As Nigeria moves toward the 2027 general elections, the political atmosphere is already beginning to heat up, and with it comes a familiar wave of misinformation. Social media, messaging apps, and online forums will be flooded not only with legitimate political debate but also with false claims, manipulated videos, doctored images, and carefully crafted lies designed to shape how people vote, weaken trust in the electoral system, or simply discourage Nigerians from showing up at the polls. This is not new—every election cycle brings its own set of misleading narratives—but the scale and sophistication of these falsehoods have grown, thanks to cheap digital tools, faster sharing, and deep distrust in institutions. The FactCheckHub, drawing on previous fact-checks and insights from disinformation researchers, has identified ten major misinformation narratives that Nigerian voters should be ready to encounter. These are not just random rumors; they are recurring themes that exploit religion, ethnicity, fear, and confusion. Understanding them now, before the campaign season fully takes off, is one of the best defenses an ordinary voter can have. If people know what to look for, they are less likely to be fooled, and less likely to become unwilling spreaders of false information.
One of the most powerful and dangerous narratives involves religious leaders and their supposed political endorsements. In Nigeria, where faith is deeply woven into public life, a claim that a prominent pastor or Islamic cleric has endorsed a candidate can shift perceptions and even votes. As the 2027 elections approach, voters should expect to see stories that a well-known religious figure has backed a particular contender, withdrawn support from another, or received a divine revelation about who should win. Some of these claims will be real, but many will be fabricated from whole cloth, while others will recycle old videos and present them as recent events, or take a genuine remark out of context to make it seem like an endorsement that never happened. The FactCheckHub has already documented this happening: before the 2023 elections, viral articles falsely claimed that the former Emir of Kano, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, had endorsed Peter Obi. The claim was completely untrue, yet it spread widely. Christian leaders have not been spared either, with a false story once alleging that Pastor E.A. Adeboye staged a protest against former President Goodluck Jonathan. These narratives are especially effective because they tap into deep loyalty and make people feel that supporting a certain candidate is aligned with their faith. But voters must demand evidence: an original statement, a verifiable video, or a confirmation from the religious leader’s own office. Without that, such claims should be treated as suspicion, not fact.
Another major category of election misinformation involves the machinery of voting itself, and the fear that it can be manipulated or that the process is not safe. Voters will likely see alarming posts claiming that INEC has postponed or cancelled an election nationwide, often dressed up with fake press releases, INEC logos, or notices that look official. In October 2026, INEC had to disown a fraudulent online publication that pretended to be a special announcement about governorship candidates in six states. While that particular notice was not about postponing an election, it showed how easy it is to create convincing official-looking documents. There will also be claims that the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) has been hacked, remotely disabled, or tampered with to rig results. These stories can be very persuasive, especially if there are technical problems at polling units. But a delay or a machine malfunction is not proof of hacking. There are many possible explanations: connectivity issues, operator errors, battery problems, or even genuine technical failure. In November 2022, INEC’s Director of ICT insisted that BVAS was secure and that anyone trying to bypass it would face major obstacles. That does not mean the system is perfect, but it does mean that every glitch should not be treated as evidence of a conspiracy. Similarly, voters may see claims that a candidate has suddenly withdrawn from the race and endorsed an opponent. These stories can appear as fake letters, edited videos, or social media graphics, and they often exploit real political negotiations or coalition talks to seem plausible. The FactCheckHub has debunked such claims before, including a false report that a governorship candidate in Ondo State had dropped out, and another that Peter Obi was planning to leave his political coalition. Unless the candidate, their campaign, or their party has made an official statement, these claims should be viewed with deep skepticism.
Misinformation also preys on voters’ confusion about the practical requirements of casting a ballot. One recurring falsehood is that people can vote using their National Identification Number (NIN), driver’s licence, or a temporary voter slip instead of their Permanent Voter Card (PVC). This is not true under Nigeria’s Electoral Act 2026, which clearly requires that a person present a PVC at the polling unit in the constituency where they are registered. There is a separate step for biometric accreditation using BVAS, but the PVC itself is still a legal requirement. A social media post saying otherwise can cause real harm by leading eligible voters to show up at the wrong place with the wrong documents, or by convincing them they can vote when they cannot. Another common problem is fake election results, which tend to flood the internet while voting and counting are still going on. These might look like official INEC tallies, but they are often fabricated, altered, or recycled from older elections. Some circulate on WhatsApp with a sense of urgency, as if the final result has already been declared when it has not. The Electoral Act sets out a clear process for collating and announcing results, and only authorized officials have the legal power to declare a winner. A graphic with a logo and some numbers is not an official result, no matter how polished it looks. Voters need to wait for INEC’s official announcements and rely on credible news organizations rather than trusting every spreadsheet or screenshot that appears in their chats.
