CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

The Fourth Republic of Nigeria, inaugurated in 1999, represents a period of

democratic consolidation following several decades of military rule. This new democratic

dispensation, after years of military coups and authoritarian governments, brought hope for

more accountable governance, political stability, and active citizen participation. In this

context, political participation the ways in which citizens engage with political processes

through voting, protests, advocacy, or other forms of action became an essential feature of the

Nigerian political landscape. (Diamond, 2008; Omotola, 2010; Suberu, 2007).

One of the most profound transformations in political participation during this period

has been the rise of digital technologies, particularly social media. Social media platforms,

such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and WhatsApp, have revolutionized the way

people communicate, share ideas, and interact with political leaders and institutions. In

Nigeria, as in many other parts of the world, social media has rapidly become an integral part

of political campaigns, social movements, and political discourse.

In the years following the return to democracy, the role of social media in political

participation in Nigeria became increasingly evident, especially as the country’s youth

population began to harness the potential of digital platforms to express their views, mobilize

for political causes, and engage in debates about governance. The Fourth Republic,

characterized by relative political stability and growing internet penetration, saw a

remarkable increase in social media adoption. According to the Digital Report 2021, Nigeria

had over 33 million social media users, with a significant portion of these users being young

Nigerians aged 18-34.

1
 The impact of social media on political participation has become a significant area of

interest, particularly in the context of developing democracies like Nigeria. In recent years,

social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram have gained prominence,

providing citizens with new avenues for engagement in political discourse and participation.

This phenomenon is particularly relevant in Nigeria, where traditional forms of political

engagement have often been characterized by a lack of transparency, accountability, and

accessibility (Oba, 2020). As a result, social media has emerged as a powerful tool for

political mobilization, influencing the ways in which citizens interact with political processes.

Social media facilitates instant communication, allowing individuals to share

opinions, disseminate information, and organize collective action. Studies indicate that social

media platforms have reshaped the political landscape in Nigeria, enabling citizens to engage

more actively in political discussions and campaigns (Ojo, 2021). The ability of social media

to transcend geographic boundaries means that Nigerians can engage in political discourse

irrespective of their locations, fostering a sense of community and shared purpose among

users (Adeyemo, 2021). Moreover, the rise of citizen journalism has empowered individuals

to report on political events and issues, challenging the narratives presented by mainstream

media (Nwachukwu, 2022).

The youth demographic, which constitutes a significant portion of Nigeria's

population, has been particularly active on social media platforms. This age group has

harnessed the power of social media to advocate for change, as seen during the #EndSARS

protests against police brutality in 2020. The protests illustrated how social media could

galvanize public sentiment and mobilize citizens for a common cause, leading to

unprecedented political engagement (Ogunyemi, 2021). However, while social media

presents opportunities for enhanced political participation, it also poses challenges, including

2
the spread of misinformation and online harassment, which can undermine democratic

processes (Olatunji & Abubakar, 2022).

The implications of social media on political participation in Nigeria warrant

comprehensive examination, especially considering the increasing reliance on digital

platforms for political engagement. Scholars and policymakers alike recognize the need to

explore the multifaceted impact of social media, considering both its potential benefits and

drawbacks. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for fostering an informed citizenry that

can effectively participate in Nigeria's democratic processes.

Recent studies have highlighted the relationship between social media usage and

political participation, revealing that the nature and extent of engagement can vary

significantly among different demographics (Oluwaseun & Adeyemi, 2023). Factors such as

education, socio-economic status, and access to technology play pivotal roles in determining

how individuals interact with political content online. Furthermore, the Nigerian context,

characterized by a diverse cultural and linguistic landscape, necessitates a nuanced

understanding of how social media impacts political participation across different regions and

communities (Nwankwo & Ugochukwu, 2022).

In summary, the intersection of social media and political participation in Nigeria

presents a complex and evolving landscape. As the nation continues to grapple with its

democratic identity, understanding the role of social media in shaping political engagement

becomes increasingly essential. This study seeks to explore these dynamics, focusing on how

social media influences political participation among Nigerians, particularly in the context of

contemporary political challenges. This study seeks to explore these issues and analyze the

extent to which social media has enhanced or hindered political participation in Nigeria

during the Fourth Republic.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

3
 The increasing prevalence of social media in Nigeria has raised critical questions

regarding its impact on political participation. While social media has the potential to

enhance democratic engagement, it also poses risks such as misinformation, polarization, and

the marginalization of certain voices. Understanding these dynamics is essential for

policymakers, political parties, and citizens to harness the benefits of social media while

mitigating its challenges.

The proliferation of social media in Nigeria has undoubtedly altered the political

landscape, but its impact on political participation remains a subject of debate. On one hand,

social media has provided new avenues for political engagement, giving citizens greater

access to political information, facilitating online discussions, and enabling more direct

communication between political leaders and the electorate. On the other hand, the rise of

social media has also brought with it significant challenges, including the spread of

misinformation, the use of social media for political manipulation, and the deepening of

political divisions.

1.3 Objectives of the Study

The main objective of this study is to determine the impact of social media on

political participation in Nigeria. Specific objectives are to:

i. evaluate the impact of social media usage on voter turnout among Nigerian youths.

ii. determine the role of social media in shaping political opinions and awareness among

citizens, and

iii. find out how social media influences the mobilization of citizens for political action.

1.4 Research Questions

The study attempt to provide answer to the following research questions.

i. What is the impact of social media usage on voter turnout among Nigerian youths?

4
ii. What is the role of social media in shaping political opinions and awareness among

citizens?

iii. How does social media influence the mobilization of citizens for political action?

1.5 Research Hypotheses

Hypothesis I

H0: There is no significant impact of social media usage on voter turnout among Nigerian

youths.

H1: There is significant impact of social media usage on voter turnout among Nigerian

youths.

Hypothesis II

H0: There is no significant role of social media in shaping political opinions and awareness

among citizens.

H2: There is a significant role of social media in shaping political opinions and awareness

among citizens.

Hypothesis III

H0: There is no significant influence of social media on the mobilization of citizens for

political action.

H3: There is significant influence of social media on the mobilization of citizens for political

action.

1.6 Significance of the Study

The significance of this study lies in its potential to contribute valuable insights into

the role of social media in shaping political participation and democratic processes in Nigeria,

especially within the context of the Fourth Republic. Social media has become an essential

tool for communication, political engagement, and activism, but its impact on political

5
behavior in the Nigerian context is not fully understood. This research will fill this gap by

providing empirical evidence of the effects of social media on voter engagement, activism,

political awareness, and public trust in the electoral process.

1.7 Scope of the Study

The scope of this study will encompass the influence of social media on political

participation in Nigeria, focusing on specific demographic groups, particularly the youth. The

study will examine various social media platforms, including Facebook, Twitter, and

Instagram, and their roles in facilitating political discourse and engagement. The

geographical focus will be on urban centers in Nigeria, where social media usage is more

prevalent, allowing for a comprehensive analysis of its impact on political participation.

1.8 Limitations of the Study

The study may encounter limitations such as potential biases in self-reported data

from survey respondents regarding their social media usage and political participation.

Additionally, the dynamic nature of social media means that trends can change rapidly, which

may impact the relevance of the findings over time. There may also be challenges in

accessing a representative sample due to variations in internet access and social media usage

across different regions in Nigeria. Finally, the study's focus on specific demographic groups

may limit the generalizability of the findings to the broader population.

1.9 Definition of Terms

Social Media: Social media refers to digital platforms and websites that allow users to create,

share, and engage with content such as text, images, videos, and links. These platforms are

designed to foster interaction, communication, and user-generated content. In the context of

this study, social media includes platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram,

6
WhatsApp, YouTube, TikTok, and other similar digital platforms that enable online

interactions and political discourse (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010; Tufekci, 2017).

Political Participation: Political participation refers to the active engagement of citizens in

the political process, which may include activities such as voting in elections, attending

political rallies or campaigns, engaging in protests, joining political parties or organizations,

and participating in discussions and debates on political issues. It can be formal (e.g., voting)

or informal (e.g., discussing politics on social media) (Verba, Schlozman, & Brady, 1995;

Ekwunife & Anisiobi, 2018).

Political Awareness: Political awareness refers to the level of knowledge and understanding

that individuals have about political processes, institutions, and current political issues. It

encompasses the ability to recognize and comprehend political events, the roles of political

actors, and the functioning of the government. Social media often plays a significant role in

shaping and increasing political awareness, especially in informing the electorate about

election-related matters and public policies (Chiluwa & Osiberu, 2020; Ogunleye, 2018).

Voter Engagement: Voter engagement refers to the involvement of citizens in the electoral

process. It includes actions that motivate or encourage individuals to register to vote, attend

political rallies, engage in debates about political issues, and ultimately participate in the act

of voting. Voter engagement can be influenced by various factors, including the use of social

media to disseminate information, encourage participation, and increase awareness of

political issues (Folarin, 2017; Okeke & Onwuchekwa, 2020).

Political Polarization: Political polarization refers to the increasing division of political

opinions and ideologies within a society. It occurs when individuals or groups strongly align

with particular political ideologies or parties, leading to a lack of common ground or

agreement on key issues. Social media can exacerbate political polarization by creating echo

7
chambers or filter bubbles, where individuals are exposed to content that reinforces their

existing beliefs, rather than challenging them (Bakshy et al., 2015; Gaber, 2019).

The Fourth Republic: The Fourth Republic refers to the period of democratic governance in

Nigeria that began in 1999, following the end of military rule. This period is marked by the

establishment of a civilian government, regular elections, and the development of democratic

institutions in the country. The Fourth Republic is significant in this study as it corresponds to

a period where social media began to play a larger role in political participation and discourse

in Nigeria (Adebanwi, 2017).

Voter Turnout: Voter turnout refers to the percentage of eligible voters who actually

participate in an election by casting their vote. High voter turnout is often seen as an indicator

of a healthy, functioning democracy, while low turnout can signal political disengagement or

apathy. Social media is often studied in relation to its ability to increase voter turnout by

encouraging individuals to participate in elections and fostering a sense of political

responsibility (Michels & de Lange, 2019; Umar, 2020).

