TITLE PAGE
PUBLIC RELATIONS AS AN IMAGE MAKING TOOL: A CASE STUDY OF THE NIGERIAN POLICE FORCE

 

BY
IBRAHIM SANI
U13MM1010

BEING A TERM-PAPER SUBMITTED TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF MASS COMMUNICATION
FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
AHMADU BELLO UNIVERSITY,
ZARIA

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
OF MCOM 242
(PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC RELATIONS)

 

LECTURER:
COSMOS EZE

 

AUGUST, 2015.

INTRODUCTION

“Police is your friend” is a common expression everywhere. Although in Nigeria, some see this expression as been used sarcastically due to the bad reputation of the police to the people resulting from its “poor public relations”.
The objective of this study “Public Relations as an image making tool: case study of the Nigerian Police Force ” looks into the internal and external problems of Nigeria police and how the Nigerian Police Public Relation Department (NPPRD) has succeeded or failed in resolving these problems. Problems such as the welfare of the police, its relationship with the public and how the police manage crowd and crisis in Nigeria. To achieve this, I discussed the topic under the following headings:
1.0 Public relations at a glance
2.0 Historical background of the Nigerian Police Force
3.0 Literature review
4.0 The police-public relations in Nigeria: problems examination
5.0 Prospects/possible solutions and
6.0 Recommendations and conclusion.

Hopefully at the end, this paper will be of great benefit to the Nigerian police as an institution on how its public relations department could rebrand the already spoilt name of the police in the eyes of many Nigerians, its relevant publics.
Findings drawn from the study revealed that NPPRD as an image making tool of the institution suffers a lot of setbacks in attempt to discharge their duties effectively. Problems such as absence of decision making power (e.g. full pledged) and incorporating of nonprofessional public relations officers into it among others. It finally outlined possible solutions on improvement strategies in order to achieve the desired goal.

 

1.0 PUBLIC RELATIONS AT A GLANCE

1.1 History of public relations

The history of public relations is as old as man. It started from the time immemorial. Although it is sometimes said that public relations is new, as if it had been invented during the last few years or since the Second World War; or just this century. In countries which have gained their independence during the last thirty years, public relations may well seem new.
Mankind has always tried to communicate and make it understood. Before, there were alphabets, characters and numerals that were pictograms (of which Chinese characters still provide examples). Ancient buildings such as pyramids, early temples and the cave paintings of Zimbabwe bear pictorial messages. People also wrote on tablets of stones and on leather, parchments and papyrus, as with the Dead Sea scrolls. All these references are enough to show that public relations is not something newly started.
However, the history of modern public relations, as in many developing countries where the government has had to take the initiatives in effecting the social change, public relations techniques were applied by governments of Europe and America.
In Nigeria, the history of modern public relations started at a formal level with the activities of government during the Second World War (1943) when the colonial government thought it wise to establish first information unit saddled with the responsibilities of informing Nigerians the on-goings in the war which most Nigerians were involved. The government employed many Nigerians as publicity officers and most of them were former journalists. In 1947, this office became full pledged public relations.
Equally in 1949, the United African Company of Nigeria (UACN) established an information unit known as public information unit. Its responsibilities were to promote mutual understanding between itself and the public. Similar units in different organizations exist all over the country.

 

 

1.2 Public relations defined

Public relation concerns any organization, commercial or non-commercial. It exists whether we like it or not –you cannot decide to have or not to have public relations. Public relations consist of all communication with all the people with whom an organization has contact. An individual also experience public relations (Individual Public Relations), unless he or she is utterly isolated and beyond human contact (Jefkins, 1998).
According to International Public Relations (IPR), public relations practice is the planned and sustained effort to establish and maintain goodwill and mutual understanding between an organization and its publics.
Frank Jefkins, a worldwide recognized public relations lecturer says public relations consists of all forms of planned communication outwards and inwards, between an organization and its public for the purpose of achieving specific objectives concerning mutual understanding.
Also, following the world assembly public relations in Mexico City in August 1978, this statement was agreed: Public Relations is the art and social science of analyzing trends, predicting their consequences, counseling organization leaders, and implementing planned programmes of action which will serve both the organization’s and the public interest.
Coming nearer home to Nigeria, Eze (2015) sees public relations as a meekness flowing from the heart.
Therefore we can see public relations as an aspect of communication that involves promoting the desirable image of persons, group of people, governments, nations, organizations etc seeking public attention. Public Relations activities and policies are used to create public interest in a person, idea, product, institution or business establishment. By its nature, public relations are devoted to serving particular interests by them to public in the most favorable light.
It is the practice of managing the communication between an organization and its public.
Osho (1999:22), subscribes to one of the earliest definitions of public relations which sees it as the management function which evaluates public attitude; identifies the policies and procedures of an organization with the public interest and execute programs of action and communication, and to earn public acceptance and understanding.
Public Relations is a continuing and constructive interchange between those who are affected by or interested in that business. It’s a management function which attempts to create goodwill for an organization and its products, services or ideas with group of people which can affect its present or future welfare (Offonry, 1985).

