Connect with us

Column

Securing Truth: The Intersection of Investigative Journalism and Cyber Security in Global South Nations

Published

2 years ago

on

Investigative journalism plays a crucial role in holding power to account, uncovering corruption, and promoting transparency in society. However, in the digital age, journalists are increasingly vulnerable to cyber security hacks and threats that can compromise their investigations and endanger sources. In Global South nations, where resources and infrastructure may be limited, addressing these challenges requires an adaptive approach that combines ethical deployment of cyber security measures with the principles of investigative journalism. This essay explores the intersection of investigative journalism and cyber security in Global South nations, focusing on ethical considerations, collaborative strategies, and the use of technology to safeguard information and integrity.

Investigative journalism plays a crucial role in uncovering corruption, fraud, and wrongdoing in various institutions. However, in recent years, journalists themselves have become targets of cybersecurity hacks in an attempt to silence their reporting and steal sensitive information.
Cyber security hacks targeted at journalists can take various forms, including phishing attacks, malware infections, and social engineering tactics. These hacks can compromise journalists’ email accounts, social media profiles, and even their devices, ultimately undermining their ability to conduct investigative journalism.
One high-profile example of a cyber security hack targeting investigative journalists is the case of the hacking group Fancy Bear targeting journalists at the Associated Press and other media outlets. Fancy Bear, a Russian hacking group linked to the Kremlin, targeted journalists in an attempt to access their emails and other sensitive information.
To protect themselves against cyber security hacks, investigative journalists must practice good digital hygiene, such as using strong and unique passwords, enabling two-factor authentication, and being cautious of suspicious emails and messages. Additionally, journalists can use encrypted communication tools and secure file-sharing services to protect their sensitive information.
Overall, the targeting of investigative journalists through cyber security hacks poses a serious threat to press freedom and the ability to hold powerful institutions accountable. Journalists must remain vigilant and take proactive measures to protect themselves and their important work.
In today’s digital age, journalists face unique challenges in safeguarding their data and ensuring the integrity of their reporting. The increasing prevalence of cyber security hacks poses a threat to investigative journalism, undermining efforts to uncover the truth and hold power to account. While the Global South Nations grapple with these issues, there is a growing recognition of the need to adopt ethical deployment of cyber security measures to protect journalistic integrity. By examining the key issues, thought processes, and solutions at the intersection of investigative journalism and cyber security, journalists can harness synergies to avoid hacks and maintain their commitment to truth-telling.
Maintaining cyber security and integrity as a journalist involves a multi-faceted approach that combines awareness of potential risks, technical solutions, and ethical considerations. Here are some synergies for journalists to avoid cybersecurity hacks and maintain integrity:
1. *Awareness of Risks*: Journalists must be aware of the various cyber security threats they may face, such as phishing attacks, malware infections, and social engineering tactics. They should stay informed about the latest trends in cybersecurity and consistently update their knowledge about potential risks.
2. *Secure Communication*: Journalists should use encrypted communication tools to securely communicate with sources, colleagues, and editors. Encrypted messaging apps like Signal and secure email services like ProtonMail can help protect sensitive information from being intercepted.
3. *Secure Data Storage*: Journalists should store their data securely, using encrypted storage solutions such as VeraCrypt or secure cloud storage services. Regularly backing up data and keeping it encrypted will help protect it from hackers or unauthorized access.
4. *Password Management*: Using strong, unique passwords for different accounts is essential to prevent unauthorized access. Password management tools like LastPass or Dashlane can help journalists generate and securely store complex passwords for various accounts.
5. *Two-Factor Authentication*: Enabling two-factor authentication adds an extra layer of security to accounts, requiring a second verification step beyond just entering a password. This can prevent unauthorized access even if a password is compromised.
6. *Social Engineering Awareness*: Journalists should be cautious of social engineering tactics, where hackers manipulate individuals into divulging sensitive information. Being vigilant and verifying the authenticity of requests for sensitive information can help prevent falling victim to social engineering attacks.
7. *Ethical Considerations*: Maintaining integrity as a journalist also involves ethical considerations when handling sensitive information. Journalists should follow ethical guidelines and seek consent from sources before disclosing any information. Safeguarding the identity of whistleblowers and protecting sensitive data are crucial aspects of maintaining integrity in journalism.
8. *Regular Training*: Continuous training on cyber security best practices can help journalists stay updated on the latest threats and prevention strategies. Media organizations should invest in providing cybersecurity training to their journalists to ensure they are equipped to handle potential risks effectively.
Essentially, maintaining cybersecurity and integrity as a journalist requires a combination of awareness, technical solutions, ethical considerations, and ongoing training. By implementing these synergies and staying vigilant, journalists can protect themselves from cybersecurity hacks and uphold the integrity of their work.
In the ever-evolving landscape of digital threats and information warfare, the symbiotic relationship between effective cybersecurity protocols and principled investigative journalism has become increasingly evident. As we witness a surge in cyber attacks targeting media outlets and journalists worldwide, the need for ethical solutions to safeguard data and preserve journalistic integrity has never been more pressing. By exploring successful examples of how cyber security measures have bolstered investigative journalism practices, we can discern the crucial role that ethical deployment plays in ensuring the persistence and triumph of truth-seeking endeavours.