1.10 Organization of Chapters

This research work is organized into five chapters for clarity and coherence. Chapter

One introduces the study by presenting the background, statement of the problem, research

objectives, research questions, hypotheses (if applicable), significance, delimitation, and

definition of key terms. Chapter Two reviews relevant literature, including conceptual,

theoretical, and empirical reviews, and provides a summary of the literature. Chapter Three

outlines the methodology adopted for the study, including the research design, population,

sampling techniques, research instruments, and methods of data collection and analysis.

Chapter Four presents the results of the study and discusses the findings in relation to the

research questions and existing literature. Chapter Five summarizes the entire research, draws

8
conclusions, offers recommendations, highlights limitations, and suggests areas for further

research.

CHAPTER TWO

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

It is important to understand the history of a phenomenon in order to manipulate it

(Sajithra & Patil, 2013).

The impact of social media on political participation has become a focal point in

political science, particularly with the rise of digital technologies in recent decades. In

Nigeria, the proliferation of social media platforms has transformed the way citizens engage

with politics. This chapter seeks to explore the influence of social media on political

participation in Nigeria, focusing specifically on the Fourth Republic, which began in 1999

after the end of military rule. This era marks a shift towards democracy, and social media has

played an increasingly significant role in political communication and engagement during

this period. The review will analyze how platforms like Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, and

Instagram have changed the dynamics of political participation, especially in the context of

Nigeria's unique socio-political landscape. By investigating existing scholarly work, this

chapter provides a critical assessment of the literature on the relationship between social

media and political participation, emphasizing the opportunities and challenges posed by the

digitalization of politics in Nigeria.

9
 The Fourth Republic of Nigeria has seen remarkable changes in the political

landscape, with elections that have been notably influenced by the widespread use of social

media. From voter education campaigns to political rallies and protests, social media has

provided new avenues for citizens to engage with and influence political processes. Social

media platforms have enabled Nigerians, particularly the youth, to express political opinions,

mobilize for social movements, and demand accountability from politicians. This chapter

provides an overview of these developments and examines the theoretical frameworks that

have been employed to understand the impact of social media on political participation.

Additionally, it discusses the limitations and criticisms of social media in the Nigerian

political context, laying the groundwork for the empirical study of this phenomenon.

History of Social Media

The roots of social media stretch far deeper than we might imagine. Although it seems

like a new trend, sites like Facebook are the natural outcome of many centuries of social

media development (Drew, 2013).

There are ongoing debates on whether e-mail could be considered a part of social

media. The predominant reasons why e-mail is not considered a social medium are because

(i) Email is a distribution mechanism whereas social media is a collective mechanism and (ii)

Mass communication is different from mass collaboration. But e-mail certainly qualifies if

we go by the simple definition that “social media is conversations that happen online”.

Though the debate goes on, we cannot ignore the fact that the introduction of e-mail marked

the beginning to the much more collaborative social media years later. (Sajithra & Patil,

2013).

In the 1990s, the world was evolving rapidly to the connected forefront. Personal

computers had evolved in popularity in developed nations, and people started realising the

potential that a connected world may have. Hence rose the Internet Relay Chats (IRCs) in

10
1988 which became popular in 1990. This was a rudimentary form of text messaging and

instant communication, and not until 1997 did we see the first full-blown social medium

come into being ([Link], 2019).

Six Degrees was an online platform that allowed users to create their own profiles and

‘friend’ others on it. This was, in the true sense, a precursor of greater days for social media,

and the fact that Six Degrees also allowed users to add unregistered people as friends too

showed the global impact that social media would eventually have all across the world. The

platform was named after the ‘Six Degrees of Separation’ theory.

Originally proposed back in 1929 by Frigyes Karinthy in light of a shrinking world,

the theory suggested that everyone in this world is connected and interconnected by no more

than six degrees, or individuals, in between. With the advent of social media, the theory took

even more profound a meaning, and the world shrunk further ([Link], 2019).

After the success of IRC, many personal websites, discussion groups and chat groups

also became popular. At the beginning of the 90s, internet access was not completely

accessible to the public. This situation changed when private Internet service Providers (ISPs)

began to start operations in the United States around 1994 or 1995. This gave millions of

home users the chance to experience it. The other reason for the initial euphoria was the fact

that the content was absolutely free other than the data usage paid to the internet companies.

Early internet users were extremely outspoken and opinionated by today’s standards. People

were thrilled at the possibility of sharing their opinions and often went overboard in their

expressions. The first online social media etiquette standards were proposed, and called

netiquette, as a control mechanism. Internet forums grew in popularity by the late 90s and as

the primary platform for topical discussions (Sajithra & Patil, 2013).

11
 The modern blog evolved from the online diary. Justin Hall, who began personal

blogging in 1994 is generally recognized as one of the earliest bloggers. The other popular

blogs are Dave Winer's Scripting News and Wearable Wireless Webcam.

Wearable Wireless Webcam was unique in terms of how it combined text, video, and

pictures transmitted live from a wearable computer and EyeTap device to a web site in 1994.

This practice of semi-automated blogging with live video together with text was referred to as

surveillance. Such entries were considered as legal evidence as well. Early blogs were simply

updates in common websites. However, the evolution of tools to facilitate the production and

maintenance of web articles posted in reverse chronological order made the publishing

process feasible to a much larger, less technical, population. Ultimately, this resulted in the

distinct class of online publishing that produces blogs we recognize today. For instance, the

use of some sort of browser-based software is now a typical aspect of "blogging". Blogs can

be hosted by dedicated blog hosting services, or they can be run using blog software, or on

regular web hosting services. Blogs are recognized as a separate medium in itself (Sajithra &

Patil, 2013).

After the invention of blogging, social media began to explode in popularity. Sites

like MySpace and LinkedIn gained prominence in the early 2000s, and sites like Photobucket

and Flickr facilitated online photo sharing. YouTube came out in 2005, creating an entirely

new way for people to communicate and share with each other across great distances. By

2006, Facebook and Twitter both became available to users throughout the world. These sites

remain some of the most popular social networks on the Internet. Other sites like Tumblr,

Spotify, Foursquare and Pinterest began popping up to fill specific social networking niches

(Drew, 2013).

Today, there is a tremendous variety of social networking sites, and many of them can

be linked to allow cross-posting. This creates an environment where users can reach the

12
maximum number of people without sacrificing the intimacy of person-to-person

communication (Drew, 2013).

The Fourth Republic

The Fourth Republic of Nigeria began on May 29, 1999, marking a significant

transition in the country’s political history. It signified the return of civilian rule after decades

of military dictatorships that had interrupted democratic governance. The Fourth Republic

was established following the death of General Sani Abacha in 1998, which led to a new

period of democratic reform, symbolized by the election of Olusegun Obasanjo as president.

This republic marked the beginning of regular, peaceful democratic elections and civilian-led

governance.

Before the Fourth Republic, Nigeria experienced several periods of military rule. From

independence in 1960 to 1999, the country had been governed by military leaders following a

series of coups and political instability. The First Republic (1960–1966) was Nigeria’s first

attempt at democracy, but it was overthrown in a coup. This was followed by military rule

and the Second Republic (1979–1983), which also ended with another military coup. The

Third Republic (1993) was short-lived, following the annulment of the presidential elections.

This created an environment of uncertainty and political unrest.

The death of General Abacha in 1998 allowed for a peaceful transition back to

democracy, initiated by General Abdulsalami Abubakar, who put in place the framework for

the transition to civilian rule. This included the creation of a new constitution and the holding

of elections in 1999. As a result, the Fourth Republic began with Olusegun Obasanjo being

elected president, not as a military leader, but as a civilian. Obasanjo's election was a

significant moment in Nigeria's history, as it represented the end of military dominance in

Nigerian politics.

13
 The Fourth Republic is defined by a democratic framework where power is derived

from the people through free and fair elections. Nigeria adopted a presidential system of

government, similar to the United States, where the president is both the head of state and

head of government. This structure established a separation of powers between the executive,

legislative, and judicial branches. The 1999 Constitution served as the legal basis for the

functioning of government, guaranteeing fundamental rights, freedom of speech, and an

independent judiciary.

One of the most important aspects of the Fourth Republic is the establishment of regular

elections, which has allowed Nigerians to choose their leaders at different levels of

government. These elections take place every four years, with the election of the president,

governors, and members of the National Assembly. The Independent National Electoral

Commission (INEC) is responsible for overseeing the conduct of elections, ensuring that they

are fair and transparent. Since 1999, Nigeria has held several elections, and power has

peacefully changed hands, particularly notable during the 2015 election, when Goodluck

Jonathan handed over to Muhammadu Buhari after losing the election, marking the first

peaceful transfer of power from one political party to another.

Despite its successes, the Fourth Republic has not been free from challenges. Nigeria

has faced problems such as corruption, political instability, ethnic and religious divisions,

terrorism, and economic inequality. For instance, the country has struggled with the rise of

extremist groups like Boko Haram in the northeast, which has significantly affected the

country's security. Additionally, economic challenges such as unemployment, poverty, and

corruption continue to plague the nation, despite efforts to improve the situation.

Moreover, the Fourth Republic has seen a significant rise in political participation

among Nigerians, especially due to the influence of social media and other digital platforms.

Social media has played a pivotal role in shaping political discourse, organizing protests, and

14
increasing political awareness among the youth. It has provided a platform for people to

express their opinions, demand accountability, and engage in political debates.

The Fourth Republic also brought with it a greater emphasis on political maturity.

Over time, Nigeria has witnessed the development of political institutions, a more active civil

society, and a stronger legal framework that supports democratic processes. However, the

challenge of electoral fraud and rigging still lingers, and many Nigerians continue to advocate

for electoral reforms to ensure more transparency and fairness in the voting process.

