Prominent social media critic, Martins Ortse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan (VDM), has denied allegations of threatening the life of the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike. The allegations surfaced following the controversial revocation of a plot of land belonging to the family of late Colonel Paul Osakpamwan Ogbebor, a revered war veteran and Nigeria’s first NDA cadet (code 001).

A WhatsApp broadcast alleged that VDM issued threats against Wike, escalating tensions online. However, in a swift reaction via Instagram, the outspoken critic firmly distanced himself from the claim, describing it as a fabricated misrepresentation of his advocacy efforts.

“I did not threaten Nyesom Wike’s life; I am not associated with the WhatsApp broadcast making the rounds,” VDM stated. He clarified that his actions were limited to urging the minister to reassess the land documents presented by Ogbebor’s family, emphasizing their legitimacy.

VDM also alleged that his video, which aimed to advocate for justice, was maliciously edited to carry a threatening caption. “What I do with my platform is to speak up for people who are oppressed and seek justice when they are in the right part of the law. I have never threatened anybody’s life,” he reiterated.

Opinion: Advocacy or Misrepresentation?

The controversy surrounding this incident underscores the challenges social media activists face. On one hand, VDM’s advocacy has shone a light on cases of alleged injustice, such as the revocation of a veteran’s family property. On the other hand, the ease of altering and misinterpreting digital content creates vulnerabilities for those in the public eye.

VDM’s explanation highlights a broader societal issue: the need to critically evaluate information disseminated on social media. As digital platforms continue to play a significant role in justice advocacy, distinguishing genuine messages from manipulated ones is crucial to maintaining the integrity of public discourse.

Conclusion

VDM’s passionate appeal for a reassessment of the Ogbebor family’s land case aligns with his track record of supporting the oppressed. However, the spread of doctored content serves as a cautionary tale about the potential pitfalls of digital advocacy.

The ball is now in Wike’s court to either revisit the land documents as VDM has urged or maintain his stance, while social media users are reminded to approach viral claims with skepticism and verify before amplifying.

What do you think about the situation? Should more be done to protect digital advocates from misrepresentation, or does this come with the territory? Let’s discuss!