One notable example of successful cyber security ethical solutions combined with investigative journalism prevailing is the case of the Panama Papers, which was a massive leak of 11.5 million documents from the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca in 2016. The leak was obtained and shared with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) by an anonymous whistleblower.
The journalists involved in the Panama Papers investigation, from news outlets across the globe, meticulously analyzed the leaked documents to uncover widespread tax evasion and money laundering schemes involving high-profile individuals, corporations, and even heads of state. The investigation shed light on the secretive world of offshore finance and exposed how the global elite used offshore accounts to evade taxes and conceal illicit activities.
In this case, the successful ethical solution was the collaboration between journalists and the ICIJ to verify the authenticity of the leaked documents and ensure accuracy in reporting. The journalists involved adhered to ethical guidelines by cross-referencing information, protecting the identities of sources, and verifying the legality of their investigative methods.
The Panama Papers investigation exemplified how a combination of cyber security ethical solutions, such as safeguarding whistleblower anonymity and secure communication channels, with rigorous investigative journalism practices can lead to groundbreaking revelations and hold the powerful to account.
This case underscores the importance of ethical considerations in handling sensitive information, the value of collaboration in investigative journalism, and the significance of protecting sources and data integrity in the digital age. It serves as a prime example of how cyber security measures can be integrated with investigative journalism to expose corruption, promote transparency, and drive positive societal change.
In the burgeoning realm of digital information dissemination and the continued prevalence of cyber threats, the dynamic interplay between adaptive investigative journalism practices and ethical cyber security deployment is particularly crucial in the context of Global South nations. As these regions contend with unique socio-political challenges and technological limitations, the need for a nuanced approach that recognizes the intersection of journalistic integrity and digital protection grows ever more pronounced. By examining how investigative journalism can adapt to these contexts while upholding ethical cyber security standards, a framework emerges for achieving a harmonious balance between information dissemination and safeguarding against external intrusions in the Global South.
In the Global South nations, where there may be limited resources and infrastructure for both investigative journalism and cyber security, a more adaptive and collaborative approach is needed to address challenges and promote ethical practices in both fields. Here are some key considerations for an adaptive view of investigative journalism and cyber security ethical deployment in Global South nations:
1. Capacity building and training: Investing in training and capacity building programs for journalists and cyber security professionals in Global South nations is crucial. Providing education on ethical practices, digital security, and investigative techniques can empower individuals to conduct thorough and ethical investigations while safeguarding their digital communications and data.
2. Collaboration and partnerships: Encouraging collaboration between journalists, civil society organizations, academia, and government agencies can foster a more holistic approach to addressing issues related to corruption, human rights abuses, and cybersecurity threats. By working together, stakeholders can leverage their respective expertise to amplify impact and ensure the dissemination of accurate and reliable information.
3. Use of technology: Embracing technology tools and platforms can enhance the capabilities of investigative journalists and cyber security professionals in Global South nations. Implementing secure communication channels, encryption tools, and digital verification methods can help protect sources, data, and investigative findings from external threats.
4. Advocacy for press freedom and privacy rights: Promoting press freedom and advocating for privacy rights are essential components of ensuring the ethical deployment of investigative journalism and cyber security measures in Global South nations. Protecting journalists’ rights to freedom of expression and access to information is crucial for holding power to account and promoting transparency.
5. Ethical considerations: Upholding ethical standards, such as accuracy, transparency, and accountability, is paramount in investigative journalism and cyber security initiatives in Global South nations. Adhering to ethical guidelines and principles can help build trust with sources, stakeholders, and the public while maintaining integrity in reporting and data protection practices.
Overall, taking an adaptive view of investigative journalism and cyber security ethical deployment in Global South nations requires a multi-faceted approach that prioritizes capacity building, collaboration, technology use, advocacy, and ethical considerations. By working together and embracing innovative strategies, stakeholders can effectively address challenges, promote accountability, and uphold human rights in the digital age.
In conclusion, in a rapidly evolving digital landscape, the ethical deployment of cyber security measures and investigative journalism practices is essential to ensure the integrity and impact of reporting in Global South nations. By building capacity, fostering collaboration, embracing technology, advocating for press freedom, and upholding ethical standards, journalists and cyber security professionals can work together to strengthen investigative efforts, protect sensitive information, and promote transparency. As we navigate the challenges of the digital age, stakeholders in Global South nations must continue to adapt, innovate, and uphold the principles of accountability, integrity, and respect for human rights in their pursuit of truth and justice. Through a collective commitment to ethical journalism and cyber security practices, we can create a safer and more transparent environment for investigative reporting to thrive and make a lasting impact on society.

