happened. It is this unsettling reality that prompted Otunba Olusegun Runsewe, the former Director-General of the National Council for Arts and Culture in Nigeria, to raise his voice in warning. He knows that culture, trust, and social harmony are delicate things, and he fears that the careless use of AI on social media is tearing at the threads that hold society together. Runsewe did not come across as a technophobe or a man afraid of progress. Rather, he spoke like a concerned elder who has watched society evolve, who appreciates the benefits of innovation, but who also knows that every powerful tool can be misused. His message was simple but urgent: AI is not evil by itself, but it can be turned into a weapon of confusion, division, and fear when placed in the wrong hands or used without responsibility.
The former NCAC boss was clearly worried about the flood of fake images, cloned voices, and fabricated stories that now move through WhatsApp, Facebook, TikTok, and other platforms like wildfire. In many Nigerian communities, social media has become the primary source of news and information, far ahead of newspapers, radio, or television. People trust what they see in a well-edited video, especially if it is shared by someone they know. Runsewe understands this psychology. He knows that when a familiar face appears to say something scandalous, many people will not pause to ask if the content is real. Instead, they will react emotionally, and that emotional reaction can be exploited by bad actors. This is why he chose to speak publicly, using his position and experience to remind everyone that seeing is no longer believing. The human mind wants to trust, but in the age of deepfakes and AI-generated content, trust must be earned through verification. Runsewe’s warning is not just about technology; it is about the survival of honest conversation, healthy relationships, and a stable society.
Paragraph 2
Runsewe was careful not to condemn AI outright. He acknowledged openly that artificial intelligence is freely available and that it can be a tremendous force for good. In his view, AI has the power to enhance communication, speed up research, make content creation easier, and even help solve some of the most difficult problems facing humanity. For example, students can use AI to explore complex topics, businesses can use it to reach new customers, and medical researchers can use it to find patterns in diseases. In agriculture, AI can help farmers predict weather, manage crops, and reduce waste. In governance, AI can improve service delivery, detect corruption, and help policymakers make informed decisions. Runsewe sees all of this potential. He is not one of those voices that want to ban technology or hide from the future. The problem, he says, is not the tool itself, but the unguided, unprotected, and unprincipled use of it. When AI is used without thought for consequences, it stops being a helper and starts being a hazard. It is like a sharp knife: in the hands of a skilled surgeon, it saves lives; in the hands of a careless child, it causes wounds. The same technology that can create beautiful art can also create lies dressed up as truth.
The greatest danger, in Runsewe’s eyes, is the creation and circulation of false images and fabricated content. In the past, if someone wanted to spread a lie, they had to be creative and persuasive. They had to write a convincing story, find people who would believe it, and hope that it survived contact with the facts. Now, anyone with a smartphone and an internet connection can produce a fake image that looks absolutely real. They can make a politician appear to take bribes, a religious leader appear to make offensive comments, or an innocent person appear in a compromising situation. These images are difficult to detect, and once they are posted, they spread faster than any correction can follow. By the time the truth catches up, the damage is already done. Runsewe is particularly concerned about the way these fake images and voices can be circulated through social media applications that are designed to maximize engagement, not encourage critical thinking. Algorithms reward shocking and emotional content because it keeps people staring at their screens. This means that the most outrageous lies often get the most attention, while careful and honest information stays buried. The result is a public space polluted with misinformation, where citizens no longer know what to believe or whom to trust.
Paragraph 3
The consequences of this kind of AI misuse are not abstract. Runsewe listed them clearly and passionately. Fake AI images and voices, he warned, are capable of tearing families apart. Imagine a husband seeing a video of his wife in a situation she was never in, or a daughter seeing a manipulated image of her father making a heartless statement. Relationships can break in minutes, and no amount of later explanation can fully repair the wound. The same applies to social institutions. A fake video of a respected judge, school principal, or community leader can destroy years of good reputation overnight. Government itself is not safe. A doctored video of a governor saying the wrong thing can provoke protests, fuel distrust, and make citizens question the legitimacy of their leaders. During times of crisis, such content can be deadly. If a fake image of a politician insulting a particular ethnic group or religion goes viral, it can ignite real-world violence. People do not always pause to check whether what they are watching is real; they simply respond to the fear, anger, or outrage that the content triggers. That is why Runsewe warned about inter-religious and inter-ethnic strife. Nigeria is a beautifully diverse country, but that diversity carries tension. AI-made content can pour fuel on those tensions, turning minor misunderstandings into open conflict.
The former director-general did not stop at stating the problem; he made it clear that this is a direct threat to peace and stability. He wants Nigerians to think of AI not just as a technological trend, but as a social force that can either heal or wound. When a government is discredited by fake videos, institutions become fragile. When families are torn apart by manipulated images, communities lose their moral center. When citizens are constantly flooded with misinformation, they become cynical and suspicious. They stop believing in anything, and that is dangerous because democracy depends on informed public trust. Runsewe’s voice in this matter is important because he is not speaking from the sidelines. He has spent years working in culture and communication, helping define how Nigerians understand themselves and their nation. He knows that the stories a society tells itself can shape its future. And if those stories are increasingly fake, then the future will be built on a foundation of lies. This is not something to be taken lightly. It is a call to action for every family, every school, every religious organization, and every citizen to develop a new kind of discipline, the discipline of checking before believing, and verifying before sharing.