In summary, the Fourth Republic in Nigeria represents a period of democratic rule

that began in 1999 after years of military dictatorships. It has provided Nigerians with regular

elections, civilian governance, and constitutional democracy. Despite facing numerous

challenges, the Fourth Republic has seen significant strides in political engagement,

particularly among the youth, and has witnessed peaceful transitions of power. However,

corruption, security challenges, and economic instability remain key issues that Nigeria must

address for the Fourth Republic to achieve its full potential.

2.1 Conceptual Framework

Political Participation

Participation means ‘sharing in’ or ‘wrap oneself with’ every dimension of life, of

culture or of economy, our educational system, our political system, our decision-making

process. But there is less than a complete agreement among the scholars about the meaning of

the concept ‘Political Participation’. Political participation is the involvement of the citizens

in the political system (Falade, 2014). The citizens form the crux of any society and it is

important they are part of the political process. According to Akamare (2003, as cited in

Falade, 2014), political participation is an aspect of political behaviour and it focuses on the

way in which individuals take part in politics. It is a voluntary activity and one may

participate directly or indirectly. The various ways by which the people can be involved in

15
the political system include selection or election of political leaders, formulation of policies,

community activities and other civic engagements.

Empirical investigation of political participation could be split between two basic yet

mutually interlinked approaches. The first approach deals with the realistic extant level of

popular engagement in the processes of governance. The chief objects of interest are the level

(local, regional, national etc.) and method (voting, campaigning, contacting, protesting etc.)

of political participation. In this context, the influence of various manners of political

participation and the motivation to either reject participation or indeed become an active part

of it are studied. Individual and national patterns of political behaviour are also compared.

Cross-national comparison of political participation patterns concentrate largely on voting

because of the availability of internationally comparable data on voter turnout and the

relevance of national elections for the given political system. As evidenced by such

international comparisons, voter turnout shall be influenced largely by a number of

institutional factors (e.g. voter registration systems, electoral procedures, degree of political

competition in the society and the party system) which, taken together, create an institutional

environment of the given country’s political system (Nekola, 2014).

The essence of political participation in any society, either civilized or primitive, is to

seek control of power, acquisition of power and to influence decision making. Political

participation is a means of contributing ones quota to the political system and overall

development of the nation. Political participation is one of the fundamental requirements of

democratic governance. This is the reason why Adelekan (2010, cited in Falade, 2014)

emphasized that ideally, democracy means individual participation in the decisions that

involves one’s life. In a democratic system, there is the necessity for the citizenry to be fully

involved in the democratic procedures of the choice of rulers and effective communication of

the public policies and attitudes. Any claim to democratic regime or state must essentially

16
embrace a high degree of competitive choice, openness, and enjoyment of civic and political

liberties and political participation that involves all groups of the society. The extent to which

people participate in the political system differ from person to person. Falade (2014)

identified six types of political participants. These are: The inactive: These are the people that

take no part in any political activity. Voting specialists: These are the people that get eagerly

engaged only in voting. Besides voting, they are not concerned about other political activities.

Parochial participants: These people participate in politics occasionally. They vote or get

involved in any other political activity only when it affects their personal interest. The

communalist: These are those who get engaged in voting regularly, they also get involved in

community affairs but they are not involved in political campaign activities. The

campaigners: They are actively involved in political campaign but inactive in other

community affairs. Complete activists: They are highly involved in all political activities,

they actively participate in voting, political campaign, community activities and make contact

with public officials (Falade, 2014).

Importance of Political Participation in a Democracy

The vibrancy of a democracy is directly tied to the level of political participation

among its citizens. In democratic systems, the engagement of citizens in the political process

ensures that the government remains accountable to the people and reflects their interests.

Political participation enables individuals to express their preferences, influence policy

decisions, and ensure that their voices are heard in the political arena. In the context of

Nigeria, where the political landscape is marked by a history of military rule and corruption,

increasing political participation is essential for the strengthening of democratic institutions.

The Fourth Republic, for instance, has been characterized by a growing emphasis on citizen

involvement and the development of democratic norms, despite challenges such as voter

apathy, electoral fraud, and inadequate representation of marginalized groups.

17
 Political participation also fosters a sense of civic duty and collective responsibility.

When individuals participate in political activities, they develop a greater understanding of

the political system and the challenges faced by their society. This leads to more informed

voting decisions, increased political knowledge, and a stronger commitment to democratic

values. In Nigeria, however, the challenges of political participation are compounded by the

country’s complex socio-political dynamics, including ethnic tensions, religious divisions,

and economic inequalities. Social media has the potential to bridge some of these gaps by

providing a space for political discourse that transcends traditional social and cultural

boundaries. This has been particularly evident in the mobilization of youth during the 2015

and 2019 elections, as well as during movements like #EndSARS.

2.1.1 Social Media

Social media is the term often used to refer to new forms of media that involve

interactive participation. Often the development of media is divided into two different ages,

the broadcast age and the interactive age. In the broadcast age, media were almost exclusively

centralized where one entity such as a radio or television station, Newspaper Company, or a

movie production studio distributed messages to many people. Feedback to media outlets was

often indirect, delayed, and impersonal. Mediated communication between individuals

typically happened on a much smaller level, usually via personal letters, telephone calls, or

sometimes on a slightly larger scale through means such as photocopied family newsletters.

With the rise of digital and mobile technologies, interaction on a large scale became

easier for individuals than ever before; and as such, a new media age was born where

interactivity was placed at the center of new media functions. One individual could now

speak to many, and instant feedback was a possibility. Where citizens and consumers used to

18
have limited and somewhat muted voices but now they could share their opinions with many.

The low cost and accessibility of new technology also allowed more options for media

consumption than ever before – and so instead of only a few news outlets, individuals now

have the ability to seek information from several sources and to dialogue with others via

message forums about the information posted. At the core of this ongoing revolution is social

media. The characteristics, common forms, and common functions of social media are

explored here (Manning, 2014).

2.1.2 Social Media as a Tool for Political Communication

Social media has redefined political communication by enabling direct engagement

between politicians and the public. Before the advent of social media, political

communication in Nigeria was often top-down, with political leaders relying on traditional

media to broadcast their messages to the public. However, social media has allowed for a

more interactive form of communication, where citizens can engage with political leaders,

ask questions, and express their opinions. This has led to a more participatory form of

politics, where citizens are no longer passive recipients of political information but active

contributors to political discourse.

Political candidates in Nigeria now use social media platforms to reach voters more

efficiently, especially during election periods. For example, during the 2015 and 2019 general

elections, politicians used Facebook and Twitter to promote their manifestos, interact with

voters, and solicit donations for their campaigns. Social media platforms also enable

politicians to respond to criticisms and address public concerns in real-time. This level of

interaction is particularly important in a country like Nigeria, where the gap between political

elites and ordinary citizens is often perceived as wide. Social media provides a platform for

bridging this gap and enabling more transparent and accessible political communication

(Ogunyemi, 2023).

19
2.1.3 Social Media and Political Participation: Global Context

Social Media and Political Engagement in Developed Democracies

In developed democracies, social media has had a profound impact on political

engagement and participation. Platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram have

reshaped the way political campaigns are conducted and how voters engage with political

processes. In countries like the United States, social media plays a significant role in

influencing voter behavior, especially during election seasons. The 2008 and 2012 U.S.

presidential elections marked a shift in political campaigns, where social media was used not

only for grassroots organizing but also for fund-raising, direct communication with voters,

and spreading political messages. Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign, for example, leveraged

social media to engage young voters and create a sense of community among supporters

(Loader, Vromen, & Xenos, 2014).

Similarly, social media platforms have been pivotal in the rise of movements and

political awareness campaigns in the United States, such as the Black Lives Matter

movement, which was largely organized and spread via Twitter and Instagram. These

platforms have provided marginalized groups and activists with a platform to voice concerns,

mobilize support, and challenge dominant political narratives. The ability to organize

protests, share videos of police brutality, and amplify voices that would have otherwise been

silenced demonstrates the empowering role of social media in modern democratic

engagement (Tufekci, 2017).

However, the positive influence of social media in developed democracies is not

without its challenges. The spread of misinformation, online harassment, and the

amplification of extreme political views have raised concerns about the ability of social

media to contribute positively to political engagement. The 2016 U.S. presidential election,

for example, highlighted the role of fake news, social media manipulation, and targeted

20
political ads in influencing voter perceptions and behaviors. These issues have sparked

debates on how to regulate social media platforms to ensure that they contribute positively to

democracy without facilitating the spread of false information (Gillespie, 2018).

2.1.4 Social Media and Political Engagement in Emerging Democracies

In emerging democracies, social media also plays a crucial role in shaping political

participation, though the dynamics can differ significantly from those in developed nations.

Social media provides a platform for citizens in countries with nascent democratic institutions

to engage in political discourse, mobilize for political change, and challenge corrupt

practices. Countries like Egypt, Tunisia, and Ukraine have seen significant political

movements fueled by social media, especially during the Arab Spring in 2011, when

protesters used platforms like Facebook and Twitter to organize and communicate in real-

time (Howard et al., 2011).

In Nigeria, social media has similarly served as a tool for mobilizing citizens for

political engagement. Young people, in particular, have been active participants in online

political discourse, advocating for electoral reforms and challenging political elites. The

#EndSARS protests of 2020 exemplified the power of social media in Nigeria, where Twitter,

Instagram, and Facebook played key roles in organizing protests, raising awareness about

police brutality, and mobilizing international support. Social media was a central element in

creating a decentralized, leaderless movement that reached millions of Nigerians and people

around the world. This highlights the potential of social media to facilitate political

participation and democratize political engagement, particularly in countries where traditional

political structures may be perceived as unresponsive to the needs of the people (Ibrahim,

2021).

However, in many emerging democracies, social media's impact is often tempered by

challenges such as government censorship, the digital divide, and the lack of media literacy.

21
In some countries, governments have attempted to control or restrict social media to prevent

the organization of protests or political mobilization. In Nigeria, for instance, the government

has passed laws aimed at regulating online speech, such as the controversial Social Media

Bill, which some argue seeks to stifle dissent and limit free speech (Fapohunda, 2023). These

challenges underscore the importance of ensuring that social media remains a tool for

democratic participation rather than a platform for political manipulation and control.