♦ Professor Ojo Emmanuel Ademola is a Nigerian Professor of Cyber Security and Information Technology Management, and holds a Chartered Manager Status, and by extension, Chartered Fellow (CMgr FCMI) by the highly Reputable Royal Chartered Management Institute.

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Anthony Obi Ogbo

From Threats to Partnership: How Diplomacy Repositioned Nigeria in Washington

Published

1 month ago

on

January 13, 2026

By

“Nigeria reframed terrorism, corrected Washington’s lens, and secured cooperation —a  pure anatomy of diplomatic turnaround“ —Anthony Obi Ogbo

Nigeria’s recent engagement of a United States–based lobbying firm under a reported $9 million contract was widely scrutinized, predictably misunderstood by some, and quietly effective. The objective was clear: to shape Washington’s understanding of Nigeria’s complex security challenges—particularly violence affecting Christian communities—within an accurate geopolitical, intelligence, and regional framework. Such engagements are not unusual. In fact, they are a routine and essential feature of modern international diplomacy, allowing governments to clarify policy positions, counter distorted narratives, and ensure that domestic security crises are not flattened into simplistic talking points for foreign consumption.

In an era where global perception can influence aid, sanctions, military cooperation, and diplomatic goodwill, strategic communication has become inseparable from national security. Nigeria’s decision to professionally engage Washington signaled an understanding that security today is fought not only on the battlefield but also in briefing rooms, policy memos, and diplomatic corridors.

Evidence suggests that this recalibration has begun to yield results. Just days ago, former U.S. President Donald Trump publicly acknowledged—belatedly—that Muslims are equally among the primary victims of ISIS terrorism. It was a striking rhetorical shift for a political figure who had long leaned on broad, inflammatory framing that blurred the distinction between extremist violence and religious identity. That admission did not emerge in a vacuum. It followed sustained pressure from global security analysts, regional experts, and Muslim leaders who have repeatedly challenged the false narrative that terrorism is rooted in faith rather than criminal ideology, geopolitical instability, and organized violence.

