By Zagazola Makama
When Masara Kim Usman asked whether Zagazola Makama had suddenly started “siding with Plateau people,” he probably believed he was making a clever point. Instead, he exposed the fundamental weakness of his entire argument. The question itself reveals either a remarkable misunderstanding of our work or a deliberate attempt to rewrite years of reporting.
What an extraordinary discovery. Apparently, after years of reporting attacks, exposing killings, demanding accountability and documenting insecurity across Plateau, we have only now developed sympathy for the people. This is like accusing a firefighter of suddenly becoming interested in fires after spending years at fire scenes.
But logic has never been the strongest department of professional outrage merchants.
The truly entertaining part is that Masara appears shocked that the Government of Plateau State, working journalists and people within Barkin Ladi now question his many false narratives. This created a serious crisis. Not for Barkin Ladi. Not for Plateau. But for the theory that every disagreement must come from enemies.
From the beginning, Zagazola Makama has consistently stood with victims of violence in Plateau State and across Nigeria. We have reported attacks on farming communities and the fulani communities. We have documented killings, displacement, cattle rustling, banditry and terrorism on both sides. We have exposed failures of all concerned stakeholders and demanded accountability from authorities.
Most importantly, we have done so without asking the ethnicity, religion or political affiliation of either the victims or perpetrators.
That is because journalism is supposed to serve the truth, not tribal narratives.
What Masara appears unable to accept is that supporting victims does not require abandoning facts. Standing with communities does not mean surrendering objectivity. Seeking justice does not require the manufacturing of his convenient Christian genocide fake narratives to sell to international audiences.
One must admire the consistency of Masara Kim’s logic. In Masara’s world, every question is an attack. Every request for evidence is oppression. Every disagreement is a conspiracy. Every critic is compromised. And every narrative he promotes arrives pre-certified as unquestionable truth.
It is a fascinating system. In fact, it may be the first known example of a one-man fact-checking organization where the investigator, witness, judge, jury and appellate court are all the same person.
Every day we hear him saying, “The people were attacked with sniper rifles and machine guns by Islamic terrorists, screaming Allahu Akbar,” when neither he nor anybody witnessed any such thing. But because this was the type of narrative that would sell in the international community, he has maintained the script.
Now that members of the same community have begun asking questions, the conspiracy becomes difficult to manage. Suddenly, the old script stops working. That is where the confusion began. Masara’s response reads like a man discovering that reality has refused to follow his script.
The article itself is remarkable. It spends thousands of words explaining why scrutiny is important. Then spends thousands more words complaining about scrutiny. It argues that nobody should be beyond questioning. Then it becomes upset when questions are directed back.It demands accountability from everyone.
Except, apparently, itself.
That is an impressive achievement. Even Olympic gymnasts would struggle to perform such intellectual gymnastics. Then there is the familiar formula. Whenever evidence becomes inconvenient, change the subject.
For years, some activists have operated under a simple formula. If you agree with them, you are courageous. If you question them, you are compromised. If you request evidence, you are a sellout. If you expose inconsistencies, you become an enemy or you are working with the bandits. It is a remarkably convenient system.
Unfortunately for them, reality has begun to interfere with their script. Everyone now understands that there are two sides to the crisis in Plateau State.
The latest challenge to Masara’s narrative did not come from government officials alone. Governor Caleb Mutfwang, and all the security agencies who were present at the scene, dismissed the mass burial attack video posted by Masara Kim as “fake.” Now members of his own community are asking for accountability on another video.
For years, Masara and others have accused anyone questioning their claims of attempting to silence victims. Yet when questions are directed at them, they respond exactly as they accuse others of behaving. Scrutiny suddenly becomes persecution. Verification becomes hostility.
Fact-checking becomes betrayal. That contradiction lies at the heart of the current controversy.
Whenever facts become uncomfortable, discuss motives. Whenever a question cannot be answered, attack the questioner. And whenever a narrative develops cracks, produce a larger narrative.