 

1.2 Public Relation as an Image Making Tool

Public relation is much more than cultivating contact. It is about finding and implementing strategic campaigns, reacting to crises and ensuring that an organization is always correctly and positively represented (Daramola, 2003).
Therefore public relation is not concerned with how an organization sees itself, but how others see it. It is about presenting positive image and not the false one.
However, it is equally important for me to draw a line of difference between public relation and propaganda. Public relation is built on truth, not lies. Unlike propaganda which is half truth, half lies. Regrettably enough, so misunderstood is public relation that some people cannot differentiate it from the propaganda.
All in all, public relation is the deliberate and consistent effort aimed at winning goodwill and mutual understanding between an individual, an organization or a firm and its relevant publics.
As we will see later in the case of our case study, The Nigerian Police Force, its public relation department is not full pledged i.e. it lacks both the professional skills of a standard public relation job and the decision making power of the management. Little wonder, the NPPRD sometimes lack access to vital information which ideally supposed to be their main job.
Jefkins (1980) believes that the more public relation officer know about an organization, the better for he or she to speak on its behalf. Hence there is need for full pledged public relation department in the Nigerian Police Force.
When we go deeper into this topic of our discussion, we shall hopefully see how its recommendations could lead to a better relationship between the NPF and its relevant publics –the Nigerian populace.

 

2.0 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE NIGERIAN POLICE

The Nigerian Police Force was established on April 1, 1930, with its headquarters in Lagos then, commanded by an Inspector-General of Police. Nigerians assumed the overall leadership of the Force in 1964 when the late Louis Orok Edet was appointed the first indigenous Inspector-General of Police. Since then, fourteen other Nigerians, including the incumbent, Solomon Arase, have been at the helm. The Nigeria Police Force is a product of the nation’s Constitution: the 1999 Constitution cited by Alemika and Chukwuma (2000,p.15) explicitly prohibited the establishment of State Police forces other than the Nigeria Police Force. Section 214(1) stipulates: “There shall be a Police Force for Nigeria, which shall be known as the Nigeria Police Force, and subject to the provisions of this Section no other police force shall be established for the Federation or any part thereof.” Though, the country briefly experimented local police force at the regional levels alongside the Nigeria Police Force, as enshrined in the Independence Constitution of 1960 and the Republican Constitution of 1963 which provided for Local Police Force and the Nigeria Police Force. But the military cut short this experiment when it seized power on January 15, 1966, and dissolved the Local Police Force, as a result of the negative roles attributed to the Force during the First Republic (1960-1966) (Alemika and Chukwuma 2000).
In essence, The Nigeria Police is a national force and the only one operating throughout the country covering an area of 923,769 square kilometres with an estimated population of over 150 million. Thus, by virtue of Section 4, Police Act of 1967, Cap 359 of the Laws of the Federation, 1990, power is conferred upon the Force for the maintenance of law and order throughout the country. The Nigeria Police personnel are estimated at about 377,000 (The Punch). The Nigeria Police has a centralized management command and control structure in which the Inspector-General of Police singlehandedly determines both policy and operational matters. As the head of the Force, the Inspector-General of Police is appointed by the President but on the advice of the Nigeria Police Council, from among some serving top hierarchy of the Force (NOPRIN, 2007).

 

