By Oru Leonard
The decision by the Nigerian Association of Christian Journalists (NACJ), to honour the National Publicity Secretary of the All Progressives Congress, Felix Chukwumenonye Morka, as “Most Outstanding Political Marketing Communicator of the Year 2026” ahead of the 2027 general elections raises important questions about professional boundaries, credibility and the proper ownership of marketing communication awards.
According to the announcement, the award is intended to recognise Morka’s contribution to political communication and his role in communicating the policies and programmes of the President Bola Ahmed Tinubu-led administration.
There is, of course, nothing inherently wrong with journalists recognising individuals who have distinguished themselves in public communication.
Journalists and media organisations have every right to acknowledge excellence.
The problem, however, arises when a body of journalists begins to confer what is essentially a marketing communication award without demonstrating a clear professional framework, methodology or institutional competence for assessing practitioners in the marketing communication profession.
Calling someone the “Most Outstanding Political Marketing Communicator” is not merely a journalistic compliment. It invokes the language and professional territory of marketing communication.
Political marketing communication is a specialised field involving strategy, audience research, branding, public relations, advertising, media planning, reputation management, campaign communication, messaging and measurable communication outcomes.
Such recognition should therefore be anchored in transparent professional criteria and assessed by people with demonstrable competence in the discipline.
Otherwise, professional awards risk becoming little more than instruments for public relations.
Cheap political points?
The timing of the award makes the situation even more curious.
With the 2027 elections approaching, the APC itself says it expects its publicity secretary to continue shaping the party’s messaging and building public support for the President’s re-election.
Against that background, describing the party’s chief spokesman as the outstanding political marketing communicator of the year can easily be interpreted as political validation rather than an independent professional assessment.
That perception may be unfair to the recipient, but it is a legitimate concern for the organisers.
Awards are supposed to confer credibility on recipients. They should not create questions about the credibility of the award itself.
If an award is presented to a serving partisan political spokesman for excellence in political marketing communication while the country is already into an increasingly competitive pre-election environment, the organisers ought to explain precisely how the selection was made.
- Who were the nominees?
- What were the measurable criteria?
- Was there an independent judging panel?
- Were professional marketing communication practitioners represented?
- Were campaign outcomes, audience engagement, brand perception, strategic innovation and communication effectiveness evaluated?
Without answers to these questions, the award risks being perceived as an honour designed to generate headlines rather than one based on rigorous professional assessment.
Journalism and marketing are different professions
This is not an argument against journalists giving awards.
It is an argument for professional responsibility.
Journalism has its own standards, institutions and professional competencies.
Marketing communication has its own standards, regulatory structures and professional bodies.
A journalist can report on, analyse or recognise excellence in marketing communication. But when an organisation presents itself as an authority for determining who is the outstanding professional in a specialised marketing communication category, it should be prepared to defend the professional basis of that judgment.
This is where institutions such as the Advertising Regulatory Council of Nigeria (ARCON), the Nigerian Institute of Marketing of Nigeria (NIMN) and the Nigerian Institute of Public Relations (NIPR) should take an interest.
The issue goes beyond one individual or one award.
It concerns the protection of professional standards.
If every association, media platform, social organisation or interest group can create professional-sounding categories and confer them without recognised criteria, professional awards could gradually lose their meaning.
Recognition should not become political advertising
There is also a distinction between recognising communication excellence and inadvertently providing political branding.
A political party’s spokesman is, by definition, engaged in partisan communication. His responsibility is to advance and defend the interests and positions of his political organisation.
That work can certainly be professionally executed and deserves objective assessment where appropriate.
But an award that effectively brands a serving political spokesman as the country’s outstanding political marketing communicator, particularly in the run-up to an election, requires a much higher degree of transparency.
Otherwise, what should be a professional honour can become a convenient political talking point.
Indeed, the APC’s decision to issue a congratulatory statement celebrating the award demonstrates how easily such recognition can be incorporated into partisan political messaging.
That should concern everyone who values the integrity of professional communication.
ARCON, NIMN and NIPR should speak up
This development should serve as a wake-up call for professional bodies.
ARCON, NIMN and NIPR should not necessarily concern themselves with who wins individual awards. Their responsibility should be to protect the integrity, standards and professional identity of the industries they regulate or represent.
There should be clearer conversations around the use of professional terminology in awards and recognitions.
If “marketing communicator”, “advertising professional”, “public relations practitioner” and similar professional descriptions are to retain their meaning, they should not be reduced to attractive titles used by organisations seeking publicity for award ceremonies.
The industry should discourage the trivialisation of professional competence.
The bigger issue
This is not about Felix Morka.
It is about whether professional titles and categories should be casually appropriated for awards without credible professional assessment.
Morka may well be an effective political communicator. His long experience in law, advocacy and public affairs, as cited by his party, is not in dispute here.
The question is much simpler: Was the award determined through a credible marketing communication assessment, or was it essentially a journalistic recognition dressed in professional marketing language?
There is a significant difference.
Nigeria needs credible awards that celebrate genuine excellence, not awards that can be interpreted as political endorsements, promotional devices or attempts to score cheap political points.
As the country approaches the 2027 elections, every institution involved in public communication should be especially careful about maintaining independence and credibility.
Awards should elevate professional standards—not blur them.
And when the name of an entire profession is attached to an award, the profession itself has every right to ask: By whose standards, using what criteria, and with what professional authority?