More importantly, the acknowledgment coincided with tangible policy movement. Trump-aligned U.S. security networks have quietly expanded counterterrorism cooperation with Nigeria under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration. This development underscores a pragmatic recognition that effective counterterrorism is not achieved through threats, isolation, or performative rhetoric, but through partnership, intelligence sharing, and regional capacity building.

This week, the United States delivered fresh military supplies to Nigeria to support ongoing security operations. The delivery followed recent U.S. air strikes against Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) targets, carried out at Nigeria’s formal request. While air strikes often attract public attention, the more consequential story lies beneath the surface: a shift toward coordinated intelligence operations, logistical support, and sustained military collaboration. This is not symbolic diplomacy. It is functional, operational alignment.

Contrast this moment with an earlier chapter in Nigeria–U.S. relations. During the Jonathan administration, Nigeria experienced significant difficulties in its diplomatic engagement with Washington. Rather than relying on seasoned foreign policy professionals, security strategists, and international communications experts, the government leaned heavily on local intermediaries and political loyalists to interpret and convey Nigeria’s position abroad. The result was a weakened diplomatic posture, fragmented messaging, and persistent misinterpretation of Nigeria’s internal security realities. Critical issues—ranging from Boko Haram’s evolution to regional insurgency dynamics—were often viewed through incomplete or distorted lenses.

That experience offered a lasting lesson: goodwill alone does not translate into influence. In global politics, perception must be managed as deliberately as policy. Strategic silence, amateur diplomacy, or reactive communication leaves a vacuum—one that is quickly filled by external narratives, advocacy groups, or political opportunists with their own agendas.

What has changed now is not merely tone, but method. Nigeria’s current approach reflects an understanding that diplomacy is not capitulation, and lobbying is not a sign of weakness. It is leverage. It is preparation. It is the disciplined articulation of national interest in a language that global power centers understand. By engaging professionally, Nigeria reframed its security narrative—not as a sectarian failure, but as a shared counterterrorism challenge that requires international coordination.

Even Donald Trump’s posture illustrates this transformation. A leader who once relied on threats, ultimatums, and rhetorical spectacle has now, through institutional channels, become part of a support framework working with regional actors to strengthen security and civilian protection. The shift is not ideological; it is a strategic move. And it reflects the enduring truth that diplomacy often succeeds where bluster fails.

In international politics, power is not only measured by firepower or economic weight, but by the ability to persuade, align, and sustain cooperation. Nigeria’s recent experience is a reminder that nations are not judged solely by their crises, but by how effectively they explain, manage, and confront them on the global stage. Diplomacy, when practiced with clarity and professionalism, does not dilute sovereignty—it reinforces it.

♦ Publisher of the Guardian News, Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D., is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015)  and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Continue Reading

Anthony Obi Ogbo

When Air Power Becomes a Christmas Performance: The Illusion of Success in Trump’s Nigerian Strike

Published

2 months ago

on

December 28, 2025

By

“Bombs alone do not defeat ideology. Precision without intelligence is noise.“ —Anthony Obi Ogbo

When President Trump announced his authorized United States air strike against ISIL (ISIS) fighters in northwest Nigeria on Christmas Day, there was an immediate burst of celebration on Nigerian social media. For a country exhausted by years of kidnappings, massacres, and territorial insecurity, the announcement sounded like long-awaited international support. Memes circulated, praise poured in, and some Nigerians hailed Trump as a decisive global sheriff finally willing to act where others hesitated.

But after the initial euphoria settled, a sobering assessment emerged: the strike appeared less like a strategic military intervention and more like a made-for-television spectacle designed to burnish Trump’s international strongman image.