2.1 The Nigerian Police Force: Roles and Responsibilities

The cardinal principles of establishing the Nigeria Police Force is to maintain law and order as well as safeguard and protect lives and property of all citizens of the country. To achieve this, section 194 (1) of the 1979 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and subsequently the 1999 Constitution of the country provides that the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) shall have such powers and duties as conferred upon them by law. The police refer to a particular kind of social institution, while policing implies a set of processes with specific social functions. The police are the main institution that provides regular direct contact with the public, a situation that makes it unique among other law enforcement agencies and agents. The job of the police is so complex and enormous to the extent that they supervised through patrol the activities of the societal members in order to ensure effective policing. Policing is a process that involves detection and punishment of wrong acts as negative re-enforcement to criminal behavior and deters potential wrong doers. It is an aspect of social control process involving surveillance and sanctions intended towards ensuring security of the whole (Maguire, Morgan and Reiner, 1997). In essence, Reiss (1971) explains that policing involves a situation whereby the police mediate between the community and the legal system. Notwithstanding, Quincy (1979) posited that the police are by nature disliked by the public due to the somewhat intrusive nature of their jobs.
Johnson and Gregory (1971) highlight the roles and responsibilities of the police, arguing that unlike many other occupational roles, the policeman's role is ambiguous. S/he is a friend and a protector. S/he assures safety on the streets and keeps the peace. You call him/her when you are in trouble, when your neighbors are making too much noise, or when your property is lost. At the same time, this police man/woman is a foe and a repressor. S/he inhibits your freedom; charges you when you violate a law, or illegally parked; comes to your house to quiet you down when your neighbors complain about noise; investigates; and interrogates you when you are suspected of or involved in some illegal activity. Although, the above scenario reflects what is obtained in American society couple of decades ago, it is exactly the situation in Nigeria and perhaps elsewhere. Fundamentally, Johnson and Gregory (1971) describe the police work as particularly dynamic, complex, delicate yet important, and this applies to every existing human society. Buttressing the above point, Black (1968) explained the ramifications and complications of police work, asserting that the policeare responsible for protecting life and property, preventing lawlessness, and apprehending law breakers. A police is imagined as chasing hardened criminals, capturing bank robbers, and investigating murders. Similarly, Goldsmith and Harris (2012) believe that considering the nature of police work, obtaining cooperation can be particularly difficult. Despite that, policing, like many other activities, benefits from cooperation and collaboration with other partners, notably the public.
In line with the above therefore, the public need to appreciate the fact that their maximum support is a necessity for the success of safeguarding the lives and property of the whole and for a better and sustainable development. Gourley (1954) argues that the police and the public are in a sense identical and that the police represent only a small fraction of the public they serve. Additionally, he asserts that citizens cannot discard their responsibility to police themselves merely by retaining professional police to perform the daily tasks for which citizens have no time, the capacity, and the inclination. Thence, the police can never adequately discharge their obligations to protect life and property unless they are reinforced by the good will and cooperation of the public. Although, Gourley’s audience was the mid-20thcentury Americans, his message is clear and applicable to the Nigerian public of the 21stcentury and beyond. The citizens must understand that their security and welfare are, to a great extent, dependent upon the maintenance of an orderly society, which in turn is dependent upon the effectiveness and efficiency as well as the prestige of the police.
According to Fielding (1996) cited in Wright (2002), there are three models that characterize policing work. These include:
i. The enforcement model, which largely focus on the police work of crime control and law enforcement.

ii. The service model that set policing priorities for dealing with crime control, order maintenance and service delivery in consultations with the public.

iii. The community model, which gives priority to maintaining public tranquility over crime control. The philosophy here is that the police and the public have the responsibility for keeping their society safe in order to ensure security of lives and property.

The police are responsible for enforcing all criminal laws irrespective of whether citizens wish to be policed or not. According to Alemika (1993), the police force is created to primarily promote harmony and security of lives and property in the society. However, what is important is how the police conduct themselves in the process of discharging their legal function, which is always the problem in Nigeria. Further, Ehindaro (2005) observed that the police alone cannot combat crime without co-operation from the public. Without strong ties with the community, the police may not have access to vital information from the citizens that could help control, manage, solve and deter crime.How then do the NPF relate to the public? How is the current relationship? What are the factors responsible for the current situation? How ought the ideal relationship?

2.2 Public Relations Department in the Nigerian Police Force
In order to project the social services dimension of the duties of the police, the late Kam Selem, former Inspector-General of Police (1966-1975) formally established the Force Public Relations Department as a statutory function of the Force and expanded its services to states Commands. The Nigeria Police Force has demonstrated how critical public relation is to its operations, hence, its replication in major police formations across the country. The Force headquarters Public Relations Officer (FPRO) is the official mouthpiece for the entire Nigeria Police Force, and he is superior in rank (the position is occupied by at least an Assistant Commissioner of Police) to Police Public Relations Officers (PPRO) who hold sway at the Zonal and State Commands – a responsibility that is traditionally entrusted to an officer of at least the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police and Assistant Superintendent of Police respectively. The Department performs communication tasks such as publishing the list of wanted persons, missing persons, stolen vehicles, dark spots, security tips and organizes press briefings to parade arrested criminal suspects. It also issues press releases and bulletins, writes feature articles, publishes photographs and advertisements through the press and electronic media in order to keep the public constantly informed of police activities. It also organizes public lectures and produces informative materials such as posters, flyers and booklets in order to inform and educate the public about police activities. The Department is also responsible for producing police calendars, diary, greeting cards, magazine and newsletter. It is noteworthy to state that Nigeria Police Public Relations Department (NPPRD) in all police formations throughout the federation is peopled by general duties police operatives, and not public relations professionals.
The Nigeria Police Force classifies public relations as a general duty function and it is subsumed under Administration Department. The implication of this kind of arrangement is that any police officer irrespective of his or her educational background or professional training can be posted to work in the Department.