2.1.5 Social Media and Political Participation in Nigeria

Early Use of Social Media for Political Campaigning

In the early stages of social media adoption in Nigeria, political parties and politicians

were slow to embrace these platforms for campaigning. However, by the mid-2000s, as

internet access expanded and social media platforms gained popularity, politicians began to

recognize the potential of these platforms to reach voters, particularly the younger

demographic. The 2011 presidential election marked a turning point in Nigeria’s political

landscape, with political candidates such as Goodluck Jonathan and Muhammadu Buhari

utilizing social media to engage with the electorate. Facebook and Twitter were used to share

political messages, campaign videos, and respond to critics in real-time.

Social media’s role in Nigerian political campaigns became even more prominent in

the 2015 and 2019 elections, where platforms like Twitter became central to political

discourse. During the 2015 election, for instance, political candidates utilized Twitter

hashtags to rally supporters and engage in direct dialogues with voters. Social media was

seen as a way to bypass traditional media channels, which were often seen as biased or

controlled by political elites. By utilizing platforms like Twitter, politicians could speak

directly to the people and circumvent the gatekeeping of traditional media (Odebode &

Okeke, 2016).

22
 This shift to social media engagement also had implications for voter education and

turnout. Politicians and advocacy groups used social media to inform Nigerians about the

importance of voting, how to register, and the voting process. By making political

information more accessible and engaging, social media helped to increase political

awareness, particularly among the youth. This demographic, which had historically been

disengaged from the political process, became more active in political discussions and

expressed their views through social media (Okereke, 2021).

2.1.6 Social Media in the Fourth Republic

The Fourth Republic, which began in 1999 with the transition to civilian rule, has

witnessed significant political developments in Nigeria. As democratic processes have

evolved, so too has the role of social media in Nigerian politics. In the early years of the

Fourth Republic, traditional forms of political engagement, such as party rallies and town hall

meetings, dominated the political landscape. However, as the internet penetration rate grew,

social media platforms became an increasingly important tool for political communication

and engagement.

The 2011, 2015, and 2019 general elections exemplified the transformative role of

social media in Nigerian politics. Social media was used to engage voters, disseminate

campaign messages, and mobilize citizens around key political issues. The emergence of

political movements, such as the #BringBackOurGirls movement, which advocated for the

release of the kidnapped Chibok girls, demonstrated how social media could serve as a

platform for advocacy and activism. Social media also allowed for greater accountability, as

citizens used platforms like Twitter to demand action from the government on issues such as

corruption, poverty, and security (Akinpelu & Olorunnisola, 2020).

However, social media’s impact on political participation in Nigeria is not without its

complexities. While social media has provided a platform for political engagement, it has

23
also been used to spread misinformation and fake news, particularly during election periods.

Political candidates and parties have been accused of using social media to manipulate public

opinion, spread false information, and engage in negative campaigning. This highlights the

need for greater regulation and media literacy to ensure that social media remains a positive

force in Nigerian democracy (Adebayo, 2020).

2.2 Theoretical Framework

Agenda-Setting Theory

How do we keep up on news about what is going on in our neighborhood, our city,

our state, our nation or around the world? How do we find out about the latest fashions,

movies, technology, and diets? We live at a time when a lot is happening everywhere and all

at once. Information about products, peers, family, community, state, nation, and the world

constantly comes at us from an ever growing array of media. News is created and packaged

by an impressive array of sources ranging from journalists to bloggers to YouTube

enthusiasts (Baran & Davis, 2012).

The beginning of agenda-setting theory can be traced as far as 1922, when Walter

Lippmann expressed his concern on the vital role that mass media can do in influencing the

setting of certain image on the public’s mind. In portraying the influence of mass media,

Lippmann gives an example of individuals who supposed to be enemies while their countries

are at war. Instead of becoming enemies, without having access to information about the war

through media, those individuals are able to live harmoniously in a secluded island.

Lippmann indicates on how mass media can set a particular agenda which can influence the

opinions of the public. However, he never used the term ‘agenda setting theory’ in his book.

Nevertheless, he did generate the foundation for the agenda setting theory (Nor, 2014).

Although he did not specifically use the term, Bernard Cohen (1963) is generally

credited with refining Lippmann’s ideas into the theory of agenda-setting. “The press is

24
significantly more than a purveyor of information and opinion,” he wrote. “It may not be

successful much of the time in telling people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in

telling its readers what to think about. And it follows from this that the world looks different

to different people, depending not only on their personal interests, but also on the map that is

drawn for them by the writers, editors, and publishers of the papers they read”.

Parenthetically, it is hard to ignore the limited-effects bias in Cohen’s thinking. He first

argued that the press is rarely successful in telling people what to think, but then said that the

world looks different to different people depending on what the press offers them. Another

way of interpreting this is that Cohen took a mass society perspective and revised it to make

it compatible with the limited-effects perspective (Baran & Davis,

2012).

In the latter years, the term ‘agenda-setting theory’ was however popularized. One of

the most significant researches which contribute to this theory was written by McCombs and

Shaw in 1972. They observe on the capacity of mass media in influencing the voters’

opinion on the United States of America (USA) presidential campaign of 1968. From their

research, McCombs and Shaw found out that mass media did have certain percentage on

those members of the public who frequently referred to information as provided by the

media. Such percentage is increased for those who are driven with the enthusiasm in

following up with the presidential campaign’s information (Nor, 2014).

During September and October of the 1968 USA presidential election, these

researchers interviewed one hundred registered voters who had not yet committed to either

candidate (presumably these people would be more open to media messages). By asking each

respondent “to outline the key issues as he [sic] saw them, regardless of what the candidates

might be saying at the moment,” they were able to identify and rank by importance just what

these people thought were the crucial issues facing them. They then compared these results

25
with a ranking of the time and space accorded to various issues produced by a content

analysis of the television news, newspapers, newsmagazines, and editorial pages available to

voters in the area where the study was conducted. The results?

“The media appear to have exerted a considerable impact on voters’ judgments of

what they considered the major issues of the campaign…. The correlation between the major

item emphasis on the main campaign issues carried by the media and voters’ independent

judgments of what were the important issues was .967,” they wrote. “In short, the data

suggest a very strong relationship between the emphasis placed on different campaign issues

by the media… and the judgments of voters as to the salience and importance of various

campaign topics” (Baran & Davis, 2012).

The power of the news media to set a nation’s agenda, to focus public attention on a

few key public issues, is an immense and well-documented influence. Not only do people

acquire factual information about public affairs from the news media, readers and viewers

also learn how much importance to attach to a topic on the basis of the emphasis placed on it

in the news. Newspapers provide a host of cues about the salience of the topics in the daily

news – lead story on page one, other front page display, large headlines, etc. Television news

also offers numerous cues about salience – the opening story on the newscast, length of time

devoted to the story, etc. These cues repeated day after day effectively communicate the

importance of each topic. In other words, the news media can set the agenda for the public’s

attention to that small group of issues around which public opinion forms (McCombs, 2011).

Agenda-setting, primarily a micro-level effects perspective, has another interesting

contemporary articulation as a more macro-level theory: agenda-building, “the often

complicated process by which some issues become important in policy making arenas”. Kurt

Lang and Gladys Lang (1983, cited in Baran & Davis, 2012) defined agendabuilding “as a

26
more apt term than agenda-setting: (as) a collective process in which media, government, and

the citizenry reciprocally influence one another” (Baran & Davis, 2012).

Agenda-building presumes cognitive effects (increases in knowledge), an active

audience (as seen in the Lang and Lang definition), and societal-level effects (as seen in both

definitions). Its basic premise is that media can profoundly affect how a society (or nation or

culture) determines what its important concerns are and therefore can mobilize its various

institutions toward meeting them and has allowed this line of inquiry to flourish (Baran &

Davis, 2012).

Agenda-setting pioneer McCombs has undertaken an effort to expand and develop the

theory by linking it to a broad range of other media theories, for example, Framing Theory.

He calls his new theory Second-Order Agenda-Setting. McCombs argues that agenda-setting

operates at two levels, or orders: the object level and the attribute level. Conventional agenda-

setting research has focused at the object level and has assessed how media coverage could

influence the priority assigned to objects (e.g., issues, candidates, events, and problems). In

doing this, media told us “what to think about.” But media can also tell us “how to think

about” some objects. Media do this by influencing second-order “attribute agendas.” They

tell us which object attributes are important and which ones are not (Baran & Davis, 2012).

McCombs argues that second-order agenda-setting and framing share common

concerns for attribute agendas (frames), the dynamics of the agenda-setting process (framing

process), and agenda-setting influence (framing effects). McCombs believes that the

integration of agenda-setting theory with framing theory will help clarify some of the

concepts in framing theory. He advocates “explication of a more general theoretical structure

describing the frames and attributes that are important to the communication process”.

Dietram Scheufele provided an overview of agenda-setting, priming, and framing theories in

which he argued that agenda-setting and priming are compatible theories but that framing is

27
quite different because it involves activation of entire interpretive schemas—not merely

prioritization of individual objects or attributes. He wrote:

Agenda-setting and priming rely on the notion of attitude accessibility. Mass media

have the power to increase levels of importance assigned to issues by audience members.

They increase the salience of issues or the ease with which these considerations can be

retrieved from memory…. Framing, in contrast, is based on the concept of prospect theory;

that is, on the assumption that subtle changes in the wording of the description of a situation

might affect how audience members interpret this situation. In other words, that framing

influences how audiences think about issues, not by making aspects of the issue more salient,

but by invoking interpretive schemas that influence the interpretation of incoming

information. (Scheufele, 2000, as cited in Baran & Davis, 2012).

The repetition of messages about public issues in the news day after day, along with

the pervasiveness of the mass media in our daily lives, constitutes a major source of

journalism’s influence on the audience. The incidental nature of this learning, in turn, helps

issues to move rather quickly from the media agenda to the public agenda. Although the

benchmark for the appearance of agenda-setting effects is one to two months, there are, of

course, variations among individuals and across issues. Under conditions of high personal

involvement, the timeframe for measurable effects may be very short.