This was not the first time the United States has launched air strikes in Africa or the Sahel under the banner of counterterrorism. From Libya to Somalia, from Syria to Yemen, U.S. “precision strikes” have often been announced with confidence and celebrated with press briefings—only for the targeted groups to regroup, mutate, and, in some cases, expand their reach. In Nigeria itself, years of foreign-backed security assistance have failed to decisively neutralize Boko Haram or its ISIS-affiliated offshoots. Instead, violence has fragmented, spread, and grown more complex.

No verifiable evidence has been produced to confirm high-value ISIS targets were eliminated

The Nigerian strike followed a familiar pattern. U.S. officials framed it as a blow against ISIS-West Africa Province (ISWAP), a group aligned with the global ISIS network. Trump’s language suggested a decisive intervention—an act of muscular diplomacy signaling that America still projects power where it chooses. Yet no verifiable evidence has been produced to confirm high-value ISIS targets were eliminated, leadership structures dismantled, or operational capacity degraded.

What followed was a digital smokescreen. Social media accounts, many anonymous and unverified, began circulating gruesome images of dead bodies and destroyed villages—photos long associated with banditry in Nigeria’s northwest. These images were quickly repurposed to “prove” the success of Trump’s strike. However, this is where the narrative falls apart under scrutiny.

Trump’s mission, as publicly stated, was to target ISIS. Not bandits. Not kidnappers. Not rural criminal gangs. ISIS is a transnational terrorist organization with ideological, financial, and operational links across continents. Bandits, by contrast, are primarily armed criminal groups—motivated by ransom, cattle theft, and territorial control, not global jihad. Conflating the two may be politically convenient, but it is analytically dishonest.

Killing or displacing bandits does not equate to dismantling ISIS. In fact, indiscriminate or poorly targeted air strikes often worsen the situation, pushing criminal groups to radicalize, splinter, or align with extremist factions for protection and legitimacy. This pattern has been observed repeatedly in conflict zones where military force substitutes for intelligence-driven strategy.

A truly successful counterterrorism raid is not measured by dramatic announcements or viral images. It is measured by clear, verifiable outcomes, including the confirmed elimination of high-ranking commanders, disruption of recruitment and financing networks, seizure of weapons caches, and—most importantly—sustained reductions in civilian attacks. None of these benchmarks has been credibly demonstrated in the aftermath of Trump’s Nigerian air strike.

Instead, Nigeria wakes up to the same grim reality: villages remain vulnerable, highways unsafe, and communities terrorized. The strike did not change the security equation. It did not empower Nigerian forces. It did not restore civilian confidence. And it certainly did not neutralize ISIS as a strategic threat.

This air strike offered Nigerians symbolism, not security.

In that sense, the air strike was not merely ineffective—it was a failure dressed in the language of strength, executed for optics, and amplified for political gain. It offered Nigerians symbolism, not security.

If the goal is truly to eliminate ISIS and its affiliates in West Africa, the path is neither theatrical nor unilateral. It requires robust intelligence sharing, sustained training, and real-time coordination with Nigerian and regional forces. It demands targeted arms assistance, logistical support, and investments in surveillance capabilities that allow local militaries to act decisively and lawfully. Above all, it requires a long-term commitment to strengthening state capacity—not fleeting air shows announced from afar.

Bombs alone do not defeat ideology. Precision without intelligence is noise. And celebration without results is self-deception. Trump’s Nigerian air strike may have produced headlines, but history will remember it for what it was: a failed mission masquerading as success.

♦ Publisher of the Guardian News, Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D., is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015)  and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Continue Reading

Anthony Obi Ogbo

Trump’s Nigeria Strike: Bombs, Boasts, and the Illusion of Victory

Published

2 months ago

on

December 26, 2025

By

“With Obama, Al-Qaeda was not eliminated by noise; it was suffocated by intelligence.“ —Anthony Obi Ogbo

It has now been confirmed that the United States acted in collaboration with Nigeria in the recent strike on Islamic State elements in northwest Nigeria. That cooperation deserves recognition. Intelligence-sharing between Washington and Abuja is necessary, overdue, and welcome. Terrorism is transnational; defeating it requires allies, not isolation.