The Nigerian Police Force public relation department is not full pledged i.e. it lacks both the professional skills of a standard public relation job and the decision making power of the management. Little wonder, the NPPRD sometimes lack access to vital information which ideally supposed to be their main job.
Jefkins (1980) believes that the more public relation officer know about an organization, the better for he or she to speak on its behalf. Hence there is need for full pledged public relation department in the Nigerian Police Force.

 

3.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

A publication, “Creating a Better Police Image”, Nigeria Police Information Booklet (1981,p.5) stipulates the statutory roles of NPPRD to include the following: “To spotlight anything likely to cause police-public friction and advise the authorities of the situation and suggest action to remove it; to publicize the good work of the police so that the public will appreciate such services; to gain and sustain a favorable public opinion about the Force; to establish and strengthen sound relationship with well-meaning citizens and to win over the “fence sitters” by effectively communicating with them; to educate the public on the functions and roles of the police in the society; planning and coordination of the Force public relations policies with a view to improving police relationship with the public; serving as the central source of public information concerning the Force and the only official channel of publicity for the Force; production and distribution of the Force’s magazine, newsletters, press releases, feature articles, statistics, photographs, films, advertisements and other publicity documents to the information media and the public; establishment and maintenance of an internal information and reference service within the Force; examination of complaints from the public; and education of ranks on the importance of public relations.”
According to Alemika and Chukwuma (2000,p.32) relationships between the Nigeria Police and the citizens are largely characterized by suspicion, prejudiced, mutual disrespect, conflict and violence. In essence, the inability of the police to connect with the public as a result of their widely reported belligerent and criminal attitudes has alienated the public.
“Creating a Better Police Image”, Nigeria Police Information Booklet (1981,p.6) further outlines the causes of public distrust of men and officers of the Force: “Dissatisfaction in handling of reports due to the public ignorance of police methods and the law; rude treatment of citizens who come to the police with cases; an overbearing attitude and an attempt to deflect the ego of the citizen in public; discourteous approach of policemen controlling or checking traffic in the cities; unpleasant tone of voice; unnecessary show of force and bestial pleasure to hurt people while controlling crowd; rough treatment of suspects and other offenders; taking advantage of other citizens when driving police vehicles such as breaking speed limits and jumping of lanes; showing partiality to women, friends and relations in handling cases; assumption of proud airs by policemen to cover their shortcomings; drinking in uniform while on duty; unkempt and careless dress and appearance; and tendency to expect unmerited rewards for performing lawful duties.” However, the aforementioned publication suggests some basic rules which every member of the police force should embrace as their operational creed in their quest to transforming their organization into a responsive, accountable, civil and people-centered: “Smile and be polite (not weak) and avoid rudeness; enthusiasms instead of dullness – show interest in what you have at hand, learn about your job and locality to be able to discuss any problem freely and confidently; use courteous words instead of sharp retorts; response instead of indifference. Listen to those who come to complain, show you are interested and be alert to their moods; warmth instead of coolness, warmth attracts warmth, no one can respond to you if you are cold and aloof; understanding instead of closed mind, keep an open mind to be able to discuss, reason, discern and arrive at sound judgment; attention instead of neglect, listen and if necessary disagree politely; patience instead of irritation; sincerity instead of sham. Say exactly what you mean. Be honest and straight forward in dealing with the public; consideration instead of annoyance, listen without annoyance; to persuade without apparent force is evidence of maturity; facts instead of arguments, facts are your best weapon because they cannot be denied and can be repeated without confusion, don’t argue, reason; creative ideas – the world is progressing so must you or you fall by the way side, you have to think progressively, the days of the bluster muscle police are gone, working mostly alone you must act promptly without reference to you superiors; helpfulness instead of hindrance; giving you time to assist others and asking nothing in return is the most difficult but most rewarding experience; action instead of dilatory tactics; and appreciation instead of ingratitude.”

