International Journal of Sub-Saharan African Research (IJSSAR)

Background: The farmer-herder conflict in Nigeria’s Middle Belt has escalated from localised disputes into a significant humanitarian crisis. Media representation plays a pivotal role in shaping public perception and conflict dynamics; however, empirical research comparing blame-oriented versus solution-oriented framing remains limited.
Objective: This study analysed how The Daily Trust and The Punch newspapers framed the conflict in Benue State between January and June 2018, specifically quantifying the prevalence of blame versus reconciliation narratives.
Method: Guided by Entman’s framing theory, the study employed a mixed-methods content analysis of 20 purposively sampled news reports, editorials, and opinion pieces. Results: Blame-oriented frames slightly predominated (55%) over solutions-oriented frames (45%). The Punch favoured accusatory narratives, whereas The Daily Trust exhibited a more balanced approach. Reporting was largely episodic, focusing on immediate violence rather than thematic which will address long-term structural causes. While the media fulfills an accountability “watchdog|” role, the high frequency of blame-oriented reporting risks deepening communal polarisation in Benue State.
Conclusion: Although The Daily Trust and The Punch provide essential oversight, the tendency to prioritise immediate blame over long-term solutions creates a volatile narrative environment that can exacerbate tensions in Benue State.
Unique Contribution: This study provides systematic, empirical evidence of the tension between accusatory and constructive journalism. It identifies the "Watchdog Paradox," where traditional accountability-seeking reporting inadvertently fuels ethnic and resource-based polarization during active crises.
Key Recommendation: Editors should adopt "solutions journalism" to shift the discourse toward sustainable reforms—such as modern ranching and community-led mediation—rather than focusing primarily on retributive demands.