Visual representation of ASUU strikes in Nigeria: a semiotic analysis of cartoons in selected Nigerian newspapers

4.1.1 Metaphorical representation of legislature and lecturer’s salary

In the words of Tsakona (2009), earlier research has claimed that cartoons convey messages via their humorous representation of and comment on reality. In cartoons, meaning is produced either via two semiotic modes, the verbal and the visual, or solely via the visual mode. In the above cartoons, two modes, visual and verbal, convey the intended message. Figure 1a metaphorically represents two participants, a Legislature and a lecturer, as depicted in their attires. CLOTH is used as a semiotic resource in the representation. The lecturer, an ASUU man, is seen putting on an academic gown while the legislature is shown wearing a native dress agbada. Observable in Figure 1a is a comparative view of both legislatures and lecturers in Nigeria.

Figure 1:

Metaphorical representation of legislature and lecturer's salary. (a) Representation of Lawmakers and ASUU Conversation. (b) Representation of Academic staff salary in Nigeria.

Source: Vanguard Newspaper, June 25, 2022 (https://www.vanguardngr.com/2022/06/asuu-strike-gangrene/).

Another semiotic resource employed in the representation above is the use of SIZE. Visual images of bags in the hands of the two participants, as tagged in Figure 1a, use size to represent the mega take home of a legislature in Nigeria and the sekele or meagre allowance of the lecturer. While the legislature was seen carrying a big bag represented by “ALLOWANCES AND SALARY” with both hands, the ASUU man, as depicted in the cartoon, was seen holding his salary with his left hand. Worthy of note here is the legislature’s size compared with the slim Professor with his long neck as evidence of underpaid salary and poor funding of education in Nigeria.

In Figure 1a, it can be deduced that the legislators never embark on strike because they are overpaid. The lecturers embark on strike because they are underpaid and tertiary institutions are underfunded. However, the legislator urges ASUU to sheathe their swords and go back to work. In Figure 1b, there is a visual representation comparing salary and other daily necessities. The cartoonist posed a question thus: “Salary, Why are you not growing?”. While salary remains dwarfed, fuel, food and rent have grown. This means that while the cost of every other thing has increased in the past years due to the economic situation in the country, the salary of university staff members remains the same. While “Fuel” and “Rent” were represented with masculine characters, “Food” receives feminine characters. In addition, the textual representation “Salary is like menstrual cycle. Comes once in a month and disappears within 7 day. If you do not see it, you are worried!” makes a comparison between Salary and the menstrual cycle. In this way, Salary is likened to a woman’s monthly cycle that must be expected monthly. There is repurposing, resemiotization, remediation and re-use of the menstrual cycle in this context.

4.1.2 Visual representation of FG’s attitude towards ASUU

In Figures 2 and 3, several visual codes and texts coupled with gestures, colours, comics and other artefacts have been employed as semiotic resources in the ongoing FG/ASUU deliberations regarding the strike. As Gee (2003: 18) noted, a semiotic domain is “any set of practices that recruits one or more modalities (e.g. oral or written language, images, equations, symbols, sounds, gestures, graphs, artefacts, among others) to communicate distinctive types of meaning”. In this way, Samson and Hempelmann (2006), Hempelmann and Samson (2007) observed that the visual code and its interaction with the verbal one result in the non-linearity of cartoon messages, affecting thus the cognitive processing of cartoons.

Figure 2:

Showing FG/ASUU’s dialogue.

Source: Punch Newspaper, January 18, 2022 (https://ms-my.facebook.com/punchnewspaper/posts/cartoon-flakes/5131123650259089/).

Figure 3:

Showing ASUU’s insistence for proper funding.

Source: Vanguard, December 2018 (https://www.vanguardngr.com/2018/12/strike-asuu-may-not-honour-further-calls-by-fg-national-president/).

Figure 2 shows a contrast between the textual mode and the image represented. First, the text depicting FG’s statement, “We don’t have resources to meet ASUU demands at once”, is in contrast with the hidden bags of money labeled “ N LOAN” and “ N BORROWED MONEY” behind Mr. President. This view supports Figure 3 regarding the conversation between ASUU and FG as represented textually by “POOR FUNDING” on the signpost. In Figure 2, the Federal Government has some hidden money in the form of “Loan” and “Borrowed money”, which to the Government is not for funding education. Likewise, in Figure 3, the heading “ASUU WANTS FG TO NEGOTIATE WITH UNION TO END STRIKE…” reflects ASUU’s request for education funding in Nigeria. Below the picture in Figure 3 is the inscription “HOW ABOUT FUNDING US THE WAY YOU FUND ASO ROCK?” This text depicts a comparison/contrast between ASO ROCK’s funding and Nigeria’s education. On this note, ASUU requests that FG should spend on education as the Government spends on Aso Rock.

The FG, in the two data above as shown in their posture, show unconcerned attitude in their gestures, spreading of hand by Mr. President portraying “We don’t have resources to meet ASUU demands at once” and the folding of hands by the FG representative in the second image, as if he is truly paying attention to ASUU’s request while on the contrary, the opposite is the case. The cartoonist has metaphorically manipulated and represented visual elements in a bid to convey his message.