 

4.0 THE POLICE-PUBLIC RELATIONSHIP IN NIGERIA: PROBLEMS EXAMINATION

Police ideally supposed to be “a friend” to everyone; one who guards his life and property; one who ensure freedom of his welfare, either individually or as a member of a society; one who always waits to give his helping hand; one who protects national values etc. unfortunately in Nigeria, reverse is the case. Some people even consider the police as their enemies; those who are meant to intervene and/or disturb their social life; those who violate the fundamental human right etc. This referent to the critical relationship between the Nigerian Police as a body and the Nigerian populace is as a result of poor public relation strategy between the duos.

Public relation as a strategy could be used to solve most of the misconceptions about the police led to the deteriorations of relationship between the duos.
Prominent among these problems is absence of a full pledged PR department. As stated earlier in this work, the NPPRD mainly comprises of unprofessional in its constituent. The fact that every police officer (including non-PR professionals) can work in this department often makes it difficult for them to carry out their duties accordingly.
Notably also, I (personally) am of the opinion that the word force in the name of the police as an institution be removed. This possibly emanated from the fact that the NPF was established during the colonial period when everything had to be enforced by force to achieve the desired objective. Commonsensically, there is an element of contradiction between the name: The Nigerian Police Force and the motto: police is your friend. Or can we say that the two are used oxymoronically or sarcastically?
According to Ibrahim Yakubu Lame, former director-general Police Service Commission, corruption is so rampant in the Nigerian police that people of contemporary Nigeria cannot give trust to them anymore.
Corruption is a major factor that plays out in the bad P-PR. Nigeria has a widespread reputation for corruption. In 2000, it appeared at the top of Transparency International's list of the most corrupt countries, and it continues to be regarded as a bastion of fraud, graft, and deceit (Transparency International, 2009; Smith, 2010). In Nigeria today, the problems of development are not necessarily due to the scarcity of the natural factors of production but due to corruption which has eaten deep into the fabric of Nigerian society, and at present, one of the greatest obstacles to national development (Abdullahi 2002:9). In the language of cause and effect, corruption is often portrayed as an independent variable inhibiting the desired and supposedly dependent outcomes of democracy and development, including improving health outcomes (Transparency International, 2006).

Findings of Hills (2008) confirmed that corruption is endemic at every level, with the police regularly heading the Transparency International’s list of the most corrupt institutions in Nigeria. An average police man in Nigeria is exploited right from his/her recruitment. S/he might not be the best fit for the job, but paying-off can get him there. At the police training colleges, the quality and quantity of food they are served is nothing to write home about; the allowances are not assured of being fully paid and as at when due; during passing-out bribes may be given for a “better” posting; before and upon arriving at respective areas of primary assignment may attract a continuation of the trend; and even “returns” might be solicited to the senior ranking officers. At retirement, no one can guarantee that entitlements will be given without giving out bribes. In the event a police officer dies while in service, the so-called “commissioner’s regret allowance” is not enough for the deceased officers’ family to sustain a living for the period of mourning; needless say there’s a befitting burial, if the deceased’s culture permits. These frustrations usually contribute to the increased corrupt practices of the police- something that is in the fabrics of the police, at the best in the public’s eyes.

 

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

In spite of the alluring structures and programs of NPPRD, the image of the Force has largely not resonated with the kind of police force desired by the civil populace: a force that eschews inappropriate use of lethal force, illegal arrest and detention, extortion, intimidation, corruption, sexual violence and extra-judicial killings. However, the following recommendations would guide NPPRD in its bid to re-engineer the Force, slough off its undesirable reputations and turn it into a humane law enforcement agency that is respected, trusted and befriended by the civil populace as the protector of lives and property.
The NPPRD efforts at endearing the police to the public are ineffectual because there is no synergy between it and the Force’s two largest and most important Departments -- Operations, General Investigations and Intelligence. The core of police activities is performed by men and officers of these departments: they take measures to prevent the commission of crime; investigate the commission of crime; interrogate suspects; they search persons and premises in order to detect, prevent or investigate the commission of crime; among others. These are the police personnel who interface daily with the public, and whose unprofessional postures have largely tainted the image of the Force, thereby causing the relationship between the police and the public to become increasingly thorny. NPPRD spirited efforts at repairing the damaged relationship between the Force and the public in the forms of seminars, workshops, publications, radio and television programs, other strategies have failed to stem police abuses and coercive excesses because there is little or no working relationship between NPPRD and the Force key departments in its bid to anchor modern policing ideals and democratic values in the heart of police personnel. Understandably, men and officers of these departments are not keying into the laudable programmes of NPPRD because of their corrupt tendencies: many of them serve as conduit through which “illegal and criminal contributions find their way through the system as booties to all the hierarchy.”

