One story, different narratives: Framing the post-subsidy cost of living crisis in the Nigerian press

The present study employed framing theory to analyze how major Nigerian newspapers constructed the narrative of the cost-of-living crisis following the 2023 fuel subsidy removal and naira flotation. Through a quantitative content analysis of 505 articles from six newspapers (Punch, The Nation, The Guardian, Vanguard, Daily Trust, Leadership), the research applies Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) typology of five news frames and an analysis of news media functions. The findings reveal a stark bifurcation in media narratives. A clear dichotomy emerged: one group of newspapers (Punch, The Nation, The Guardian) adopted an Accountability Model, heavily emphasizing frames of attribution of responsibility and human interest while performing a critical watchdog function. In contrast, another group (Vanguard, Daily Trust, Leadership) employed a Conflict-Event Model, dominated by the conflict frame and a passive information function, thereby depersonalizing the crisis and sidestepping accountability. The study concludes that the Nigerian press did not present a unified narrative but instead constructed parallel realities, fundamentally shaping public understanding along ideological and editorial lines. This fragmentation has profound implications for democratic accountability, highlighting how media framing can fracture public consensus during a national emergency.