Paragraph 4
Given all these dangers, what should ordinary people do? Runsewe had very practical advice. Above all, he urged Nigerians to be wary of information circulated on social media. This does not mean treating every post with paranoia, but it does mean slowing down. Too many people accept a piece of news simply because it is in their feed, and they pass it on without a second thought. Runsewe tells us to pause and ask basic questions: Who created this content? When was it made? Where does this image or video appear elsewhere? Is this the official social media page of the person concerned? Are there other reliable sources reporting the same thing? If the answer to these questions is unclear, then the wise decision is to hold off. He stressed that the public should fact-check information before accepting or sharing it. Fact-checking is not just something for journalists or scientists; it is something every citizen can practice. Today, there are online tools that can identify manipulated images, and there are professional fact-checking organizations that publish reports on viral claims. But even without those tools, simple common sense can go a long way. If an image or a story seems designed to provoke a strong reaction, it probably is. The more dramatic the claim, the more carefully it should be examined.
Runsewe also pointed to the reality of AI-generated voices and cloned images of prominent political figures. People have heard broadcasts that sound exactly like a senator, or videos that feature the perfect likeness of a celebrity, saying things that those individuals never said. This is not science fiction; it is happening right now. In many cases, the content is fake, but the impact is real. A politician can be embarrassed, a business can lose customers, a family can be humiliated, all because someone used AI to create a forgery that is difficult to distinguish from the original. That is why Runsewe advised that citizens should cross-check information with relevant government agencies. If an important announcement seems to come from a ministry or a public official, one should visit the official website or contact the agency directly. It may take a little extra time, but the few minutes spent verifying could save months of regret. He used the old expression: do not swallow everything “hook, line, and sinker.” The internet is full of bait, and if we bite without thinking, we end up caught in a hook of confusion and conflict. The answer is not to stop using social media, but to use it with intelligence and restraint.
Paragraph 5
Runsewe also turned his attention to the world of education, and here his concern was just as strong. He decried the negative impact of AI on institutions of higher learning, especially the growing dependence of students on technology for assignments and research. There was a time when a student would go to the library, sit with a pile of books, and spend hours reading, taking notes, and forming an original idea. That discipline built character, sharpened the mind, and produced graduates who truly understood their subjects. Now, a student can type a question into an AI application and receive a long, polished essay in seconds. It is convenient, but it is not education. Runsewe warned that this excessive reliance on AI has promoted plagiarism, intellectual laziness, and a lack of originality. When students copy AI-generated texts and submit them as their own work, they cheat themselves. They may receive good grades, but they do not receive knowledge. They may graduate with certificates, but they do not graduate with skills. And when these graduates enter the workforce, they are often unable to solve problems, think critically, or communicate effectively, because the machine did the thinking for them.
This is a crisis that goes beyond the classroom. A nation depends on the creativity and competence of its people. If an entire generation of students grows up dependent on AI for every challenge, then the future of innovation, entrepreneurship, and leadership is at risk. Runsewe’s words were not meant to shame students, but to awaken them. He wants young people to understand that AI can be a helpful assistant, but it can never replace the human mind’s power to reason, question, and imagine. A student can use AI to organize notes, check grammar, or generate ideas for further study. But the final work must be the student’s own. The research must be read, the concepts must be understood, and the writing must come from personal effort. Teachers and lecturers also have a role. They must design assignments that test critical thinking, not just memorization. They must be alert to signs of plagiarism and teach students how to use technology ethically. Parents too must encourage a culture of hard work and curiosity, rather than looking for shortcuts. Education is too precious to hand over to a machine. Runsewe’s warning is simple: if we let AI do our thinking for us, we will raise a generation of people who know how to operate applications, but do not know how to read, analyze, or create. That is not progress; it is a tragedy.
Paragraph 6
As Nigeria prepares for the 2027 general election, Runsewe’s warning becomes even more urgent. Elections are already tense, emotional, and high-stakes. With AI-generated content deliberately designed to heat up the polity, they could become even more dangerous. A fake audio clip of a candidate promising violence, or a manipulated video of an electoral official rigging the system, could inflame supporters, trigger riots, and undermine the credibility of the entire election. Runsewe called on stakeholders in the electoral process, political parties, security agencies, civil society organizations, the media, and religious and traditional leaders, to develop proactive and effective strategies to counter fake narratives. Waiting until a lie has gone viral is too late. The response must be immediate, organized, and credible. He also advocated a greater use of conventional media, such as radio, television, and newspapers, to disseminate accurate information promptly. In an age of digital noise, traditional media still holds an important place because it is trusted by many communities, especially older citizens and those in rural areas. If government and civil society can use these platforms to provide timely updates and accurate explanations, it will be harder for fake content to take root.
But in the end, the responsibility falls on each citizen. Runsewe said that artificial intelligence, an innovative technology in the global information and communication system, can be counterproductive in Nigeria if citizens consume social media information without proper scrutiny. Those words are a challenge. They ask us to rise above laziness, to question what we see, and to demand truth. If we fail to do this, if we continue to share first and check later, then we will become instruments of our own destruction. But if we listen to Runsewe’s advice, if we teach our children to think critically, if we support verified journalism, if we protect the integrity of our institutions, and if we refuse to let fake content turn us against our neighbors, then AI can still be a blessing. The technology is not going away. It will grow more powerful with every passing year. The question is whether we will master it, or let it master us. Otunba Olusegun Runsewe has done his part by speaking out. Now it is up to all of us to act with wisdom, courage, and honesty, so that in the age of artificial intelligence, we remain truly human.