 

The need for Autonomy of NPPRD and Recruitment of Professionals

At present, NPPRD is subsumed under the administration department (secondary responsibility), and this classification has adversely affected its operation. For NPPRD to realize its potentials and professionally discharge its functions, it must commence the recruitment of professionals into its fold. Steps should be taken to professionalize the Department in its entirety and discard the retrogressive policy of posting “General Duty” officers who lack professional training in public relations (PR) to the Department. Public relations is critical to the operations of the Force, NPPRD should be elevated to the status of a full-fledge department which must be manned by a police officer who is versed in PR practice, and must not be lower than the rank of a Deputy Inspector-General (DIG) – he should be able to participate at the highest decision making body of the Force.
The present system whereby NPPRD is headed by an officer of the rank of a Deputy Commissioner (most times lacks professional competence in PR practice), who in turn report to the DIG in-charge of the Administration Department, do not augur well for the Department as this could stunt initiatives and hurt its operations. Hiring PR Consulting Firms to Launder Police Image Dearth of PR professionals or experts in NPPRD has severely hampered its ability to effectively tackle the image problem of the Force. In this respect, the Department should outsource some of its jobs that require expertise execution. The consulting firms would serve as outside eyes, and because they are detached from the system, they can also bring civilian perspectives to bear on the job – by designing a PR framework that would transform the Nigerian police into operationally capable, public-friendly and accountable police force that will advance democratic governance in the country. Oversight by Independent Citizenry Over the years, police monitoring teams have failed to effectively tackled police unprofessional conducts and anti-people acts. The most promising kind of reform is one based on the concept of civilian oversight of the police. And this should involve people of different strata of the society: students, teachers, lawyers, journalists, businessmen, former police officers and licensed private security practitioners. A monitoring team comprising mainly civilians of proven integrity and sound educational background should be constituted to investigate complaints of misconducts or disciplinary infractions against police operatives.

 

Holistic Approach to Recruitment and Training

It is very sad that recruitment into the Force has become all-comers affair – All that is required of any prospective police officer are Secondary School Certificate with five credit passes, including English language and mathematics; good physical stature and stamina. Because of the nation’s poor record keeping culture, it is possible for a convicted criminal in a state in the Southwest to emerge as a police officer in another state in the Northwestern part of the country. Recruitment into the Force is very porous. And like everything Nigerian, the process has been compromised: The Nigeria Police has become a magnet for crooks and their ilk. Recruitment is done without rigorous background check. There is no fool-proof mechanism for vetting the claims and background of recruits. This explains why criminalities thrive in the Force, as people of questionable credentials and characters find their way into the organization unchecked. The Force recruitment system scarcely pays attention to the psychological and emotional stability of the recruits. The resultant effect is that people of fiery temper who are eventually recruited soon become uncontrollably dangerous elements in the society. NPPRD should champion the cause of administering psychological tests on recruits in order to determine their true human nature and whether they are fit to perform the task of protecting lives and property. The curricula for the training of police officers, especially at the entry level are inadequate and narrow in scope. There is so much emphasis on physical exercise and police duties. Subjects such as computer science, psychology, sociology, political science, geography, law and public relations which could have prepared the recruits to perform their roles effectively in the society are left out. Also, NPPRD should ensure that police officers are properly trained in their various roles and services to the Nigerian society.

 

Fairness and Respect for all Members of the Public

NPPRD should regularly train police operatives on how to deal with the civil populace. They should be educated on how to accord respect and equal treatment to members of the public irrespective of their social status. The Department should design measures that would enhance police-public cordiality. For instance, police officers should be schooled on how to address members of the public. Politeness and decorum should form the basis of their interaction with the civil public. Words such as “Sir,” “Mr.” or “Madam” should preface their remarks. Instead of the commonly uttered: “Park! Come out. Bring your particulars.” Indeed, NPPRD has structures such as Police Community Relations Committee and Police Public Complaints Bureau which if effectively put to use would help stamp out unethical practices in the Force and improve police-public relations. In all, this study has shown that NPPRD is a pivotal arm of the Force that should be empowered, adequately funded and reengineered to perform its roles effectively. Indeed, the Department is crucial to the successful transformation of Nigeria Police into a friendly, trusted and efficient police force

REFERENCES

 

1.      Abdullahi, A. (2002). “Corruption: The Greatest Obstacle to National Development.” Nigeria: Corruption in Development. Zaria: Ahmadu Bello University.