But let us be clear: bombs alone do not defeat terror. And Donald Trump’s strike—trumpeted loudly on social media before facts, casualties, or strategy were disclosed—was less a turning point than a performance.

Trump’s announcement was a classic spectacle: “powerful,” “deadly,” “perfect strikes.” No numbers. No clarity. No accountability. Just noise. It was the same choreography America has deployed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen, and Somalia—places where U.S. airpower landed hard, headlines screamed victory, and instability deepened afterward. Violence escalated. Militancy adapted. Civilians paid the price.

History is unkind to airstrikes sold as solutions.

Nigeria knows this better than anyone. Long before Trump’s tweet, the Nigerian military had already conducted multiple operations in the same terror corridor. At least five major strikes and offensives stand out:

  • First, Operation Hadarin Daji, launched to dismantle bandit and terror camps across Zamfara, Katsina, and Sokoto, involving sustained air and ground assaults.
  • Second, Operation Tsaftan Daji, which targeted terrorist hideouts in the Kamuku and Sububu forests—precisely the terrain now in the headlines.
  • Third, repeated Nigerian Air Force precision strikes in the Zurmi–Shinkafi axis, neutralizing commanders and destroying logistics hubs.
  • Fourth, joint operations with Nigerien forces, disrupting cross-border supply routes used by ISIS-linked groups.
  • Fifth, recent coordinated offensives involving intelligence-led raids, special forces insertions, and follow-up ground clearing in the northwest.

These were not symbolic gestures. They were Nigerian-led, Nigerian-funded, Nigerian-executed. And yet, there were no fireworks on social media. No flag-waving hysteria. No intoxicated praise of Nigerian commanders as saviors of civilization.

Why? Because there is a dangerous segment of Nigerians who suffer from what can only be called the American Wonder mentality—a colonial hangover that applauds anything louder simply because it comes from Washington. The same Nigerians who ignore their own soldiers dying in silence suddenly abandon Christmas meals to celebrate Trump’s tweets, typing incoherent praise, mangling grammar, and mistaking spectacle for substance.

It is embarrassing. And it is intellectually lazy.

Terrorism is not defeated by volume or virality. It is defeated by intelligence—quiet, patient, unglamorous work. The United States knows this. Barack Obama understood it. Al-Qaeda was not dismantled through social media theatrics or chest-thumping declarations. It was weakened through intelligence fusion, financial disruption, targeted operations, local partnerships, and relentless pressure on leadership networks—mostly without fanfare.

Obama did not tweet. He acted. So what actually works against groups like ISIS in Nigeria?

First, intelligence supremacy. Human intelligence from local communities, defectors, and infiltrators matters more than bombs. Terror groups survive on secrecy. Break that, and they collapse.

Second, financial and logistical strangulation. Terrorists run on money, fuel, arms, and food. Cut access to smuggling routes, illicit mining, ransom flows, and cross-border trade, and their operational capacity withers.

Third, community stabilization and governance. Terrorism thrives where the state is absent. Roads, schools, policing, and justice systems matter. People who trust the state do not shelter terrorists.

Fourth, regional coordination, not episodic strikes. Nigeria, Niger, Chad, and Burkina Faso must sustain joint pressure, not reactive operations driven by headlines.

Airstrikes can support these strategies—but only as tools, never as substitutes.

Trump’s strike may have killed militants. It may have disrupted camps. That is commendable. But it is not a solution. It is a moment. And moments, without strategy, fade.

If Nigerians truly want terror defeated, they should stop worshiping foreign loudness and start demanding disciplined intelligence, consistent policy, and respect for the men and women already fighting on the ground.

Real victories are quiet. Real security is built, not tweeted.

♦ Publisher of the Guardian News, Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D., is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015)  and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Continue Reading

Trending