On Monday in Abuja, Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) took a deliberate and timely step toward safeguarding the integrity of the 2027 general elections. The commission convened a capacity-building workshop for its public affairs officers (PAOs), the men and women who serve as the official voices of the electoral body across the country. The theme of the workshop, “Strengthening PAOs’ Capacity for Credible, Verified and Responsible Election Communication Towards 2027,” reflects a growing recognition that modern elections are shaped not only by what happens at polling units, but by what people believe, see, hear, and share in the digital spaces around them. In an era where generative artificial intelligence can manufacture convincing fake audio, video, and images in seconds, INEC is no longer treating misinformation as a side issue. It is now a central threat to electoral credibility, and the commission wants its frontline communicators ready to confront it. The workshop, organized by the INEC Voter Education and Publicity Department, brought together public affairs officers from across the country to rethink how they manage information, respond to false narratives, and use technology responsibly. The underlying message was simple but ambitious: if Nigerians are going to trust the 2027 election results, they must first trust the information they receive about the electoral process. That trust begins with the people who speak for INEC, and this workshop was designed to prepare them for the immense responsibility of being accurate, fast, and credible under pressure.
Speaking at the opening of the workshop, Mohammed Haruna, National Commissioner and Chairman of INEC’s Information and Voter Education Committee (IVEC), delivered a striking assessment of the current moment. He quoted INEC Chairman, Prof. Josh Amupitan, who had recently noted that election credibility no longer depends only on ballot papers, Bimodal Voter Verification System (BVAS) machines, or official result sheets. The information environment in which voters form their judgments has become just as important, if not more so. Haruna explained that generative AI has made it easier and far harder to detect manipulated audio, video, and images. The problem is not only fabricated content, but highly targeted messaging designed to feed conflicting narratives to different groups of voters. One group might see a story that supports a hopeful view of the process, while another is shown a completely different version designed to provoke suspicion or anger. This is not a distant, theoretical risk. According to Haruna, INEC is preparing for a general election period in which the volume, speed, and, at times, the inaccuracy of information about the commission will increase dramatically. The skills in verification, escalation, and consistent messaging that the PAOs build in the workshop will be tested in real time. The message was unmistakable: the next election may be influenced as much by the stories people believe as by the ballots they cast, and the credibility of INEC will depend on its ability to cut through the noise with truth.
Haruna was careful to frame the workshop not as a routine training exercise, but as an investment in the people who carry INEC’s reputation on their shoulders every day. He described PAOs as the frontline communicators of the commission in the states, the first point of contact between the electoral body and the public. Public affairs work within an electoral management body, he said, carries particular demands: the need for accuracy, the need for speed, and the need for sound judgment under pressure. These demands are made even more complicated by an environment increasingly shaped by social media and, more recently, by artificial intelligence. The workshop, he explained, was designed to cover the core areas of their responsibilities, including managing the information ecosystem, identifying misinformation and disinformation, verifying information, and responding appropriately and clearly. It was also intended to introduce PAOs to the responsible use of AI in their work. Haruna acknowledged that artificial intelligence holds real promise for improving how the commission communicates, but he was equally clear that it must be approached with care, verification, and appropriate safeguards. For the public affairs officers in the room, this meant learning to do more than simply send press releases or respond to inquiries. It meant becoming information managers, truth-seekers, and guardians of the electoral process’s credibility in their states. It meant understanding that a single unverified post, a poorly worded response, or a delayed correction could cause damage far beyond what a traditional news cycle could repair.
The Director of Voter Education and Publicity, Mrs. Victorial Eta-Messi, reinforced the gravity of the moment in her own remarks. She told the participants that the workshop had come at a defining time for them, as INEC prepares for the demanding road to 2027. Her words were both a recognition of their importance and a reminder of their vulnerability. PAOs, she said, serve as the primary bridge between INEC, the media, and the general public in their respective states. Through them, Nigerians form much of their impression of who INEC is, what it stands for, and how reliable its information is. That responsibility calls for skill, consistency, and, above all, credibility. Eta-Messi did not sugarcoat the reality of the environment in which the PAOs operate. INEC, she noted, operates under constant public scrutiny and is regularly confronted with attempts to misrepresent its work and undermine public confidence in it. The attempts are not always crude. Sometimes they come in the form of carefully edited videos, out-of-context quotes, or fabricated statements attributed to the commission. At other times, they are simple but persistent lies that repeat until they begin to feel true. Eta-Messi urged the participants to take the workshop seriously and to see it as the beginning of a sustained engagement, not a one-day event. She stressed that it is essential for INEC’s communication personnel to be continually equipped to meet that reality, because the threat of misinformation will not pause for an election cycle. It will grow, evolve, and adapt, and INEC’s communicators must be prepared to grow and adapt with it.
The workshop’s objectives were laid out in clear terms by the commission’s Deputy Director for Information and Publicity, Mr. Wilfred Ifogah, who presented an overview of the training. He said the workshop was designed to build participants’ competence in preparing for and supporting effective media and public engagements, and to strengthen their ability to write clearly and consistently for different audiences and platforms. This was not only about writing well, but about writing with purpose, clarity, and an awareness of the ecosystem in which every public statement will be received, interpreted, and possibly twisted. The training also focused on developing participants’ capacity to manage the information ecosystem in a practical, proactive way. This includes monitoring traditional media and social media platforms, identifying emerging misinformation and disinformation trends, verifying questionable information before it gains traction, and applying agreed escalation and response procedures when false narratives appear. Perhaps most importantly, the workshop introduced participants to the responsible use of artificial intelligence in communication work. Ifogah explained that this includes understanding the practical applications of AI tools, recognizing their limitations, and applying the safeguards required around confidentiality and verification. The goal is not to make PAOs experts in coding or machine learning, but to make them informed users of technology who can leverage its benefits without being fooled by its risks. The deeper message was that communication in the digital age requires more than good intentions or even good writing. It requires a disciplined process of verification, a clear chain of decision-making, and the courage to correct mistakes quickly and openly.
Looking ahead, the significance of this workshop goes far beyond the training materials or the discussions that took place in Abuja. It represents a quiet but important shift in how INEC understands its own role in the democratic process. For many years, election credibility was seen primarily as a technical matter: were the ballot papers secure, did the machines work, were the results properly collated? Those things still matter, of course, but they are no longer enough. In a world where a convincingly faked video can go viral in minutes, and where algorithms can feed different realities to different communities, the protection of electoral integrity has become a communications challenge as much as an operational one. By investing in its public affairs officers, INEC is acknowledging that the people who explain the process are just as important as the people who run it. The 2027 general elections will be a test of the commission’s technical readiness, but they will also be a test of its communicative readiness. The PAOs who attended the workshop now carry with them not just new skills, but a deeper understanding of what is at stake. They are being asked to be faster, more accurate, more careful, and more trustworthy than ever before. They are being asked to use new tools without being seduced by them, to respond quickly without rushing, and to protect the truth in an environment where falsehoods are cheaper and easier to produce than ever. It is a difficult assignment, but it is also an essential one. In the long run, the credibility of Nigeria’s elections may depend not only on the calmness of the process on election day, but on the clarity and honesty of the words that precede it, and the people who will be on the front lines of making sure those words are credible, verified, and responsibly delivered.