Engaging the blackbox-glassbox paradox: Media imperatives in the era of artificial intelligence, By Omoniyi Ibietan

Artificial Intelligence

Therefore, in the AI era, development is not only a function of infrastructure, capital, or policy. It is a function of trust, and trust must now be engineered. This is irreducible and I hope the Federal Government will direct the Federal Ministry of Communications, Innovation and Digital Economy to begin, quickly, a scalable, phased implementation of Nigeria’s National Artificial Intelligence Strategy (NAIS).

My presentation with the above title, was the first lead paper at the opening ceremony of the First Mass Communication International Conference that took place at the main auditorium of the permanent site of Usmanu Danfodiyo University, Sokoto.

In the preamble, I reiterated that communication IS NOT MERELY THE TRANSFER OF INFORMATION but a meaning-making and meaning sharing activity characterised by shared intentionality – a purely cooperative activity of mutual understanding and shared intent and mutual goals. Yes, the goals are constant. Burgoon and Ruffner (1978) concluded their reasoned definition of communication with that proviso and it is still valid. As such, communication pushes parties involved towards a common ground for the formation of social reality. This is the reason that communication is fundamentally a cooperative social process of meaning-sharing and meaning-making.

Inspired by “A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition” (Tomasello, 2005), I recalled that communication heralds language, as evident in children’s use of gestures, pointing and pantomimes in communication during their pre-linguistic years and how humans incrementally acquired language. I advanced the logic of cognitive and developmental science, giving it a push with Yuval Harari’s (2011) ‘Cognitive Revolution’, thus implicitly rejecting Chomsky’s (1957, 1959) ‘generative grammar’ and its foundational theory, ‘universal grammar’. I was intentional, certainly not absolutist because there is no absolutism in academia but I wanted to reimagine communication in a more contextual, rational, and contemporary sense.

I mean, how can we hold on to such a simplistic definition of communication when, today, a brief remark or a press statement – frequent, popular activities of communication management – no longer constitute mere information, the moment they hit the virtual networks. As Achi (2026) noted, “a single statement becomes a national [or global] conversation, reputation is no longer shaped by what was said alone. It is shaped by how fast meaning is assigned to it” and meaning is assigned in the context of a variety of pressures in the social environment, Nigerian ‘fault lines’ and geopolitics, legitimate or inordinate emotions, including those emanating from the avant-garde of a largely informed but restless demography of upcoming persons. This is the context in which Moniepoint’s Eniolorunda’s recent concern was received, although he goofed or perhaps did not remember that what you say is not as memorable as how you say it.

Anyway, I reflected briefly on theory. What about the place of theory, broadly speaking? I explored Amartya Sen’s “The Capability Approach”, Everett Rogers’ “Diffusion of Innovation”, and “Technological Determinism”, particularly from the lens of Marshal McLuhan, to explain how Nigeria might approach the adoption of Artificial Intelligence. I used my work (Ibietan, 2023:107) to explain the role of theories in research and professional practice, as perspectives that offer general clarifications about what a study might reveal, or explain the dimension through which a researcher is investigating a phenomenon. Theories basically exist to explain and interpret situations, to enhance the understanding of our world, our interpretation of occurrences and to support our effectiveness in professional practices.

I spoke to the value of AI and possible derivable benefits and appreciated the Federal Government’s affirmation of the National Artificial Intelligence Strategy (NAIS) 2025, which I reviewed and requested participants at the conference to review too. Nigeria surely needs to be in the AI optimisation loop, as the technology becomes the key driver of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (FIR), but we need to tease out and implement the strategy in phases, and with a focus on culture institutions like the media, then security, agriculture, education (broadly) and health. I stated that if we adopt good models, funding may not really be an issue. The five pillars consolidated into three focal areas and the 32 strategic objectives of NAIS 2025 look good and imaginative, but I wish there was sufficient and more objective considerations for impact assessment.

Kenya recently called off a partnership with Microsoft on data centres because the country found that it had no capacity to generate the amount of electricity required for it. Nigeria already identified funding, “ethical applications, algorithmic transparency, data privacy and potential labour market displacement,” but we must…