In recent years, the Nigerian public has witnessed an increasing reliance on emotional displays in crisis management.
Prominent figures in business and entertainment have turned to public apologies and tearful appeals as a means of addressing controversies.
The trend gained attention when Sujimoto’s chief executive officer, Sijibomi Ogundele, appeared in a video where he shed tears while denying fraud allegations.
The imagery of the real estate entrepreneur in visible distress drew widespread commentary across digital platforms.
In contrast, Fuji musician Wasiu Ayinde, popularly known as KWAM1, issued a calmer apology following a reported airport disruption.
His response lacked the emotional display of Sujimoto’s presentation, instead opting for a straightforward statement to the public.
Together, these two episodes highlight different approaches to reputation management under public pressure.
Globally, the use of tears as a tool for image repair has been widely documented.
From corporate executives in Europe to entertainers in America, the “crying apology” has become part of modern crisis communication.
The structure often follows a familiar pattern: a quiet setting, a subdued tone, and an eventual breakdown into tears.
The goal is to project vulnerability, encourage empathy, and close the gap between public figures and their audiences.
In Nigeria, these methods now appear in the toolkits of leaders across industries and politics.
Past events in the National Assembly have also shown lawmakers resorting to emotional expressions during heated debates.
Senators have been seen to shed tears on camera while lamenting issues of insecurity or defending their positions on controversial matters.
Such incidents fuel the perception that tears are not only personal but also performative instruments in the public arena.
Analysts note that repeated exposure to similar scenarios can weaken their impact.
Audiences, especially in the digital age, are equipped to assess body language, tone, and consistency in messages.
When tears are unaccompanied by concrete accountability or remedial action, they may be received with scepticism.
The role of technology has also intensified scrutiny.
Social media platforms allow viewers to replay videos, dissect facial expressions, and compare them with past behaviours.
In this climate, an emotional outburst can quickly be framed as either genuine remorse or calculated performance.
For businesses, the risks are particularly significant.
A poorly received apology can damage brand reputation, erode stakeholder confidence, and reduce market value.
Conversely, a measured and factual response may restore credibility more effectively than a tearful appeal.
In the entertainment sector, audience loyalty is often tied to perception of authenticity.
When performers are seen as sincere, their brands recover more quickly from controversy.
But when displays appear exaggerated, fans may disengage, citing insincerity or manipulation.
These dynamics place public figures at a crossroads in reputation management.
While emotional expression is part of human behaviour, its overuse as a strategy risks rendering it ineffective.
The Nigerian experience mirrors global patterns where crying on camera has been alternately celebrated and ridiculed.
The challenge lies in distinguishing genuine contrition from tactics aimed at buying sympathy.
For Sujimoto’s CEO, the tears sparked debate but did not silence questions about the allegations he faces.
For KWAM1, a drier apology brought less drama but underscored a different method of image repair.
Both cases illustrate the evolving relationship between public figures, media, and reputation.
The lesson emerging is that reputation management cannot rely solely on emotional performance.
Practical steps such as transparency, accountability, and corrective measures carry more weight than tears alone.
Nigeria’s audiences, shaped by repeated exposure to public controversies, are now more alert to insincerity.
This shift demands a rethink in how businesses and entertainers communicate in moments of crisis.
Public tears may still move people, but only when backed by verifiable action and responsibility.
Without such measures, crying risks becoming a predictable act that no longer holds persuasive power.
The age of performative remorse is giving way to an era where substance outweighs spectacle.
In this new reality, reputation will be judged less by emotional display and more by corrective action after the cameras stop rolling.
Discussion about this post