Individual differences in responses to the media agenda are grounded in the

psychological concept of need for orientation, the idea that we have an innate curiosity about

the world around us. For a wide variety of public affairs, such as evaluating a new

presidential candidate or judging different public policy outcomes, the news media provide us

with this orientation. The higher our need for orientation, the more we tend to search for

information, rely on the media and are predisposed to agenda-setting effects.

28
 An individual’s need for orientation in regard to public affairs is defined by two

components: relevance and uncertainty. In general, the greater the relevance of a topic to an

individual and the greater is the uncertainty about the topic, the higher the need for

orientation. Individuals with a low need for orientation in regard to public affairs pay little or

no attention to news reports and, at most, demonstrate weak agenda-setting effects. At the

other end of the continuum, among individuals for whom both relevance and their uncertainty

about a situation are high, their need for orientation is high.

These individuals typically are of the news, and strong agenda-setting found among

them. The media, of course, are not our orientation to public affairs. Personal experience,

includes communication with our and co-workers, also informs us about For instance, we do

not need the media to significant inflation in the economy; routine reveal its presence.

However, to learn about topics such as budget deficits, our information, if not the only one, is

this case, personal experience is greatly most probably, non-existent. In theory, we do not

need the media to alert us about inflation as routine purchases reveal its presence. But to learn

about abstract economic topics such as budget deficits, our main –if not only- source of

information is the news media issues are obtrusive, that is, they obtrude into our daily lives

and are directly experienced, while other issues are unobtrusive, and we encounter them only

in the news (Zucker, 1978).

This accurate example of the Agenda-Setting Theory and its effect on society

provides the topic with proven credibility and accuracy on how the media’s agenda has been

proven to become the public agenda (Adams, Harf & Ford, 2012).

2.3 Review of Empirical Studies

Recent years have seen a decline in non-profit community participation such as

political party membership. Also, there are several challenges when it comes to engaging

people in party politics. Contrary to popular expectations, the rise of the Internet did not

29
result in increased levels of public participation. On top of that, many political parties are

afraid to lose control over their message when they delegate power and authority to the public

(Effing et al.).

In a study that was run by Zhang et al. (2010) that was interested in how social media

affected different variable including civil engagement. They did this by doing a phone survey

that included 998 individuals that were all ages. The results showed that “reliance on social

networking sites such as YouTube, Facebook, and Myspace was positively related to civic

participation but not to political participation or confidence in government” (Zhang, 2010).

We can see that in this study that social media didn’t influence political participation, even

when they didn’t just get their research from only college aged respondents (Megan, 2017).

Many governments are however recognizing social media platforms as a means to

understand and reach their citizens directly (Geraldine, Melanie and Rene, 2014). In societies

where the majority of people have “free” access to the internet, social media can serve as a

technical base for digital political debate and can facilitate opinion shaping processes, at least

in theory. In this context, “free” refers to the freedom to access the internet, to access

information freely, to express oneself freely without fear of surveillance or persecution.

Academia is still in debate about the impact on societies of this process that has been

described as the new “structural transformation of the public sphere (Geraldine et al., 2014).

And in Nigeria, the social media have become the most accessible source of

information, particularly in the last three general elections. Before the day of the election, the

social media disseminated many messages to the public that went viral. In the 2015 general

election, the social media became a more potent tool and even a more lethal weapon. There

were releases in the form of videos, voice notes, headlines, and broadcasts that made and mar

many political parties and individuals (Oyenuga, 2015).

30
 Issa (2016) identified four ways social media has shaped political communication.

Firstly, it has deepened segmentation of audience triggered by the rise of network television

channels and specialized magazines and websites. Segmentation of audience is a product of

two main elements of the social media: diversification of coverage and selective exposure

(that is, finding information that aligns with the predispositions of individuals). Social media

makes it possible for its users to read and discuss specific issues and then connect with other

individuals who share their beliefs. This has the possibility of creating individual voters that

are fixated on specific issues and who may not be able to relate with the wider issues that are

part of a general election. The existence of different media and brands of information

platform can slit political communication into different segments - all addressing the same

issues from different perspectives.

The second way social media has shaped political communication is by weakening the

gatekeeping capacity of the traditional media. Before the emergence of social media, the

traditional media played a key role in deciding what is sufficiently important to be aired to

the public. This gatekeeper role of the traditional media enables it to set the agenda of public

discourse. In the 1970s, (McCombs and Shaw, 1972) asserted that the mass media force

attention to certain issues. They build up public images of political figures. They are

constantly presenting objects suggesting what individuals in the mass should think about,

know about, [and] have feelings about. McCombs and Shaw insist that a small number of

mass media news producers dominate the market, and therefore, audiences only get

information about what the media decides is important enough to be covered.

By presenting politicians with a platform to speak directly to their constituents and

potential voters without the traditional media intermediary, the social media has largely

curtailed the agenda setting role of the traditional media (Gillin, 2008, as cited in Issa, 2006).

31
Social media outlets have a responsibility to develop and implement social networking

guidelines for their users.

Finally, social media has emerged as the new influencer in social, economic and

political settings. Research has shown that increasing use of social media for political

communication has led to declining newspaper readership and television viewership in many

countries. Under this circumstance, the social media may likely continue to dominate political

communication, and to serve as a tool for gathering and disseminating political messages

(Issa, 2016).

In his study titled ‘The Influence of Social Media on the Voting Behaviour of the

Youth in South-East Nigeria’, Akinlade (2016) found that social media messages do not seem

to influence youths voting preferences as many of them already made up their minds on who

to vote based on primordial sentiments like religion, geopolitical background, ethnic

affiliation and the likes. Nigerian youths regard social media as a credible medium and as

such they frequently access it and spend some time on it daily (Akinlade, 2016).

Bond, Fariss, Jones, Kramer, Marlow, Settle and Fowler (2012, cited Akinlade, 2016)

however carried out an experiment titled ‘61 – million person experiment in social influence

and political mobilization’ and concluded that social media messages do influence people.

They estimated that tens of thousands of votes eventually cast (during U.S Congressional

election 2010) were generated by a single Facebook message. (Akinlade 2016).

Mobilization, Participation and Democracy in America by Rosenstone and Hansen

which looked at elections over time and what makes someone more likely to participate in the

political process. ‘Through the strategic choices of candidates, parties, interest groups, and

activists, political, economic, and social change has tipped the balance of political

participation in America… Candidates now speak directly to the electorate through new

campaign technologies’ (Rosenstone and Hansen, cited in Megan, 2017). This is the reason to

32
why the public is more encouraged to mobilize which we know increases them to go out and

vote. This is an important factor in what makes social media important for citizens, because it

gives individuals access to the candidates in ways that have not always been there. This

research provides us a basis on how new technologies can be used to help get citizens active

in the political process and to get citizens to go out to vote in elections. This research by

Rosenstone and Hansen is an important part of the study of not only political participation,

but to how social media is important for campaigns and citizens (Megan, 2017).

In his study on the 2014 general elections in Romania, Muntean (2015) found that

engaging young adults in political activities on social networking sites, results in higher

levels of traditional forms of participation. “As young adults are considered to be apathetic

towards politics, this strategy might be useful in changing their attitudes and obtaining their

input and opinions”. Therefore, political candidates might invest in their social media

presence, in future electoral campaigns, in order to appeal to the young audience (Muntean,

2015).

A Professor of Communications at Kent State University, Paul Haridakis, opined that:

“The influence of social networking could be significant. Unlike a newspaper article or

television broadcast, the information presented on sites like Facebook is filtered through a

user's circle of friends and acquaintances… they may trust those people more that they would

a media organization or a campaign”. From the foregoing, it is imperative to state that

political participation amongst youth is largely dependent on the use of Facebook and more

youth are showing stronger reliance on thne Facebook as their platform for securing political

information they need to make their informed political decisions (Abdu, Mohamad and

Muda, 2016).

Ayankoya, Calitz and Cullen, (2015) in their study ‘A Framework for the Use of

Social Media for Political Marketing: An Exploratory Study’ showed that “politicians and

33
political organisations can benefit from social media, by taking advantage of the ability to

network with their members, the people in the network of their members and other potential

members”

As the rise of the social media has captured researchers’ attention, and a few studies

investigate its effects on political participation. This study specifically intends to shed light

on the influence of social media on political participation in Nigeria, a case study of Fourth

Republic especially during the 2019 Nigerian general elections.

Gaps in Literature

Despite the growing body of research on social media and political participation in

Nigeria, several gaps remain. Most studies focus on specific election periods rather than

analyzing trends across the entire Fourth Republic, limiting understanding of how social

media’s influence has evolved over time. Research often concentrates on youth or university

populations, neglecting older adults, rural dwellers, and less-educated groups. Additionally,

much of the literature examines online engagement such as liking, sharing, or commenting,

without sufficiently linking these activities to offline political behaviors like voting, activism,

or party membership. There is also limited attention to regional differences, digital access

inequalities, and the role of political efficacy in mediating social media’s impact.

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction

This chapter presents the methodology used to examine the impact of social media on

political participation in Nigeria, with a specific focus on the Fourth Republic. It outlines the

34
design of the study, the area of study, the population, sampling techniques, sources of data,

reliability of the instrument, methods of data collection, administration of the instrument, and

the method of data analysis. The goal is to provide a clear and systematic approach to the

research process, which will help in understanding how social media has influenced political

participation in the Fourth Republic.

3.1 Design of the Study

The research adopts a descriptive research design, which is appropriate for exploring

the impact of social media on political participation. Descriptive research is employed to

describe the nature of the phenomenon under investigation by observing and recording the

way social media has been used by Nigerian citizens in the political domain. This design will

help to examine how individuals, groups, and political entities in Nigeria have used social

media to influence political behavior, decision-making, and overall political engagement

during the Fourth Republic.