 

2.      Africacenter.org/wpcontent/uploads/2009/10/Criminal-Force-An-Interim-on-the Nigeria Police

 

3.      Alemika, E. E. & Chukwuma, I. C. (2000). Police-Community Violence in Nigeria. Retrieved March 15, 2012 from http://www.cleen.org/police-violence.pdf

 

4.      Alemika, E. E. (1993). “Police-Community Violence in Nigeria”: A paper presented in a workshop, Jos, Nigeria.

 

5.      Alemika, E. E. (1999). “Police-Community Relations in Nigeria: What Went Wrong?” in I

 

6.      Anderson, J. (1979). Theoretical Considerations of Offender and Obscenity in Formal Contacts with Citizens: Police Deviance. Boston: Anderson Publishing Company.

 

7.      Black, A. (1968). The People and the Police. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

 

8.      Block, P. and Specth, D. (1973). Law Enforcement in a Time of Community Policing. Canada: Kelly Publishing Limited.

 

9.      Brodgen, M. and Nijhar, P. (2005).Community Policing: National and International Models and Approaches, USA: Willan Publishing.

                                              

10.  Bunyard, A. (1978). Toward a Conceptual Framework of Evaluating Community Policing. England: Anderson Publishing.

 

11.  Chukwuma and I. Ifowodo (eds.) Policing a Democracy. Lagos: Center for Law Enforcement.

 

 Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999). In Alemika, E. E. & Chukwuma, I. C. (2000). Police-Community Violence in Nigeria. Retrieved March 15, 2012 from http://www.cleen.org/police-violence.pdf

 

12.  Creating A Better Police Image (Nigeria Police Information Booklet), (1981). Lagos: The Nigeria Police Force Headquarters.

 

13.  Dambazau, A. B. (1999). Criminology and Criminal Justice. Ibadan: Spectrum Books Limited Department For Information and Development (DFID) Report, 2005.

 

14.  Devies, B. (2006).Police Advisor to the Community Policing Project.

 

15.  Donald Becker (1996). “Police Community Relations: A Review”,in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol.77, No. 4.

 

16.  Ehindaro, S. (2005). “Crime Indices in Nigeria: linkages to Socio-Economic Inadequacies”. Being a paper presented at the National Summit in Social Security held at Abuja, Nigeria

 

17.  Goldsmith, A. and Harris, V. (2012).“Trust, Trustworthiness and Trust-building in International Policing Missions.”In Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, Vol.45, No.23.

 

18.  Madaki, M. and Kurfi, M.H (2013). Toward enhancing police-community relations in Nigeria: Problems and prodpects. In Journal of Sociological Research, Vol. 4, no. 2.

 

19.  Maguire, Morgan and Reiner(1997).Outsider Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: New York Free Press.

 

20.  National Crime Prevention Council (2007): Improving Police-Community Relations through Community Policing. Bureau of Justice Assistance (2007).

 

21.  Network on Police Reform in Nigeria (NOPRIN) (2007). Criminal Force? An Interim Report on the Nigeria Police Force. Retrieved November 15, 2012 from

 

22.  Obasanjo, O. (2005). “Robbers Recruited into Police,” Vanguard newspaper, April 5, 2005. Pp. 47.

 

23.  Okereke, G. O. “Public Attitudes towards the Police Force in Nigeria.” In Police Studies: International Review. Police Development, 113:16

 

24.  Okiro, M. M. (2007). “The Nigeria Police Force Operational Handbook on Community Policing”. Ibadan: Ibadan University Press.

 

25.  Quincy, R. (1979). “Community Policing in Small Towns and Rural America”: Journal on Crime and Delinquency, vol. 40 no. 3. PP. 371-383.

 

26.  Reiner, R. (2000). The Politics in the Police. Oxford University Press.

 

27.  Reiss, R. (1971). Criminal Justice Cultures: Bail and Remand: Contemporary Issues in Criminology. Wales: University of Wales Press.

 

28.  Smith, D.J. (2010).“Corruption, NGOs, and Development in Nigeria.”Third World Quarterly, Vol. 31, No.2, 243-258. Routledge: Taylor and Francis.

 

29.  The 1979 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

 

30.  The Blue Print Newspaper, April 1, 2013, also available online via: http://blueprintng.com/2013/04/extra-judicial-killing-of-boko-haram-leader-cant-be-justified

 

31.  The Nigeria Police Force: A Handbook of General Information, (1981). Lagos: The Nigeria Police Force Headquarters.

 

32.  The Transparency International Report, 2009http://www.transparency.org/White, M. F. et al (1991). The Theoretical Considerations of Officer Profanity and Obscenity in Formal Contacts with Citizens, in T. Barker and D. L. Carter (eds.). Police Deviance.Cincinnati, Ohio: Anderson Publishing Co.

 

33.  Wright, A. (2002). Policing: An Introduction to Concepts and Practice. Devon: Willan Publishing.

 

34.  Yusuf, A. (2007). “The Nigeria Police Force Operational Handbook on Community Policing”. Ibadan: Ibadan University Press.

