By David Akinadewo-Adekahunsi
The recent controversy surrounding Biola Adebayo and her interview with Olanrewaju Omiyinka has once again brought to the fore a recurring tension within Nigeria’s evolving media space, the uneasy intersection between emotional public opinion and the enduring principles of professional journalism.
At the heart of the matter lies a simple but fundamental question: should an individual who has served a prison sentence be denied the right to tell his own side of the story? In a society governed by law, not mob sentiment, the answer ought to be straightforward. The justice system exists not only to punish wrongdoing but also to reform and reintegrate offenders into society. Once a sentence has been served, the ex-convict, in the eyes of the law, has paid his debt and is entitled to resume life without perpetual social persecution.
It was within this legal and moral context that Biola Adebayo offered her platform to Baba Ijesha. Yet, rather than being seen as an exercise in balanced storytelling, her action triggered a wave of outrage across sections of social media. Critics accused her of insensitivity, alleging that granting such a platform amounted to endorsing the actions that led to his conviction. This interpretation is not only flawed but also dangerous, as it undermines the very essence of fair hearing, a cornerstone of both journalism and justice.
The reaction from Damilola Adekoya, popularly known as Princess, who has been closely associated with the victim in the case, further intensified the situation. Her emotional outburst, including public condemnation and curses directed at the host, reflects the depth of personal pain and unresolved grievance. While such reactions are human and understandable, they should not be allowed to dictate the standards of public discourse or media practice. Emotional investment, however justified, must not eclipse reason, especially in matters that demand objectivity.
Journalism, by its very nature, is not designed to comfort; it is designed to inform, interrogate, and present multiple perspectives. If Biola Adebayo were operating strictly within the framework of professional journalism, the expectation would not be to suppress the interview but to expand the conversation. The appropriate response would have been to offer equal opportunity to opposing voices, particularly those who believe that certain facts were misrepresented. This is how credibility is built, not by retreating under pressure, but by deepening engagement.
The decision to delete the interview, followed by a public apology delivered in a posture of contrition, raises serious concerns about the influence of social media outrage on editorial judgment. It signals a troubling precedent where content creators, rather than standing by the integrity of their work, capitulate to the loudest voices in the digital arena. Such actions blur the line between responsible responsiveness and outright surrender to emotional blackmail.
Public communication, especially on sensitive and controversial issues, requires more than popularity or goodwill; it demands training, discipline, and a firm grasp of ethical boundaries. This episode underscores the critical importance of professional grounding in media practice. Handling contentious subjects is not merely about providing a platform; it is about managing narratives, anticipating backlash, and maintaining balance under pressure.
Equally important is the need for restraint from all stakeholders. The continued public hostility directed at Baba Ijesha, even after he has served his sentence, raises questions about society’s commitment to rehabilitation. Justice, if it is to retain its meaning, must not be extended indefinitely through social condemnation. There is a fine line between seeking accountability and perpetuating vengeance.
Furthermore, the pattern of public attacks reportedly directed by Princess at individuals perceived to be sympathetic to Baba Ijesha, including veteran actress Idowu Philips (Iya Rainbow), suggests a widening circle of conflict that risks eroding civility within the industry. Disagreement is inevitable in a plural society, but it must be expressed within the bounds of decorum and mutual respect.
The media space, particularly in the age of digital democratization, is increasingly populated by individuals who wield influence without the corresponding responsibility that comes with professional training. While this democratization is not inherently negative, it becomes problematic when sensitive issues are handled without adherence to established ethical standards.
Biola Adebayo’s experience should therefore serve as a cautionary tale. It is not enough to have a platform; one must also possess the capacity to manage it responsibly. Consulting experienced journalists, especially when dealing with controversial figures or subjects, is not a sign of weakness but of professionalism.
Ultimately, the lesson here is not about apportioning blame but about reinforcing standards. Society must resist the temptation to reduce complex issues to simplistic moral binaries dictated by outrage. The media must remain a space for dialogue, not a battleground for emotional dominance.
If we are to preserve the integrity of public discourse, we must defend the principles that sustain it—fair hearing, balance, and the courage to stand by truth even when it is unpopular.
David Akinadewo-Adekahunsi is a veteran Nigerian journalist, author, and Editor-in-Chief of Nigerian Monitor Magazine. He writes extensively on media ethics, governance, faith, and socio-cultural issues. He is also a clergyman and music minister based in Ondo State, Nigeria.