In this research, both qualitative and quantitative approaches will be integrated in a mixed-

methods design. This approach allows for a deeper understanding of both the patterns of

social media use and the subjective experiences of individuals involved in political

participation.

3.2 Area of the Study

The area of the study is Nigeria, specifically focusing on the political environment

during the Fourth Republic, which began in 1999. Since the Fourth Republic represents the

period of democratic governance, it is during this time that social media has gained

increasing significance in political engagement. The study will focus on major urban areas in

Nigeria, particularly Abuja (the Federal Capital Territory) and Lagos, which are key political

hubs. These cities are known for their active political engagement and their high penetration

35
of social media platforms. Additionally, a comparison may be made between urban and rural

areas in terms of social media usage for political participation.

3.3 Population of the Study

The population of the study comprises Nigerian citizens who are active users of social

media platforms, including but not limited to Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and WhatsApp.

The focus is on adults aged 18 years and above, as they are eligible voters and are more likely

to participate in political activities. The population will also include political parties, political

analysts, social media influencers, and civil society organizations who utilize social media to

participate in political discourse. The study targets individuals who have used social media

platforms to express political opinions, share political content, engage in political campaigns,

or participate in online voting or discussions during the Fourth Republic.

3.4 Sample Size and Sampling Techniques

Given the vast population of social media users in Nigeria, it is impractical to study

the entire population. Therefore, the study will adopt a stratified random sampling technique

to select participants. Stratified random sampling is ideal for ensuring that different segments

of the population, such as age groups, regions, and social media platforms, are well-

represented in the study. The sample size will be determined using the Cochran formula for

sample size determination. A sample size of approximately 500 respondents will be selected

to ensure a representative and reliable result.

This sample will be drawn from several urban areas across Nigeria, including Lagos,

Abuja, Kano, and Port Harcourt. The respondents will be categorized based on the type of

social media platforms they use most frequently and their level of political engagement. Each

stratum will be sampled proportionally, based on population size.

3.5 Sources of Data

The research will rely on both primary and secondary data:

36
 1. Primary Data: This will be collected through surveys and interviews. The survey

will be administered to Nigerian social media users to collect quantitative data on

their usage patterns, political participation, and engagement on social media. The

interview will involve political analysts, campaign managers, and social media

influencers who have experience in using social media for political activities.

2. Secondary Data: This will include relevant documents, reports, and existing

literature on social media’s role in political participation, focusing on the Fourth

Republic. Sources of secondary data will include academic journals, books, and

credible online publications.

3.6 Reliability of the Instrument

The reliability of the data collection instruments will be ensured by conducting a pilot

study prior to the main data collection process. The pilot study will be done with a small

group of respondents who are similar to the actual participants in the main study. The

responses will be tested for consistency, clarity, and validity. Additionally, Cronbach's

alpha will be used to assess the internal consistency of the survey instrument, with a target

alpha value of 0.7 or higher to ensure the reliability of the instruments.

Moreover, the instruments will be reviewed by experts in the field of political science and

communication studies to verify that they accurately capture the research variables and

questions.

3.7 Method of Data Collection

Data will be collected using a combination of the following methods:

1. Survey: A structured questionnaire will be used to collect quantitative data. The

questionnaire will include closed-ended questions related to the frequency of social

media use, types of political activities undertaken on social media, perceptions about

social media’s influence on political participation, and demographic information. The

37
 survey will be administered electronically (via email or online survey tools such as

Google Forms) and in person, where feasible.

2. Interviews: Semi-structured interviews will be conducted with political analysts,

social media influencers, and campaign managers to gain insights into how social

media has been used for political mobilization, advocacy, and awareness during the

Fourth Republic. The interviews will allow for in-depth responses that provide

qualitative data to supplement the survey findings.

3.8 Administration of the Instrument

The instruments will be administered by a team of trained research assistants who will

be responsible for distributing the questionnaires, guiding participants on how to fill out the

survey, and conducting the interviews. For online surveys, participants will be sent links to

the questionnaire through email and social media platforms. Consent will be obtained from

participants before data collection begins. In cases where in-person administration is

necessary, the survey team will conduct face-to-face interviews in selected urban areas,

ensuring that respondents understand the questions and feel comfortable providing honest

responses.

3.9 Method of Data Analysis

The collected data will be analyzed using both qualitative and quantitative methods:

1. Quantitative Data Analysis: The responses from the survey will be coded and

entered into statistical software such as SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social

Sciences). Descriptive statistics, including frequencies, percentages, and mean scores,

will be calculated to describe the patterns of social media use and political

participation. Inferential statistics, such as chi-square tests or regression analysis, may

also be used to test hypotheses related to the relationship between social media usage

and political participation.

38
2. Qualitative Data Analysis: The qualitative data from the interviews will be

transcribed and analyzed thematically. Thematic analysis will be used to identify

recurring themes and patterns in the responses. The findings from the interviews will

be used to provide a deeper understanding of the specific ways in which social media

influences political participation and the perceptions of political actors and

influencers.

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

39
4.0 Introduction

This chapter presents the results of the data collected through the survey and

interviews. The findings are presented in tables using frequencies and percentages. The

results are aligned with the research objectives and questions. A discussion follows to

interpret the data in light of existing literature.

4.1 Presentation of Results

4.1.1 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents

Table 4.1: Age Distribution of Respondents

Age Group Frequency Percentage (%)

18–24 150 33
25–34 106 23
35–44 101 22
45–54 69 15
55+ 34 7
Total 460 100

Table 4.2: Gender of Respondents

Gender Frequency Percentage (%)

Male 267 58
Female 184 40
Other/Prefer not to say 9 2
Total 460 100

Table 4.3: Educational Qualification of Respondents

Qualification Frequency Percentage (%)

Secondary School 60 13
Undergraduate 294 64

40
Qualification Frequency Percentage (%)
Graduate/Postgraduate 106 23
Total 460 100
Interpretation: The results show that the majority of respondents were young, educated, and

predominantly male. This affirms that Nigerian youths are the most active demographic

group on social media for political purposes.

4.1.2 Patterns of Social Media Usage

Table 4.4: Most Frequently Used Social Media Platforms

Platform Frequency Percentage (%)

WhatsApp 377 82
Facebook 313 68
Twitter 281 61
Instagram 248 54
TikTok 161 35
YouTube 124 27
LinkedIn/Other 92 20

Table 4.5: Frequency of Using Social Media for Political Purposes

Frequency Frequency Percentage (%)

Never 0 0
Rarely 64 14
Occasionally 101 22
Frequently 212 46
Always 83 18
Total 460 100
Interpretation: WhatsApp, Facebook, and Twitter dominate as platforms for political

engagement, with most respondents using them frequently for political discussions.

4.2.3 Social Media and Political Awareness

Table 4.6: Extent to Which Social Media Increased Political Awareness

41
Response Frequency Percentage (%)
Not at all 15 3
To a small extent 49 11
To a moderate extent 115 25
To a large extent 156 34
To an overwhelming extent 125 27
Total 460 100
Interpretation: Over 86% of respondents reported that social media enhanced their political

awareness to at least a moderate extent.

4.2.4 Social Media and Voter Turnout

Table 4.7: Influence of Social Media on Voting Decision

Influence Level Frequency Percentage (%)

Not at all 58 13
No impact 58 12
Somewhat influences 147 32
Strongly influences 197 43
Total 460 100

Table 4.8: Participation in Election Campaigns via Social Media

Response Frequency Percentage (%)
Yes 281 61
No 179 39
Total 460 100
Interpretation: A majority indicated that social media influenced their decision to vote, while

more than half participated in online election campaigns.

4.2.5 Social Media and Political Mobilization

Table 4.9: Participation in Online Political Protests (e.g., #EndSARS)

42
Response Frequency Percentage (%)
Yes 225 49
No 235 51
Total 460 100

Table 4.10: Effectiveness of Social Media in Holding Politicians Accountable

Effectiveness Level Frequency Percentage (%)

Not effective 87 19
Moderately effective 133 29
Very effective 156 34
Extremely effective 84 18
Total 460 100
Interpretation: Almost half of the respondents participated in online protests, and the

majority viewed social media as moderately to very effective in ensuring accountability.

4.2.6 Social Media, Polarization and Misinformation

Table 4.11: Encounter with Political Misinformation on Social Media

Response Frequency Percentage (%)

Rarely 69 15
Occasionally 69 15
Frequently 240 52
Always 82 18
Total 460 100

Table 4.12: Perception of Political Polarization Due to Social Media

43
Response Frequency Percentage (%)
Yes 282 61
No 106 23
Not sure 72 16
Total 460 100
Interpretation: The majority of respondents acknowledged encountering misinformation

frequently and believed social media contributes to political polarization.

4.2 Discussion of Findings

The findings of this study reveal that Nigerian youths are the most active

demographic group engaging with social media for political purposes. The age distribution

shows that a majority of respondents fall within the youthful age bracket of 18–34 years, with

a substantial proportion having at least undergraduate education. This demographic profile is

consistent with studies such as Ojo (2021), which argue that the vibrancy of political

discourse in Nigeria is primarily driven by young, educated, and digitally literate citizens.

The dominance of males in the sample also reflects gender disparities in political

participation, although recent research highlights increasing female involvement in digital

politics (Adeyemo, 2021).

The results further show that WhatsApp, Facebook, and Twitter are the most

frequently used platforms for political engagement, with over 80% of respondents relying on

WhatsApp for political communication. This aligns with the argument by Ogunyemi (2021)

that WhatsApp has become a central tool for grassroots mobilization due to its affordability,

accessibility, and immediacy. The frequency of usage also suggests that social media has

moved beyond being a space for leisure to one of serious political debate and activism.

Notably, over 86% of respondents reported that social media enhanced their political

awareness to at least a moderate extent, thereby reaffirming the view that digital media

bridges the gap between political elites and citizens.

