TRADING FAKE NEWS FOR MONEY: The Case Of Ejike Ofoegbu As A Cautionary Tale - Christian Aburime.

Let us not mince words. Let us not dress this up in the conciliatory language of diplomatic press statements. What Ejike Ofoegbu intentionally did, a self-styled online publisher of ‘Igbo Times Magazine’ and ‘INews’, was not only “irresponsible journalism,” or a “lapse in judgment,” it was a deliberate, calculated, and criminal assault on truth.

One that he now apologetically admits was motivated by nothing more noble than clicks, online traffic, audience engagement, and financial gain.

And now that the walls have closed in, now that the long arm of the law has reached his doorstep, Ofoegbu has issued what he calls a “Public Apology and Full Retraction.” But let us be brutally honest: this apology is not a moral awakening on the part of reckless bloggers like him. It is a survival strategy.

It is the desperate attempt of a man who has finally realised that fabricated stories about a sitting governor and his family do not exist in the lawless wild world of the internet; they exist in a Nigeria with cyber laws, defamation statutes, and courts that do not pamper character assassination.

Anyone who reads Ofoegbu’s apology again, slowly, will be shocked at the sheer audacity of his fabrications. He did not only concoct and publish false quotes attributed to Anambra State Governor, Professor Chukwuma Charles Soludo, CFR, and his son Ozonna. He constructed an entire theatre of the absurd: a governor “disowning” his son and claiming he was “ordered from Temu”; a son calling his father a “drunkard who beat my mom”; a “drinking competition” between a governor and a minister; and election predictions manufactured from thin air!

These were satanic works of fiction presented as journalism. Ofoegbu didn’t just fail to verify his sources; he was the source. He conjured these narratives in the same manner a novelist constructs characters, except that his characters were real people whose reputations he tarnished for clicks and monetisation.

“I sincerely admit that I published such stories in pursuit of online traffic, audience engagement, and financial gain,” he writes.

There it is. The confession that strips away any pretense of journalistic privilege. This was not press freedom. This was fraud. This was not informing the public. This was exploiting the public’s appetite for sensationalism while monetising human dignity.

But as the saying goes, “everyday is for the thief, one day is for the owner.” Ofoegbu's  cup of iniquity is full, and the long hands of the law have caught him. For too long, Nigerian bloggers operating in the shadows of responsible journalism have hidden behind the shield of “media practice" while engaging in acts that would constitute criminal defamation, cyberstalking, and character assassination in any serious jurisdiction. The law is clear. The law has always been clear. And Ofoegbu is about to discover that apologies do not erase crimes.

The Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) Act 2015,  Section 24 criminalises cyberstalking, providing that any person who knowingly or intentionally sends a message or other matter by means of computer systems or network that is false, for the purpose of causing a breakdown in law and order, prejudice, or misleading the recipient, commits an offense. The penalty? Imprisonment for up to 10 years and/or a fine of up to N25 million.

In fact, Section 38 specifically addresses identity theft and impersonation relevant, given Ofoegbu's fabrication of quoted statements attributed to Governor Soludo and his son. Also, the Criminal Code Act (Laws of the Federation), Section 373 defines defamatory matter as that which “exposes a person to hatred, contempt, or ridicule, or which causes him to be shunned or avoided.” The fabricated stories about Governor Soludo being a wife-beater and drunkard certainly meet this definition

Section 375 goes further to provide that a person who publishes defamatory matter, knowing it to be false, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment. And the Nigerian Cybercrime Act 2024 amendment strengthens provisions against the spread of false information, explicitly targeting individuals who use computer systems to generate and disseminate false content for financial gain or to cause harm.

Under Nigerian common law, libel (defamation in permanent form, including online publication) is actionable per se, meaning damage is presumed. The plaintiff does not need to prove actual harm. The false statements about Governor Soludo’s character, his family relationships, and his son’s fabricated rebellion constitute serious libel that attracts substantial damages.

While Ofoegbu goes to have his day in court and face the legal consequences of his criminality, we must now turn our gaze to the institutions that steward Nigerian journalism practitioners. This is the time such institutions as the Nigerian Union of Journalists(NUJ), Nigeria Press Council, Association of Nigeria Bloggers, and others must rise to confront and banish charlatans and quacks masquerading as professionals for filthy lucre!

Ejike Ofoegbu is not just an individual who went rogue. He is a symptom of an ecosystem that may have unwittingly tolerated the erosion of journalistic ethics in the digital space. The NUJ, which prides itself as the conscience of the Nigerian press, must disown Ofoegbu.  He is not a journalist. He is a fabricator. He has no place in any professional body that claims integrity.

The Nigeria Press Council, established under the Nigeria Press Council Act to promote high professional standards and investigate complaints against the press, must act with unprecedented firmness. Ofoegbu’s case should trigger a formal inquiry, a public censure, and a permanent blacklisting. Any less is an abdication of duty.

And the Association of Nigeria Bloggers, if it aspires to be anything more than a social club for content creators, must publicly disown Ofoegbu and institute a code of conduct with teeth to bite The blogging profession in Nigeria cannot afford to have its reputation tethered to fraudsters who trade in manufactured outrage. Such are meant to be discredited and disowned to serve as a deterrent to others.

Ofoegbu’s apology acknowledges that “no amount of money or online attention can justify spreading false information.” One wishes this consciousness had arrived before the published viral lies, not after the law came knocking. But that is the nature of consequence: it teaches what conscience failed to.

And now, to every blogger, every “publisher”, or every social media operative who has looked at the Ejike Ofoegbu saga and thought, “He was careless. I am smarter. I won’t get caught.”

Make no mistakes: you will be caught! Yes, the digital footprint is permanent. The screenshots are archived. The victims are watching. And the law may be slow, but is surely mapping your trajectory. It is a matter of time before you are caught.

To those specifically engaged in what has become a campaign of calumny against Governor Soludo through his son: you are not smart. You are not brave. You are not “speaking truth to power.” You are repeating the exact playbook that just collapsed under the weight of its own falsehoods. You are building your house on the same quick sand that swallowed Ofoegbu whole.

So, it pays to always consider your stories carefully. Are your sources verified, or are they ‘Ofoegbu-verified’, meaning invented in your imagination?

Do you have recordings, documents, and corroboration, or are you blinded by just “engagement metrics”? Can you survive a defamation suit, or will you too be drafting apologies in panic?

Unfortunately, the Cybercrimes Act does not distinguish between ‘big bloggers’ and ‘small bloggers.’ The Criminal Code does not care about your follower count. And Governor Soludo’s legal team is ready to prove that they will not treat character assassination as mere politics.

Yet, Ejike Ofoegbu’s apology is not the end of this story. It is the beginning of accountability. His day in court will establish precedent. His prosecution will send signals. The question is not whether Nigeria’s cyber laws are sufficient. They are. And while Ejike Ofoegbu’s apology is structurally sound, it is morally insufficient. It admits the ‘what’ and the ‘why’, but it does not address the systemic damage: the erosion of public trust, the poisoning of political discourse, the normalisation of ‘news’ as fiction, and the reputational harm to the innocent.

In the end, what Nigeria needs is not more performative apologies after the fact of criminality. What society needs is prevention through justice and consequences.