By every honest standard, the vicious social media campaign against Lt. Col. Olabisi Olalekan Ayeni, Acting Deputy Director of Army Public Relations, 82 Division Nigerian Army, is not an indictment of his integrity — it is a desperate backlash from those unsettled by the Nigerian Army’s growing operational successes in the South-East.
What is being presented in some corners of the digital space as “exposure” is, in truth, a familiar playbook of distortion, ethnic baiting, and psychological warfare. The target this time is an officer whose only “offence” is that he has remained steadfast in communicating the truth about military operations in one of Nigeria’s most volatile theatres. Lt. Col. Ayeni is not a propagandist. He is a disciplined military communicator operating in a battlespace where truth itself has become a casualty of insurgent-aligned misinformation.
At the centre of the controversy are claims by a social media commentator, Harry Da Diegot (@trigottiste), who alleged that Lt. Col. Ayeni manipulated images in a March 12, 2025 press release. The allegation, amplified by hostile online actors and eagerly embraced by IPOB/ESN apologists, hinges on metadata interpretations designed to suggest the images originated outside Imo State. But beyond the digital theatrics lies the real objective: to discredit a military spokesperson whose updates have consistently exposed the activities, hideouts, and infrastructure of violent criminal and separatist elements in the South-East.
This is not accidental. It is strategic.
When violent actors and their sympathisers cannot challenge the substance of military gains on the ground, they attack the credibility of those reporting them. When they cannot deny the dismantling of camps, the destruction of bomb-making sites, the recovery of weapons, or the disruption of criminal networks, they turn to smear campaigns, doctored narratives, and emotional manipulation. That is exactly what is unfolding here.
Lt. Col. Ayeni’s record speaks louder than the noise.
As Acting Deputy Director of Army Public Relations for the 82 Division, he has served in one of the most complex information environments in the country — where armed separatist propaganda, fear-driven disinformation, and anti-state narratives are deployed daily to confuse the public and weaken confidence in security institutions. In such a theatre, the spokesperson is not merely reading press statements; he is helping to secure the information domain. He is defending public trust. He is countering lies designed to embolden violent actors and demoralise troops.
That responsibility requires not just communication skills, but courage, discipline, and strategic clarity.
And Lt. Col. Ayeni has demonstrated all three.
His public engagements and press briefings have consistently reflected restraint, professionalism, and fidelity to duty. He does not indulge in theatrics. He does not court applause. He does not inflate operational achievements for media drama. Rather, he communicates with the calm precision expected of an officer who understands both the weight of his words and the sensitivity of the theatre in which he serves.
This is precisely why he deserves commendation — not condemnation.
It is important to remind the public that military spokespersons do not invent operational outcomes. They relay the results of missions executed by officers and soldiers who risk their lives daily in forests, villages, highways, and flashpoints across the South-East. When the Army announces the dismantling of insurgent enclaves, the neutralisation of armed elements, or the destruction of criminal shrines and bomb factories, these are not the products of imagination. They are the outcomes of intelligence-led operations, field engagements, and sacrifices made under fire.
To casually dismiss these reports as “fake” because of a social media narrative is not just irresponsible — it is insulting to the troops who bleed to make those victories possible.
Even more troubling is the ethnic colouration maliciously introduced into the attacks against Lt. Col. Ayeni. Branding him with divisive ethnic labels is not criticism; it is calculated incitement. It is an attempt to drag a national security institution into the gutter of sectional politics. The Nigerian Army is not an ethnic militia. It is a federal institution composed of Nigerians from every corner of the country, sworn to defend the territorial integrity and unity of the republic.
Lt. Col. Ayeni’s service reflects that national ethos.
At no point has his public communication projected ethnic bias. If anything, his statements have consistently reinforced the imperative of national unity, inter-agency cooperation, and collective security. His work in the South-East has not been about stigmatising a people; it has been about confronting violent actors who hide behind grievance, weaponise propaganda, and terrorise innocent citizens under the false banner of “liberation.”
This distinction matters.
There is a world of difference between legitimate civic expression and armed criminality. There is a difference between political dissent and the burning of police stations, the assassination of security personnel, the enforcement of illegal sit-at-home orders, and the intimidation of communities. Those who continue to sanitise such violence through digital activism or pseudo-intellectual propaganda are not defenders of justice; they are apologists for disorder.
And that is why officers like Lt. Col. Ayeni are so important.
In an age where lies spread faster than bullets, the role of a military public relations officer is no longer ceremonial — it is operational. The information war is real. It shapes public perception, affects civilian cooperation, influences troop morale, and can even determine whether criminal groups gain sympathy or lose it. In that battlefield, Lt. Col. Ayeni has stood his ground with commendable composure.
His critics may trend for a day.
His service will endure.
The Nigerian public must therefore be careful not to confuse virality with credibility. A trending accusation is not evidence. A coordinated digital pile-on is not proof. Anonymous handles, agenda-driven influencers, and emotionally charged ethnic rhetoric cannot be allowed to override institutional facts, operational realities, and the professional record of an officer who has served with discipline and honour.
If anything, the ferocity of the attacks against Lt. Col. Ayeni should tell Nigerians one thing: his communication has been effective enough to rattle those who thriv
That alone is revealing.
At a time when soldiers are making sacrifices to restore peace in the South-East, the least the nation can do is refuse to join campaigns designed to delegitimise those speaking for them. The work of the 82 Division in countering insecurity is difficult enough without the added burden of malicious propaganda from those who would rather defend violent actors than confront the truth of their crimes.
Lt. Col. Olabisi Olalekan Ayeni is not the villain of this story.
He is a professional officer doing a difficult job in a dangerous environment. He is part of the Army’s effort to ensure that Nigerians hear not only the sounds of battle, but the facts behind it. He is helping to deny violent separatists and their enablers the luxury of controlling the narrative.
And for that, he deserves respect.
In the end, the mob may shout, the propagandists may trend, and the apologists may spin their digital falsehoods — but none of that can erase character, service, or sacrifice. Lt. Col. Olabisi Olalekan Ayeni has earned his place not in the dock of social media malice, but in the honour roll of officers defending Nigeria on two fronts: the battlefield and the battle for truth. Those attacking him should be seen for what they are — not champions of accountability, but enablers of chaos. And history is never kind to those who side with propaganda against patriotism.