44
 In terms of electoral participation, the findings demonstrate that social media strongly

influences voting decisions and encourages participation in campaigns. With 43% of

respondents reporting that social media strongly shaped their voting choices, this study

supports Nwachukwu (2022), who emphasized that online campaigns and political

advertisements play a decisive role in voter turnout. Moreover, the fact that more than half of

the respondents engaged in online election campaigns underscores the role of digital spaces

in democratizing political participation and amplifying voices that may otherwise be

excluded in traditional campaign structures.

The results on political mobilization further highlight social media’s significance in

Nigerian democracy. Nearly half of the respondents participated in online protests such as the

#EndSARS movement, while the majority considered social media moderately to very

effective in holding politicians accountable. This resonates with the findings of Chiluwa and

Osiberu (2020), who stressed that online platforms create a new form of civic engagement

where citizens demand transparency from leaders. These findings suggest that digital

activism is not only reshaping how citizens interact with government but also influencing

accountability mechanisms in ways that were not possible before the advent of social media.

However, the challenges of misinformation and political polarization emerged as

major concerns. More than half of the respondents reported frequent encounters with false

political content, and 61% agreed that social media fuels polarization. These findings are

consistent with Olatunji and Abubakar (2022), who noted that while social media serves as a

tool for enlightenment, it can also exacerbate division by amplifying fake news, hate speech,

and partisan narratives. This duality underscores the paradox of social media in Nigerian

politics—it empowers citizens while simultaneously threatening the integrity of political

discourse.

45
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Summary

This study examined The Impact of Social Media on Political Participation in

Nigeria within the Fourth Republic. The research explored how social media platforms such

as WhatsApp, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok influence political awareness,

mobilization, voter turnout, and accountability among Nigerian citizens, particularly the

youth. The demographic profile of respondents revealed that the majority were young,

46
educated, and digitally active, reflecting the dominance of youths in online political

engagement.

Findings showed that social media has significantly enhanced political awareness,

with over 86% of respondents admitting that it improved their knowledge of political issues

and processes. Social media also emerged as a strong factor in influencing voting decisions,

with 43% of respondents indicating that it strongly shaped their electoral choices. Moreover,

more than half of the respondents participated in election campaigns through online

platforms, confirming that digital media has become an essential tool for political

mobilization.

The study also revealed that almost half of the respondents engaged in online protests

such as the #EndSARS movement, while the majority considered social media moderately to

very effective in holding politicians accountable. These findings underscore the

transformative role of social media in promoting civic participation and enhancing

democratic governance in Nigeria. However, challenges such as the widespread circulation of

misinformation and the deepening of political polarization were identified as significant

drawbacks, potentially undermining the credibility of online political engagement.

5.2 Conclusion

Based on the findings, this study concludes that social media plays a critical role in

shaping political participation in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic. It has become a central medium

through which citizens—especially youths—gain political awareness, make informed

decisions, mobilize for elections, and demand accountability from leaders. Social media has

democratized political communication by breaking the monopoly of traditional media and

amplifying the voices of marginalized groups.

Nevertheless, the study also highlights the negative consequences associated with

social media, including misinformation, political manipulation, and polarization, which

47
threaten the quality of democratic discourse. Therefore, while social media has become an

indispensable tool for political participation, its use requires careful regulation, ethical

responsibility, and media literacy to maximize its benefits for Nigeria’s democracy.

5.3 Recommendations

In light of the findings, the following recommendations are made:

1. Government and Electoral Bodies: The Independent National Electoral

Commission (INEC) should leverage social media more effectively for voter

education, sensitization, and election monitoring. Policies should also be developed to

regulate online campaigns without infringing on freedom of expression.

2. Political Parties and Politicians: Political actors should adopt social media as a

legitimate platform for issue-based campaigns rather than spreading propaganda and

fake news. This will enhance transparency and trust between leaders and citizens.

3. Media and Civil Society: Fact-checking organizations and civil society groups

should intensify efforts to counter misinformation and promote responsible use of

digital platforms. Collaborative campaigns can help reduce the spread of fake news.

4. Youth Engagement: Nigerian youths should continue to use social media

constructively for civic engagement, advocacy, and holding leaders accountable while

avoiding hate speech and divisive rhetoric.

5. Digital Literacy: There is a need for nationwide digital and media literacy campaigns

to equip citizens with the skills to critically evaluate online content and participate

responsibly in political discourse.

5.4 Limitation of the Study

This study was limited by its focus on a single case study of Nigeria’s Fourth

Republic, which may not fully capture variations across different political contexts or

regions. The reliance on self-reported survey data also posed the risk of bias, as respondents

48
might have overstated or understated their level of engagement. Furthermore, time and

resource constraints limited the scope of data collection to specific demographic groups,

primarily youths with internet access, thereby excluding rural dwellers who may have less

exposure to social media.

5.5 Suggestion for Further Studies

Future research should expand beyond urban youths to include rural populations with

limited digital access, thereby providing a more holistic understanding of social media’s

impact on political participation in Nigeria. Comparative studies could also be conducted

across African democracies to identify similarities and differences in digital political

engagement. Additionally, further research can focus on the role of emerging platforms such

as TikTok and YouTube in shaping political culture among young voters. Finally,

longitudinal studies tracking changes in political participation across multiple election cycles

would provide deeper insights into the long-term impact of social media on Nigeria’s

democracy.

References

Abdu, S. D., Mohamad, B., & Muda, S. (2016). Youths’ political participation through social
media in Malaysia: A case study. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 7(3),
299–310. [Link]

Adebayo, T. (2020). Social media and the challenges of fake news in Nigeria’s democracy.
Journal of Media and Politics, 12(2), 44–58.

49
Adebanwi, W. (2017). The political economy of Nigeria’s Fourth Republic. Cambridge
University Press.

Adebanwi, W. (2017). The political economy of everyday life in Nigeria: Past and present.
James Currey.

Adeyemo, A. (2021). Social media and political discourse in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic.
Journal of African Studies and Media, 13(2), 45–59.

Adeyemo, T. (2021). Social media and political discourse in Nigeria: Opportunities and
challenges. Journal of African Media Studies, 13(2), 145–160.

Adams, W. C., Harf, J. E., & Ford, C. A. (2012). Research methods for political science:
Quantitative and qualitative approaches (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Adelekan, A. (2010). Democracy and political participation in Africa. In D. A. Falade (2014),

Political participation in Nigerian democracy: A study of some selected local
government areas in Ondo State, Nigeria. Global Journal of Human-Social Science:
Political Science, 14(8), 1–7.

Akamare, S. (2003). Political behavior and democratic governance in Nigeria. Cited in D. A.

Falade (2014), Political participation in Nigerian democracy.

Akinlade, B. (2016). The influence of social media on the voting behaviour of the youth in
South-East Nigeria. International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Review,
6(1), 232–245.

Akinpelu, Y., & Olorunnisola, A. (2020). Social media, political activism and democratic
consolidation in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic. African Journal of Politics and
Governance, 9(1), 88–106.

Ayankoya, K., Calitz, A., & Cullen, M. (2015). A framework for the use of social media for
political marketing: An exploratory study. Journal of Public Administration and
Governance, 5(3), 94–107. [Link]

Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. A. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news
and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348(6239), 1130–1132.

Baran, S. J., & Davis, D. K. (2012). Mass communication theory: Foundations, ferment, and
future (6th ed.). Wadsworth.

Bond, R. M., Fariss, C. J., Jones, J. J., Kramer, A. D. I., Marlow, C., Settle, J. E., & Fowler, J.
H. (2012). A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political
mobilization. Nature, 489(7415), 295–298. [Link]

Chiluwa, I., & Osiberu, A. (2020). Social media, youth and political participation in Nigeria.
Discourse & Society, 31(4), 387–407.

Chiluwa, I., & Osiberu, O. (2020). Social media, political awareness and civic participation in
Nigeria. Journal of Communication and Media Research, 12(1), 22–36.

Cohen, B. C. (1963). The press and foreign policy. Princeton University Press.

50
Diamond, L. (2008). The spirit of democracy: The struggle to build free societies throughout
the world. Times [Link]. (2019). The history and evolution of social media.
[Link]

Digital Report. (2021). Digital 2021: Nigeria. DataReportal.

[Link]

Drew, H. (2013). The evolution of social media. Rosen Publishing.

Effing, R., Hillegersberg, J., & Huibers, T. (2011). Social media and political participation:
Are Facebook, Twitter and YouTube democratizing our political systems? In
International Conference on Electronic Participation (ePart) (pp. 25–35). Springer.

Ekwunife, C., & Anisiobi, F. (2018). Political participation and democratic governance in
Nigeria. African Journal of Political Science, 12(1), 34–47.

Ekwunife, O., & Anisiobi, C. (2018). Political participation and democratic consolidation in
Nigeria’s Fourth Republic. African Research Review, 12(3), 15–29.

Falade, D. A. (2014). Political participation in Nigerian democracy: A study of some selected

local government areas in Ondo State, Nigeria. Global Journal of Human-Social
Science: Political Science, 14(8), 1–7.

Fapohunda, O. (2023). Social media regulation and democratic participation in Nigeria:

Examining the social media bill. Journal of African Media Studies, 15(2), 210–226.

Folarin, S. (2017). Electoral participation and democratic consolidation in Nigeria’s Fourth

Republic. International Journal of Politics and Governance, 6(1), 22–36.

Folarin, S. (2017). Electoral participation and voter engagement in Nigeria. Nigerian Journal
of Politics and Policy Studies, 9(1), 77–94.

Gaber, I. (2019). Political polarization and the role of digital media. Journal of Political
Communication, 36(3), 456–472.

Gaber, I. (2019). Political polarization in the digital age: The role of social media. Journal of
Media and Democracy, 7(2), 18–29.

Geraldine, D., Melanie, S., & Rene, K. (2014). Social media and political communication:
Theories, practices and trends. Media Studies Journal, 6(2), 12–25.

Gillespie, T. (2018). Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, content moderation, and the
hidden decisions that shape social media. Yale University Press.

Howard, P. N., Duffy, A., Freelon, D., Hussain, M., Mari, W., & Mazaid, M. (2011).
Opening closed regimes: What was the role of social media during the Arab Spring?
Project on Information Technology and Political Islam, Working Paper 2011.1.
University of Washington.

