Olu Allen
Governments are not judged only by the policies they introduce. They are also judged by how they carry the people through those policies.
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration deserves recognition for taking on reforms that previous governments often delayed or avoided. Removing the fuel subsidy, liberalizing the foreign exchange market, and attempting to reshape public finances were bold decisions. Whether one agrees with every aspect of those reforms or not, they were consequential.
But bold reforms require equally bold communication.
This is where I believe the administration has consistently fallen short.
As a Nigerian who interacts daily with ordinary citizens, I have observed a troubling pattern: the government appears more interested in defending its reforms than in understanding how those reforms are being experienced by the people.
There is a world of difference between explaining a policy and arguing with those affected by it.
Too often, the administration’s response to criticism has been to highlight macroeconomic indicators—improved revenues, stronger reserves, increased investor confidence, or declining inflation projections. Those figures may matter to economists and financial markets, but they are not what most Nigerians encounter every morning.
The average Nigerian measures the economy by the price of rice, transport fares, rent, school fees, electricity, and whether there is enough food on the table.
When a mother says feeding her family has become unbearable, responding with GDP projections does not answer her pain. It tells her that the government is speaking a different language.
Political communication begins with empathy, not statistics.
One of the biggest communication mistakes this administration has made is treating criticism as though it were synonymous with political opposition.
In every healthy democracy, criticism is not sabotage. It is feedback.
A citizen who complains about hunger is not automatically working for the opposition.
A bishop who raises concerns about hardship is not necessarily attacking the government.
An economist who questions implementation is not an enemy.
An opposition politician who speaks about the suffering of Nigerians should be answered with facts and better policies—not with insults or personal attacks.
Good governments understand that criticism is free research. It reveals where people are hurting, where policies need adjustment, and where communication has failed.
Unfortunately, many official responses have projected the impression that every criticism must be defeated instead of understood.
That is not how trust is built.
If I were coaching the President’s communication team—including presidential advisers and spokespersons—I would teach five simple principles.
First, never argue with people’s pain.
When citizens say life is difficult, the first response should never be to dismiss or minimise their experience.
Instead, acknowledge it.
“We know Nigerians are hurting.”
Those five words can calm a nation far more effectively than twenty pages of economic data.
Second, stop communicating only to your supporters.
Political communication is not about winning arguments on television or social media. It is about persuading the undecided and reassuring those who are anxious.
Winning a debate while losing public confidence is not a communication victory.
Third, separate criticism from hostility.
Not everyone who questions government policy wants the government to fail.
Democracy was built on the understanding that citizens have the right to question those who govern them.
Governments that embrace constructive criticism often become stronger because they learn from it.
Fourth, communicate action, not only achievements.
Do not merely say reforms are working.
Explain what specific relief measures are being implemented, who they will help, when they will arrive, and how success will be measured.
Hope becomes believable when people can see a plan.
Fifth, remain humble.
Never celebrate economic success before citizens begin to experience it themselves.
Economic indicators may improve before living standards do. A government that celebrates too early risks appearing disconnected from the daily realities of its people.
Another concern is the increasingly hostile tone that often surrounds political discourse online.
There is a widespread public perception that prominent critics of the administration, especially figures such as, are frequently met with coordinated online attacks whenever they raise concerns about the economy or the welfare of ordinary Nigerians.
While people disagree about whether such campaigns are officially organised or simply driven by passionate supporters, the perception itself has consequences.
A government genuinely committed to democratic engagement should encourage respectful debate rather than allowing public discourse to become dominated by insults and character attacks.
History is rarely kind to governments that dismiss the emotions of their citizens.
Policies may eventually succeed.
Economic numbers may improve.
Investments may increase.
But if people remember that they cried out in pain and felt unheard, that memory becomes part of the government’s legacy.
No democracy becomes stronger by teaching citizens to remain silent during hardship.
Democracy flourishes when leaders listen, respond, explain, adjust where necessary, and continue earning public trust.
As Nigeria approaches another election cycle, the administration may understandably focus on securing a second term. Every government seeks re-election.
However, elections are won not only through campaign strategy but through public confidence.
My advice to the APC-led administration is simple:
Stop trying to convince Nigerians that they are not suffering.
Instead, convince Nigerians that you understand their suffering.
Accept criticism without immediately assuming bad faith.
Respond with empathy before economics.
Allow your reforms to be accompanied by reassurance.
Leadership is not measured only by the courage to introduce difficult reforms.
It is also measured by the humility to listen, the wisdom to communicate, and the compassion to carry the people along.
If this communication gap remains unaddressed, it may become one of the defining political weaknesses of this administration. Regardless of the eventual economic outcomes, citizens often remember not only what governments did, but how those governments made them feel.
Allen writes on public affairs and advocates for good governance.