There are also legal and constitutional myths that resurface every election season. One of the most persistent is the claim that a presidential candidate must win at least 25 percent of the votes in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, in order to be declared the winner. This misunderstanding has caused a great deal of confusion, especially since the Supreme Court has already weighed in on the matter. The constitutional requirement, as interpreted by the courts, does not require a candidate to separately secure 25 percent of FCT votes. Instead, the winning candidate must have the highest number of votes and also meet the threshold in at least two-thirds of the states, subject to the relevant constitutional provisions. In 2023, the Presidential Election Petition Court rejected the argument that winning the FCT alone was a mandatory condition, and the Supreme Court upheld that decision. Yet the myth keeps coming back, likely because the law is complex and people are looking for reasons to challenge or delegitimize an outcome they do not like. Another dangerous narrative is that foreign governments or international observer missions have annulled an election. This is factually and legally baseless. International observers like the African Union or the European Union can assess the conduct of an election, criticize problems, and issue statements, but they have no authority to overturn a Nigerian election. Only Nigeria’s own legal and judicial bodies can do that. Still, fake quotes attributed to foreign embassies or organizations can spread quickly, especially if they confirm people’s fears or frustrations. The lesson is simple: foreign observers are not a parallel government. Their opinions are not binding, no matter how strongly they are worded.
The rise of artificial intelligence has made election misinformation even more difficult to detect. AI tools can now create convincing fake images, videos, audio recordings, and documents in minutes, often with no visible signs of manipulation. But not all manipulated media is AI-generated; sometimes it is just an old video shared with a false caption, or a photo edited with basic software. The FactCheckHub has already debunked doctored images showing Peter Obi visiting President Bola Tinubu and conversing with Seyi Tinubu after the 2023 election. Those images were not necessarily produced by advanced AI, but they still fooled people. Disinformation researchers Olayinka Sheu and Rejoice Taddy have warned that deepfakes will become much harder to spot as the 2027 elections approach. Sheu noted that in 2023, people could often detect manipulated content by noticing unnatural facial movements or distorted audio, but those signs are disappearing as the technology improves. Taddy added that compression on platforms like WhatsApp, Telegram, and TikTok can hide the very flaws that might reveal a fake. She advises people to look at the content itself, how it is spreading, and who is sharing it. Odd fonts, misplaced logos, spelling mistakes, unusual dates, and pasted signatures can all be warning signs, but even these are not conclusive. Genuine documents sometimes contain errors, and sophisticated fakes may look perfect. The only reliable approach is to seek independent corroboration from official sources and credible news outlets, rather than relying on appearances or even the latest AI-detection tool. Another ugly but recurrent narrative involves ethnicity and voting rights. Voters may be told that certain ethnic groups are banned from voting in a particular state, or that speaking a certain language will get them turned away at a polling unit, or that they must belong to a specific community to participate. These claims are false. Nigerian citizens who meet the legal requirements cannot be disqualified because of their ethnicity or state of origin. Such narratives are particularly harmful because they intimidate people and inflame communal tensions, and they should be called out whenever they appear.
Underneath all of these specific myths is a deeper truth about how misinformation spreads and why it keeps working. Disinformation researcher Rejoice Taddy explains that false claims often spread because of trust. People believe what comes from their family group, their church or mosque, or a friend they know, far more than what comes from an official institution or a news website. At the same time, low trust in institutions makes it harder for corrections to take hold. When an official body denies a rumor, some people hear that denial as confirmation that something is being hidden. And because these myths return every election cycle, they begin to feel familiar, and familiarity can feel like truth. Many of these false narratives will resurface close to election day, leaving little time for fact-checkers to respond and increasing the risk of confusion, cynicism, and distrust. There are often signs of coordinated dissemination—identical messages appearing across multiple accounts within minutes, emotionally charged demands to share immediately, newly created profiles with generic pictures, and groups of accounts repeating the same talking points. But these signs do not prove coordination either, because ordinary people can unknowingly share false information, and suspicious-looking accounts are not always part of an organized campaign. For the average Nigerian voter, the best defense is to slow down. Before sharing anything, ask a few simple questions: Is this claim coming from an official source? Can I find the same information in a credible news outlet? Would this be true if I saw it yesterday? Taddy reminds us that if something seems designed to provoke fear or anger, it is worth pausing. In the end, the fight against election misinformation is not just about fact-checkers or journalists. It is about every person who chooses to verify before sharing, to question before believing, and to value the truth of his or her own informed judgment over the noise of a manipulated feed. That is how Nigeria can protect its democracy—not by silencing debate, but by making sure that the debate is based on something real.