The Presidency has criticised Arise TV host Rufai Oseni following a heated exchange with veteran journalist Reuben Abati during Thursday’s edition of The Morning Show, with President Bola Tinubu’s Special Adviser on Policy Communication, Daniel Bwala, accusing the presenter of repeatedly attacking the character of other people.
The confrontation occurred during a discussion about the 2027 presidential election and comments attributed to the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, concerning his political support for Tinubu.
Wike, who remains associated with the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, was discussed after a trending video in which he said he would work to deliver the FCT and Rivers State to Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress, APC, in the 2027 presidential election.
Rufai questioned the political implications of Wike’s position, particularly because the minister remains a national figure within the PDP while openly expressing support for the APC presidential candidate.
During the discussion, Rufai also directed criticism at the PDP presidential candidate, Senator Sandy Onor. In making his point, he referred to Onor as “Gbewudani”, a term he explained as meaning “hold my shirt”.
Rufai used the expression to suggest that the PDP candidate was effectively standing by while a prominent figure in his own political party was campaigning for Tinubu.
The remark immediately drew Abati’s objection, turning what had been a political discussion into a tense exchange between the two presenters.
Abati warned Rufai that comments of that nature could expose the television station to legal action. He argued that the statement had gone beyond political commentary and could be interpreted as an attack on the integrity of the PDP candidate.
“Rufai, be careful, you’ll bring lawsuits on this station that the station will never be able to pay,” Abati said during the programme.
He further accused Rufai of maliciously questioning the integrity of the PDP candidate and said the presenter had also created an innuendo capable of damaging the reputation of Sarafadeen Alli.
“Only you have maliciously impugned the integrity of the PDP candidate. You have also created an innuendo to tarnish the image of Sarafadeen Alli. Be careful,” Abati said.
Rufai pushed back against the warning, suggesting that Abati’s reaction was linked to disagreements between them during political discussions.
“It’s only when I disagree with your views that you start shouting lawsuits,” Rufai responded.
The exchange subsequently attracted a reaction from Bwala, who used his social media platform to sharply criticise the television host.
Bwala, a senior presidential adviser responsible for policy communication, described Rufai in highly personal terms and accused him of repeatedly making statements that damage the reputations of others.
“That’s what you get when you recruit a narcissistic OAP masquerading as a journalist,” Bwala wrote on his official X handle.
“There is no day he does not defame people’s character. But when you say one thing about him, he will tweet 24 times in a day against you,” he added.
Bwala’s comments effectively extended the on-air dispute into a wider political and media controversy, placing Rufai’s style of commentary at the centre of the debate.
The Presidency’s criticism came after the disagreement between Rufai and Abati had already drawn attention to the risks involved when political commentary moves into allegations or statements concerning an individual’s personal integrity.
At the heart of the original discussion was Wike’s reported intention to support Tinubu in the 2027 presidential election despite his continued position within the PDP. Rufai questioned how such a political alignment could coexist with Wike’s status as a prominent PDP figure.
His reference to Onor as “Gbewudani” was intended, according to the explanation he gave on air, as a way of criticising the PDP candidate for allegedly remaining silent while Wike backed an opposing presidential candidate.
Abati, however, took issue with the wording and warned that such descriptions could have consequences for both the individuals involved and the broadcaster.
The disagreement illustrates the increasingly heated nature of political discussions ahead of the 2027 election, with media personalities, politicians and political commentators facing growing scrutiny over statements made during live broadcasts and on social media.
For Bwala, the incident was also an opportunity to attack Rufai’s broader approach to public commentary. His allegation that the presenter routinely defames people’s character was not accompanied by specific examples in the post cited in the report, but represented Bwala’s stated assessment of Rufai’s conduct.
The description of Rufai as a “narcissistic OAP masquerading as a journalist” was similarly Bwala’s characterisation and should be understood as political criticism rather than an independently established finding about the television host.
The dispute also highlights the contrasting positions of the two presenters. Abati, while challenging Rufai’s choice of words, focused his criticism on the potential legal consequences of statements made during the broadcast. Rufai, meanwhile, defended his position by suggesting that Abati was particularly forceful when their views differed.
The disagreement did not change the political question that had triggered the discussion: whether Wike’s reported support for Tinubu creates a contradiction with his continued prominence within the PDP and what that means for the party’s presidential campaign.
Rufai’s comments were therefore rooted in a broader debate over political loyalty and party alignment ahead of 2027, but the language used to make the argument became the immediate source of disagreement.
Abati’s warning centred on the possibility that remarks concerning the integrity or reputation of political figures could expose the broadcaster to lawsuits. Rufai’s response instead framed the confrontation as part of a recurring disagreement over their respective views.
Bwala subsequently took the dispute beyond the television programme by publicly targeting Rufai on X, accusing him of routinely attacking others while reacting strongly when criticism is directed at him.
The development has consequently produced two separate layers of controversy: the original political argument over Wike’s support for Tinubu and the subsequent dispute over the boundaries of political commentary and personal criticism in broadcast journalism.
With the 2027 election approaching, such exchanges are likely to remain a prominent feature of political television and social media discussions. The incident involving Rufai and Abati demonstrates how quickly a debate over party politics can shift toward questions about language, reputation and potential legal exposure.
For now, the Presidency’s intervention has added another dimension to the controversy, with Bwala openly condemning Rufai’s conduct while the presenter remains at the centre of the debate following his exchange with Abati.
The remarks from Bwala, however, are his own assessment of Rufai and do not establish that the allegations against the television host are factual. Similarly, Abati’s warning about possible lawsuits was expressed as a caution during the broadcast rather than evidence that legal proceedings had been initiated.
The episode ultimately began with a question about political allegiance but evolved into a dispute over how journalists and broadcasters should discuss politicians and other public figures, particularly when comments could be interpreted as attacks on personal integrity.
As political campaigning and positioning for 2027 intensify, the confrontation serves as another example of the increasingly sharp exchanges surrounding Nigeria’s political landscape and the role of television personalities in shaping public debate.
Presidency Attacks Rufai Oseni After On-Air Clash With Reuben Abati