Ibrahim, J. (2021). Youth, social media and the #EndSARS protests in Nigeria. African
Affairs, 120(481), 1–12. [Link]

51
Issa, J. (2016). Social media and political communication in Africa: The Nigerian
perspective. Journal of African Communication Research, 9(1), 22–40.

Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and
opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68.

Loader, B. D., Vromen, A., & Xenos, M. A. (2014). The networked young citizen: Social
media, political participation and civic engagement. Information, Communication &
Society, 17(2), 143–150. [Link]

Manning, J. (2014). Social media, definition and classes of. In K. Harvey (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of social media and politics (pp. 1158–1162). Sage.

McCombs, M. (2011). Setting the agenda: The mass media and public opinion (2nd ed.).
Polity Press.

McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public
Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176–187. [Link]

Megan, J. (2017). The effects of social media on political participation. Undergraduate

Research Journal, 10(1), 1–18.

Michels, A., & de Lange, M. (2019). Enhancing political participation through digital means?
Government Information Quarterly, 36(3), 101–112.

Michels, A., & de Lange, M. (2019). From voting to public debates: Democracy and political
participation in the digital era. Democratization, 26(3), 444–460.

Muntean, A. (2015). Political participation via Facebook in Romania: The case of the 2014
presidential election. Romanian Journal of Communication and Public Relations,
17(3), 77–92.

Nekola, M. (2014). Political participation and non-participation: The analysis of political

behaviour. European Journal of Political Science, 10(4), 291–307.

Nor, N. A. M. (2014). Agenda-setting theory: A review and analysis. Journal of Media and
Information Warfare, 7(1), 1–10.

Nwachukwu, L. (2022). Citizen journalism and the transformation of Nigerian political

communication. African Journalism Studies, 43(2), 211–229.

Nwachukwu, U. (2022). Citizen journalism and social media activism in Nigeria. African
Media Review, 30(1), 55–72.

Nwankwo, B., & Ugochukwu, C. (2022). Social media and political engagement in Nigeria:
A regional perspective. Journal of African Elections, 21(1), 78–95.

Nwankwo, B., & Ugochukwu, E. (2022). Social media and democratic participation in
Nigeria: A regional perspective. Nigerian Journal of Political Communication, 11(2),
101–119.

52
Oba, R. (2020). Social media and democratic accountability in Nigeria. Media, Culture &
Society, 42(6), 973–989.

Oba, R. (2020). Social media and political participation in Nigeria: Challenges and prospects.
International Journal of Politics and Governance, 8(1), 66–79.

Odebode, O., & Okeke, R. (2016). The use of social media in the 2015 Nigerian general
elections. International Journal of Communication Research, 6(2), 90–98.

Ogunleye, A. (2018). Political awareness and the role of social media in Nigerian elections.
Nigerian Journal of Communication, 15(1), 88–105.

Ogunleye, A. (2018). Social media, political education and democratic consolidation in

Nigeria. Journal of Political Studies, 5(2), 89–102.

Ogunyemi, D. (2021). Youth, social media and political mobilization: Lessons from the
#EndSARS protests. Nigerian Journal of Social Movement Studies, 4(1), 1–19.

Ogunyemi, S. (2021). Youth, activism and digital mobilization: Lessons from #EndSARS
protests. Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 39(4), 543–560.

Ogunyemi, D. (2023). Social media, political communication and the Nigerian electorate.
Journal of Politics in Africa, 5(2), 56–72.

Ojo, T. (2021). The influence of social media on political campaigns in Nigeria. African
Journal of Communication, 27(3), 201–218.

Ojo, T. (2021). Social media and political communication in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic.
Journal of African Media Studies, 13(1), 77–95.

Okeke, V., & Onwuchekwa, C. (2020). Voter engagement and the 2019 Nigerian general
elections. Journal of Electoral Studies in Africa, 5(2), 66–82.

Okeke, A., & Onwuchekwa, J. (2020). Voter engagement in Nigeria: The role of digital
media. African Journal of Democracy and Governance, 7(3), 55–70.

Okereke, C. (2021). Social media and youth political participation in Nigeria’s Fourth
Republic. Nigerian Journal of Social Sciences, 17(1), 45–61.

Olatunji, R., & Abubakar, A. (2022). Misinformation, harassment and democratic

participation on Nigerian social media. Journal of African Media Studies, 14(1), 55–
71.

Olatunji, R., & Abubakar, S. (2022). Social media, misinformation and democracy in Nigeria.
Journal of Information and Communication Technology, 19(2), 143–160.

Oluwaseun, K., & Adeyemi, J. (2023). Socioeconomic determinants of social media

participation in Nigeria. Nigerian Journal of Politics and Policy, 18(2), 112–130.

Oluwaseun, O., & Adeyemi, K. (2023). Social media usage and political participation in
Nigeria. International Journal of African Political Studies, 15(1), 23–39.

53
Omotola, J. S. (2010). Elections and democratic transition in Nigeria under the Fourth
Republic. African Affairs, 109(437), 535–553.

Oyenuga, S. (2015). Social media and the 2015 general elections in Nigeria: Implications for
democratic governance. African Journal of Politics and Society, 4(1), 1–14.

Rosenstone, S. J., & Hansen, J. M. (1993). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in

America. Macmillan.

Sajithra, K., & Patil, R. (2013). Social media – History and components. IOSR Journal of
Business and Management, 7(1), 69–74.

Suberu, R. (2007). Nigeria’s muddled elections. Journal of Democracy, 18(4), 95–110.

Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and tear gas: The power and fragility of networked protest. Yale
University Press.

Umar, A. (2020). Social media and voter turnout in Nigeria’s elections. International Journal
of African Democracy, 4(2), 43–59.

Umar, H. (2020). Voter turnout and democratic participation in Nigeria: The role of social
media. Nigerian Journal of Political Science, 12(2), 33–48.

Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in
American politics. Harvard University Press.

Zhang, W., Johnson, T., Seltzer, T., & Bichard, S. (2010). The revolution will be networked:
The influence of social networking sites on political attitudes and behavior. Social
Science Computer Review, 28(1), 75–92. [Link]

Zucker, H. G. (1978). The variable nature of news media influence. Communication

Yearbook, 2, 225–240.

APPENDIX

QUESTIONNAIRE

Bamidele Olumilua University of

Education, Science and Technology,
Ikere Ekiti.
54
Dear Participant,
The researcher is a student of the above mentioned institution carrying out a research
to investigate the Impact of Social Media on Political Participation in Nigeria (Fourth
Republic). This questionnaire is designed to explore the impact of social media on political
participation in Nigeria, focusing on the Fourth Republic. Your responses will help us
understand the role of social media in influencing political engagement and participation.
Kindly provide honest answers to the best of your ability. All information provided will be
kept confidential.

Your’s Sincerely,

_________________
Esho Iyanuoluwa Sadiat
SECTION A: Demographic Information
1. Gender
☐ Male ☐ Female ☐ Prefer not to say
2. Age
☐ 18–25 ☐ 26–35 ☐ 36–45 ☐ 46–60 ☐ 60+
3. Educational Qualification
☐ Secondary School ☐ OND/NCE ☐ HND/[Link] ☐ Postgraduate
4. Occupation
☐ Student ☐ Civil Servant ☐ Private Sector Worker ☐ Self-Employed ☐ Unemployed
5. Location (City/State): _____________________________
6. Are you a registered voter?
☐ Yes ☐ No
SECTION B: Social Media Usage
7. Which social media platforms do you use frequently? (Tick all that apply)
☐ Facebook ☐ Twitter/X ☐ Instagram ☐ WhatsApp ☐ TikTok ☐ YouTube ☐
Others: _______
8. How often do you use social media per day?
☐ Less than 1 hour ☐ 1–2 hours ☐ 3–4 hours ☐ More than 4 hours

55
9. What is your primary reason for using social media?
☐ Social interaction ☐ News and information ☐ Entertainment ☐ Political engagement
☐ Business
10. How often do you encounter political content on social media?
☐ Always ☐ Often ☐ Sometimes ☐ Rarely ☐ Never
11. Do you follow political pages, groups, or personalities on social media?
☐ Yes ☐ No
SECTION C: Political Participation through Social Media
12. Have you ever used social media to: (Tick all that apply)
☐ Post/share political opinions
☐ Support a political party or candidate
☐ Join political discussions or debates
☐ Participate in online political campaigns
☐ Sign or share online petitions
☐ None of the above
13. Do you believe that social media has increased your political awareness?
☐ Strongly Agree ☐ Agree ☐ Neutral ☐ Disagree ☐ Strongly Disagree
14. How often do you use social media to verify political news or claims?
☐ Always ☐ Often ☐ Sometimes ☐ Rarely ☐ Never
15. Have you ever changed your political opinion based on information seen on social media?
☐ Yes ☐ No
16. Have you ever been influenced by social media to vote or not vote in an election?
☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Not Sure
SECTION D: Perception of Social Media’s Role in Politics
17. In your opinion, how effective is social media as a tool for political participation in
Nigeria?
☐ Very Effective ☐ Effective ☐ Neutral ☐ Ineffective ☐ Very Ineffective
18. Do you believe social media gives ordinary citizens a voice in Nigerian politics?
☐ Strongly Agree ☐ Agree ☐ Neutral ☐ Disagree ☐ Strongly Disagree
19. Do you think social media has reduced or increased political apathy among Nigerians?
☐ Greatly Reduced ☐ Reduced ☐ No Change ☐ Increased ☐ Greatly Increased
20. What challenges do you think affect the use of social media for political participation in
Nigeria? (Tick all that apply)

56
☐ Fake news/misinformation
☐ Internet access/cost
☐ Government restrictions or surveillance
☐ Lack of digital literacy
☐ Cyberbullying/harassment
SECTION E: Additional Comments (Optional)
21. In your own words, how has social media impacted your political engagement during
Nigeria’s Fourth Republic?
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

57