Who Controls the Truth? Decoding CNN’s EndSARS Report

23BE032963

          On the night of October 20, 2020, something tragic happened in Nigeria that people are still trying to make sense of. Young Nigerians had gathered at the Lekki Tollgate in Lagos to protest peacefully against police brutality, especially the harsh treatment from a police unit called SARS (Special Anti-Robbery Squad). They were singing the national anthem, holding up flags, and asking for a better Nigeria. But that night, gunshots rang out. Videos and eyewitnesses said soldiers opened fire on the crowd. The government denied it, and people were left confused, hurt, and searching for answers. That’s when CNN released a powerful investigation called “How a Bloody Night of Bullets Quashed a Young Protest Movement,” which tried to show what really happened at Lekki that night. But not everyone saw the documentary the same way.

          To understand why people reacted differently, we can use Stuart Hall’s Encoding/Decoding theory. Hall, a cultural theorist, said that when media (like a news report or documentary) is created, it is encoded with a message—that is, the creators have a certain meaning or truth they are trying to send out. But when people decode or watch it, they don’t always get the message the same way. Based on their background, beliefs, or experience, people may agree completely (dominant reading), partly agree (negotiated reading), or completely disagree (oppositional reading). CNN’s report was full of videos, expert analysis, satellite images, and interviews. It was clearly meant to show that the Nigerian army shot peaceful protesters and that the government tried to hide it. Everything—from the emotional music to the shaky phone videos—was designed to make people feel the pain, shock, and urgency for justice.

          For many young Nigerians and #EndSARS supporters, the documentary felt like the truth they had been waiting for. This group decoded CNN’s message exactly how it was meant—they believed it. To them, CNN was finally saying what they already knew: that their friends, siblings, or fellow protesters were attacked while asking for change. Many had already stopped trusting local news stations, which were either silent or slow to report what happened. So when CNN stepped in with evidence and a global spotlight, it gave them hope that the world was finally listening. Social media was flooded with support—people reposted clips and wrote things like “We told you!” and “Now you believe us!” For them, the documentary wasn’t just news—it was a form of justice and validation.

          But not everyone saw it the same way. Some people watched the documentary and felt torn. These are people who might have believed that something bad happened at Lekki but weren’t sure if CNN got every detail right. This is what Stuart Hall calls a negotiated reading. This group included some Nigerians, people in the diaspora, and even some international observers. They believed protesters were hurt but also felt CNN may have made some assumptions or missed parts of the story. Some were unsure about the number of people killed or whether all the videos used in the documentary were fully verified. They were touched by the emotional side of the report but remained careful, asking questions and not jumping to conclusions. They agreed that the protest mattered and people suffered, but they weren’t sure about blaming the government 100%.

          Then there was a third group that rejected the CNN documentary entirely. This group, which included government officials, some soldiers, and pro-government supporters, believed CNN was spreading lies. They saw the documentary as a foreign attack on Nigeria’s image. They accused CNN of being biased and claimed that the military only used blanks, not live bullets. The government dismissed the report as “fake news” and said CNN was trying to create problems in the country. This is the oppositional reading—where people see the message but reject it completely.Their reasons were rooted in distrust of foreign media, national pride, or simply defending the government. To them, CNN had no right to tell Nigeria’s story or accuse its leaders without solid proof.

          What Stuart Hall’s theory helps us understand is that people don’t all see media the same way. CNN may have created a strong documentary that tried to show what really happened at Lekki, but people watched it through different lenses. Some felt heard and seen, others were unsure, and some felt attacked. In a country like Nigeria, where the media is often distrusted and politics is deeply divided, stories like this one don’t land the same way for everyone. The #EndSARS movement was not just about ending police brutality—it was about demanding fairness, truth, and a better Nigeria. CNN told one version of that truth, but how it was received depended on who was watching and what they already believed.

          In the end, the CNN report wasn’t just about what happened at Lekki—it was about who gets to define what happened. Whether people accepted the story, questioned it, or rejected it, they were all reacting to the same event through different truths. And that’s what makes media so powerful and so complicated. Stuart Hall reminds us that meaning doesn’t stop at the newsroom—it continues in living rooms, on Twitter, and in conversations across the world. The fight for justice, especially in moments like Lekki, is not just about the facts—it’s about who gets to be believed.