When an interviewer repeatedly crosses the line, a guest has every right to refuse the spectacle
Lere Olayinka was right to draw the line.
Appearing on Arise TV this morning, Olayinka refused to answer questions from Rufai Oseni, insisting that he would only engage with reasonable people. Whether one agrees with his choice or not, the underlying message is unmistakable: nobody is under any obligation to submit to an interviewer who substitutes arrogance, provocation and verbal combat for professional journalism.
Rufai Oseni has, over time, cultivated a reputation for abrasive and confrontational interviews. This is not merely the opinion of his critics. His encounters with several guests have repeatedly descended into heated exchanges, with some guests openly accusing him of being disrespectful, overbearing and unnecessarily combative.
In February 2025, presidential aide Daniel Bwala had a very public confrontation with Oseni and told him bluntly: “You cannot control me or talk to me like a secondary school student.” That episode was not an isolated occurrence. Oseni’s interviewing style has repeatedly attracted criticism for crossing the thin but important boundary between robust questioning and outright discourtesy.
And that boundary matters.
Minister Dave Umahi and so many others, were also victims of this rascality.
A journalist can ask tough questions without being rude. A broadcaster can challenge a politician without insulting him. A professional interviewer can expose contradictions without turning the television studio into a verbal boxing ring.
Aggression is not journalism. Arrogance is not intelligence. Insults are not evidence.
What makes the situation even more troubling is the apparent comfort with which derogatory labels and unprintable descriptions are sometimes introduced into public discourse. Olayinka’s refusal this morning followed a reference to Oseni’s use of the expression “Gbewudani,” which had reportedly been used in relation to another person.
If an interviewer demands respect from his guests, he must demonstrate the same respect.
Rufai Oseni studied Animal Anatomy and Physiology before entering broadcasting. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that academic background; many excellent professionals have built successful careers outside their first academic discipline. But professionalism is not determined by one’s degree; it is demonstrated by one’s conduct.
And that is the issue here.
Oseni is entitled to be fearless. He is entitled to be tough.
He is entitled to challenge those in government and demand answers.
But he is not entitled to confuse incivility with courage or humiliation with accountability.
Lere Olayinka’s refusal should therefore not automatically be dismissed as cowardice or an attempt to evade scrutiny. Sometimes, refusing to participate in a deliberately combative exchange is itself a statement.
The microphone is not a weapon.
The television studio is not a courtroom.
And a journalist is not a judge.
Nigeria needs journalists who can ask uncomfortable questions without becoming insulting, who can challenge power without abusing people, and who understand that professional journalism requires both courage and restraint.
If Rufai Oseni wants his guests to respect the questions, perhaps he should first respect the people answering them.
Lere Olayinka drew his line today. He was entitled to draw it.
~ Hapijo
(Writes from Port Harcourt)