It is political duct tape. Unfortunately, reality has a habit of tearing through it. The real issue is simple. Plateau people deserve facts. They deserve justice. They deserve security.
They deserve solutions. What they do not deserve is an endless cycle in which every tragedy becomes part of a permanent outrage economy as Masara and his cohort continue to smile all the way to the bank making money in dollars through media clicks. Those victims deserve better than becoming characters in somebody else’s storyline.
The irony is that the loudest defenders of “truth” often become the most uncomfortable when truth starts asking questions. That appears to be what is happening here. The debate was never about whether Plateau people matter.
They do. The debate was never about whether victims deserve justice. They do. The debate was never about whether insecurity exists.
It does. The debate is whether facts should matter.And that is where some people become nervous.Because facts are stubborn. Facts cannot be shouted down. Facts do not care about hashtags. Facts do not care about emotions. Facts do not care who becomes offended. And unlike propaganda, facts survive scrutiny.
Masara also attempts to revive the issue surrounding the image of Abu Bilal al-Mainuki, as though discussing a photograph somehow invalidates an entire body of reporting.The argument is as weak as it is desperate.
The reporting concerning Mainuki’s death was never dependent on the quality of a photograph. The image in question was an enhanced version of an older photograph associated with the same individual. The substantive issue was the identification and reporting surrounding his death, not the technical enhancement of a picture. Yet lame critics who could not effectively challenge the core reporting chose instead to focus on the photograph itself.
It is the equivalent of losing an argument about a book and then launching an investigation into the cover design. More revealing, however, is what Masara consistently avoids discussing.
After years of presenting himself as a leading voice on Plateau, what measurable outcomes can be pointed to?
How many conflicts have been resolved? How many attacks have been prevented? How many peace initiatives have emerged from the endless cycle of outrage? How many communities are safer today because of the narratives being promoted by Masara?
His narrative has even shifted the focus of the international community into thinking that the Berom people are being attacked by Islamic terrorists similar to those in the North-East, and this was why the focus of the US AFRICOM-Nigeria operations was currently in the North-East and not Plateau State, thanks to lies and propaganda.
Mr. Masara Kim thinks he is being attacked. No. These are accountability questions. Because genuine advocacy should be judged not only by its rhetoric but also by its impact.
The tragedy of Plateau is too serious to be reduced into a permanent content-production exercise by a few individuals who constantly aim to discredit government efforts in bringing about lasting peace. Just like Government Muftwang has continued to reechoed, there are those who are working to discredit the state and to portray that nothing is working in the state in order to drive away investors.
Yes, victims deserve justice. The displaced deserve protection. The bereaved deserve answers. What they do not deserve is to become props in an endless competition for attention, influence and moral superiority.
Perhaps the most damaging aspect of some activist narratives is the tendency to oversimplify an extremely complex conflict into a religious war of domination.
Every incident becomes evidence of a predetermined conclusion. Every attack is immediately fitted into a familiar template.
Every tragedy is presented through the lens of a larger narrative that often leaves little room for nuance, context or competing evidence.
But reality is more complicated than social media slogans.
The security challenges in Plateau involve criminal gangs, banditry, communal tensions, reprisals, land disputes, governance failures, arms proliferation and cycles of violence that have evolved over decades.
Reducing that complexity into simplistic explanations may generate outrage, but it rarely generates solutions. The international community understands this. Serious policymakers understand this. Security professionals understand this. Which is precisely why evidence matters. Facts matter.
Verification matters. That is why Zagazola Makama has consistently maintained the same position.
Fulani bandits who kill innocent people are criminals. Ethnic Berom militias that target innocent people are criminals. All terrorists are criminals. And anyone promoting violence is part of the problem.
At the same time, anyone who manipulates information in ways that deepen division rather than encourage understanding is also a criminal and deserves scrutiny. Propaganda does not become noble because it claims to represent victims. Falsehood does not become truth because it is emotionally satisfying.
A dangerous narrative remains dangerous regardless of who is promoting it.
Zagazola is a Counter Insurgency Expert and Security Analyst in the Lake Chad Region
About The Author