The opposing conceptions of the audience: The active and passive hemispheres of mass communication

Over the years, there had been so many debates about what the audiences are doing with the media and its influence on them. The biggest question then was “who are the target audience of mass media?”
Frank A. Biokka, a researcher at the center for research in journalism and mass communication, university of North Carolina, USA, has attempted to, in his work titled “Opposing conceptions of the audience: The active and passive hemispheres of mass communication”, clarify some questions about theoretical and methodological nature of the mass media and its audiences.
Biocca, citing many scholars, broadly classified the mass media audiences into two broad dichotomies, namely: the passive audience and the active audience. This work therefore intends to review these two opposing conceptions, provide further clarifications and present constructive criticisms on it.
The active audiences
According to Biocca, scholars of the uses and gratification paradigm (minimal effect) believed that the audiences have beliefs and aspirations. These, of course, plus many other social classes like gender, economy, culture, etc play a very vital role in widening their horizon, as to how they perceive media messages. Hence, the audiences are active. Their backgrounds always determine how they behave. Individually, they are encased in an unseen bubble.
He also went ahead to define an active audience as individualistic, selective, rational and impervious to influence. According to him, audience sis active in terms of his media or media contents selection (utilitarianism), his intention (intentionality), his desire to involve in communication process (involvement) and his tendency to be influenced (imperviousness to influence).
The passive audiences
Scholars of the powerful effect paradigm see an audience as passive. For according to them, they don’t know when the media is asking them to do some things, as it targets their subconscious minds, in that they respond to external stimuli positively.
The researcher also referred to a passive audience as conformist, anomic, irrational and vulnerable victim of media messages, who is nothing rather than a product of the media he is exposed to. (Marcel, 1983b)
The passivity-activity audience debate
After looking at these two counter opinions about the audience, how can we justify the “activity” or “passivity” of the audience? Biocca, citing Blumler (1979), argued that the ‘activity of the audience is both cognitive and sociostructural, normative and objective, socially viable, yet innate’. Blumler also pointed out that media consumption behavior can be said to exist “ prior to its use (preactivity), during its use (duractivity), and following its use (postactivity).
Not only for Blumler, Raymond Bauer is of the opinion of audience independence. He considered the passivity of an audience as of ‘one-way influence’ which he associated with an odd alliance of exploitative communicators and mass culture critics.
“The issue is not just the findings of social science. The real issue is weither our social model of man –the model we use for running the society – and our scientific model or models –the one we use for running subjects –should be identical”. Bauer (1963:319)
Despite these arguments about the activity of the audience, there are still some questions its proponents left unanswered. Some of them are: The active audience proponents emphasized more on selectivity and intentionality, what about the unintentional and influences resulting from wrong selection of the media? Are these scholars aware that people (despite their selectivity) learn from the media? Or did they forget that after these selections to messages they expose to, the media of the message should not have any influence on them?
These and so many questions led some scholars among whom is Blumler, to call for a “rejection of audience imperialism”. The audience member is not an unconstructed master of his/her cultural faith”. Blumler et al (1985:29).
They therefore advocated for two versions of the active audience: the strong one and a weak one. The strong one emphasizes the autonomy of the audience, his self determination, etc. While the weak version points to motivational and behavioural phenomenon such as selectivity and utility. At last, they suggested the abandonment of the strong version of the audience activity.
Consequently, Biocca drawn our attention to another emergent level of conception of the audience. He called it information processing level. According to him, how we select, attend, expose and retain the media messages is “normative”, as such we cannot directly be called passive or active. Audience exposure to media messages when he is happy, sad, and hungry, all differs. Equally, their effects on him must differ.
Biocca, citing McQuail (1972), noted that individuals have different level of attention and involvement. Theorists characterized media use as intentional, goal-oriented and motivated behavior.
Finally, Biocca suggested a more decent appraisal of activity between these two opposing conceptions. Of course, even the proponents of the activity of the audience cannot deny the fact that media has influence on audience no matter how little it is. Media constitutes a larger (if not all) part of our life that we can’t do without it. It is as the result of how media is interwoven to our life, that we cannot even understand its influence on us. Of course, audiences are active, but not active always and on every issue. Sometimes the audiences, despite their selectivity freedom have to rely on the media for information. As such, it targets their sub conscious minds and makes them passive “unconsciously”.

In fact, even the individual relation to the media and media contents is largely by social or sociopsychological imperatives, some of which may be media-generated. The claims of “freedom of choice”, self-determination and cognitive independence are mere rhetorical exaggerations