Imagine scrolling through social media and seeing a video of an electoral official appearing to confess to a plan to rig an election. The video looks and sounds real, but it is entirely fabricated—a product of generative artificial intelligence. This scenario is no longer science fiction, nor is it a distant, theoretical risk. According to Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), it is a clear and present danger to the credibility of elections. The Commission has raised fresh concern over the threat of generative AI, warning that its misuse for manipulated audio, video and targeted messaging has become cheaper and considerably harder to detect than ever before. But the danger is not limited to fake videos or doctored images. It also involves highly targeted messaging designed to feed conflicting narratives to different groups of voters. In a deeply divided society, that is a dangerous weapon. One group of voters might be persuaded that the electoral commission is incompetent; another might be convinced that the voting machines cannot be trusted; still another might believe that the opposition has already conceded defeat. Each message is tailored to exploit the fears, biases and hopes of a particular audience, making it difficult for any shared understanding of reality to survive. For an election management body, this is an existential threat. If voters cannot trust what they see and hear, they cannot trust the process. That is why INEC now believes that the information environment in which citizens form their judgments is just as important as the ballot papers, BVAS machines and result sheets that have traditionally defined election credibility.
The warning was delivered in person by INEC’s National Commissioner and Chairman of its Information and Voter Education Committee, Mallam Mohammed Kudu Haruna, on Monday in Abuja. The occasion was a capacity-building workshop for Public Affairs Officers drawn from across the states—the very people who serve as the Commission’s voice to the Nigerian public. The workshop was themed “Strengthening PAOs Capacity for Credible, Verified and Responsible Election Communication Towards 2027,” and it could not have come at a more urgent moment. Haruna told the officers that they are the frontline communicators of INEC in the states, and that the credibility of the Commission’s communication, in many respects, begins with the work they do. That is a weighty responsibility. Every press statement they issue, every social media post they approve, every rumour they respond to helps shape the public’s impression of whether INEC is honest, competent and impartial. In the coming years, those impressions will be tested in real time. Haruna described the workshop as a direct response to the reality that elections are no longer decided only by what happens at the polling unit; they are also decided by what happens in the information space. He commended the Voter Education and Publicity Department for designing a practical, skills-based programme rather than a purely theoretical one. The officers were not simply there to listen to speeches; they were there to learn how to verify information, escalate problems and communicate clearly and consistently under pressure. Those skills, Haruna made clear, will be essential as Nigeria moves toward the 2027 general elections.
To fully understand why INEC has become so vocal about this threat, it helps to recall the words of the Commission’s Chairman, Prof. Joash Amupitan, at the 13th Annual International Conference of the Association of Communication Scholars and Professionals of Nigeria. He argued that election credibility today no longer depends only on ballot papers, BVAS machines and result sheets. It depends equally on the information environment in which voters form their judgments. This is a profound transformation. In the past, the integrity of an election was largely measured by observable, physical facts: whether the voting materials arrived on time, whether the machines worked, whether votes were counted and transmitted accurately. Today, however, a voter’s belief about an election can be shaped long before they step into a polling booth, by what they have watched on TikTok, heard in a forwarded voice note, or read in a post that looks like journalism but is actually propaganda. A single manipulated video can do more damage to public trust than a thousand technical glitches, because it speaks directly to our emotions and confirms our suspicions. And because generative AI is cheap and widely available, almost anyone can create convincing disinformation. The effect is deeply corrosive. If people come to believe that the electoral process is fraudulent, even without any evidence, the credibility of the outcome is undermined. That is why Amupitan called for electoral technology and electoral communication to be treated as a single discipline, not as separate fields. The machine that records votes and the message that explains it are part of the same promise to the Nigerian people: that their votes will count, and that the result can be believed.
The workshop was therefore built around practical objectives designed to turn this concern into competence. Presenting the goals of the training, the Deputy Director for Information and Publicity, Mr. Wilfred Ifogah, explained that the programme was intended to strengthen the communication skills PAOs need in their day-to-day work, both now and as the 2027 elections approach. One of the first priorities was to clarify escalation lines between Public Affairs Officers, Heads of Department, Voter Education and Publicity, and Resident Electoral Commissioners. In a fast-moving misinformation crisis, the difference between a contained rumour and a nationwide panic often comes down to knowing who to contact and when. The training also aimed to improve consistency in writing across press statements, talking points and social media. Inconsistency is dangerous. If one officer says one thing and another says something slightly different, the public may suspect dishonesty even when none exists. The curriculum also included building capacity to monitor the information ecosystem and respond to misinformation more effectively. This is no longer a luxury; it is a core duty for anyone who speaks on behalf of an election body. Perhaps most importantly, the workshop introduced the responsible use of artificial intelligence in communication, including its applications, its limitations, and the safeguards required around confidentiality and verification. AI can help officers draft faster, translate messages, and analyse online sentiment, but it must never be allowed to replace human judgment. Every AI-generated output must be checked, verified and grounded in official facts before it reaches the public. As Ifogah told the participants, the goal was for them to leave with a shared appreciation of the standards of accuracy, consistency and professionalism required of every Public Affairs Officer of the Commission ahead of the 2027 polls.
The human dimension of this work was powerfully emphasised by the Director of Voter Education and Publicity, Mrs. Victoria Eta-Messi, in her welcome remarks. She reminded the officers that it is through them that Nigerians form much of their impression of who INEC is, what the Commission stands for, and how reliable its information is. That is a sobering thought. Most Nigerians will never meet a National Commissioner or speak to a Resident Electoral Commissioner in person. For many citizens, the face of INEC is the Public Affairs Officer in their state—the person who appears in the local newspaper, answers a radio interviewer’s question, or responds to complaints on social media. When that officer is knowledgeable, calm and honest, trust in the institution grows. When they are vague, defensive or uninformed, the entire Commission suffers. Eta-Messi acknowledged that INEC operates under constant public scrutiny and is regularly confronted with attempts to misrepresent its work and undermine public confidence in it. This is not paranoia; it is a lived experience. The Commission is often attacked from all sides, with rumour and speculation spreading faster than verified facts. In such an environment, every Public Affairs Officer must act as a guardian of institutional integrity. Eta-Messi also disclosed that further capacity-building interventions are at advanced stages of planning with support from development partners. The Abuja workshop, she explained, was not a one-off event but the beginning of a sustained engagement. This is a reassuring sign. Skills need to be refreshed and reinforced as new technologies and new tactics emerge. The promise of continued investment is a promise to keep INEC’s communication capacity ahead of the threats it faces.
In the end, this is about more than media training for public relations staff. It is about the kind of democracy Nigerians can expect to have in 2027. The rise of generative AI has made the job of the Public Affairs Officer harder, but it has also made it more essential. In a world of deepfakes, synthetic voices and micro-targeted manipulation, the ability to verify a fact, to write clearly and to escalate a problem quickly is not just a professional skill—it is a democratic safeguard. Public Affairs Officers are not merely publicists for INEC; they are defenders of the information environment in which voters make up their minds. If they succeed, they will help ensure that the 2027 elections are judged credible not only at the ballot box but also in the hearts and minds of Nigerians. If they fail, no amount of operational security will be enough to protect the electoral process from the corrosion of distrust. The Commission has promised to keep building their capacity, and further training is already in the pipeline. But ultimately, the responsibility falls on each officer to internalise the standards of accuracy, consistency and professionalism that this moment demands. Trust is not built in a day. It is built message by message, statement by statement, and one honest interaction at a time. That is the work INEC has called its Public Affairs Officers to do—and it is the work that will determine whether Nigeria’s democracy can withstand the age of artificial intelligence.