4.1.3 Visual representation on the looting of Federal Government’s account

According to Kress and van Leeuwen (2006, 2020, visual images fulfill the metafunctions of representing the experiential world (representational meaning), interacting with viewers (interactive meaning) and arranging the visual resources (compositional meaning). In Figure 4, there is the realization of representational meaning by the configuration of processes (e.g. actions) represented by non-funding of education/embezzlement; participants (e.g. actors) comprise FG, ASUU, Ex-NCDC Boss and Accountant General of the Federation; and circumstances (e.g. locations) represented by Federal Account.

Figure 4:

Showing persons with access to FG account.

Source: Nairaland, June 13, 2022 (https://www.nairaland.com/7172332/nigeria-state-nation-cartoons/1).

Foregrounding here is the setting projecting Federal Account being guarded by Mr. President. In the previous figures, it could be recalled that FG had informed ASUU of the non-availability of a fund to finance the educational system in the country. On the contrary, Figure 4 captures the sacked Accountant General of the Federation walking away with N80BN, while the Ex-NCDC Boss was also seen carrying N47BN on his heading without the knowledge of Mr. President. In this way, the cartoonist has, in a metaphorical manner, humorously manipulated the lopsidedness and high level of misappropriation of funds under the current FG administration.

We could recall that the Accountant General of the Federation and the Ex-NCDC Boss have previously been accused of misappropriation and embezzlement. As a result, the cartoonist has been able to mobilize what Kress and van Leeuwen (2006) refer to as narrative and conceptual representations, which involve the “unfolding of actions and events, processes of change” (narrative) combined with “generalized, stable, and timeless essence” (conceptual).

4.1.4 Visual representation of ASUU’s resilience and FG’s frustration

In semiotic domains encoded via verbal and visual means (cartoons, comics, plays, films, sitcoms, among others), meanings are produced, and scripts can be activated and opposed by both (Tsakona 2009: 1172). In the above data, texts such as “OVER FOUR MONTHS OF ASUU STRIKE…”, “STRIKE CONTINUES”, “GO BACK TO CLASSES OR GET FIRED!” and visual images represented by ASUU official, Education Minister, FG Official, Gun, Postal are semiotic resources employed in the cartoon above. In this way, semiotic resources are communicatively shaped to convey the cartoonist’s desired message. This is portrayed via the dominance of power discourse between the Federal Government and ASUU. First, in Figure 5, a figure is seen walking away from the action scene. At the same time, another image depicting the Minister for Education is shown carrying an AK47, threatening/forcing ASUU to return to class or get fired. The third picture represents ASUU climbing the billboard to remove the FG’s banner directing them (ASUU) to get back to work. Here, both images and texts are used to relay the intended message by the cartoonist.

Figure 5:

Showing ASUU’s insistence on strike and FG threat.

Source: Vanguard Newspaper, December 11, 2013 (https://www.vanguardngr.com/2013/12/elechi-calls-scrapping-asuu/).

According to van Leeuwen (2005: 3), semiotic resources are “the actions and artefacts we use to communicate; whether they are produced physiologically with our vocal apparatus, with the muscles we use to create facial expressions and gestures, among others”. Such semiotic resources are traditionally regarded as “signs” in which a gun pointing at the ASUU man above and the facial expression of the Education Minister with mouth and eyeball opened will be regarded as signs of threat and power dominance. In van Leeuwen’s view, the sign is the principal notion of semiotics. The next image further reflects the dominance of power relation between the Federal Government of Nigerian and the Academic Staff Union of Universities.

4.1.5 Visual representation of deliberate breach of agreement by the FG

As O’Halloran (2009: 444) noted, the metafunctional principle is the principle that semiotic resources simultaneously provide the tools for constructing ideational meaning (i.e. experiential meaning and logical relations) and for enacting social relations (i.e. interpersonal meaning). To O’Halloran (2009), therefore, these metafunctions are enabled through the organisation of the discourse, which is the textual metafunction of semiosis. Here, the metafunctional principle provides a basis for examining the functionalities of semiotic resources and for analysing how semiotic choices interact in multimodal discourses to fulfill particular objectives.

Following O’Halloran’s (2009) view, Figure 6 provides semiotic resources that simultaneously employ conversation analysis tools in the dialogue between FG and ASUU. In this context, ASUU has always used the tool of a strike to enforce the FG support for education funding. On the contrary, FG has employed deception laced with empty promises. Therefore visual and textual semiotic resources in terms of visual representation of FG and ASUU, ASUU’s demands represented by “OUR AGREEMENT…N” and the spreading of hand by ASUU in anticipation to receive the “PAYMENT OF EARNED ACADEMIC ALLOWANCES”. FG’s response follows this, “JUST CLOSE YOUR EYES, I WANT IT TO COME TO YOU AS A SURPRISE PACKAGE!”. The FG’s package is a mere “PROMISE! PROMISE!!” Of course, ASUU is not unaware of the empty promise from the Federal Government. Therefore, the text and image show that ASUU is prepared for another round of strikes, symbolised by a weapon hidden behind the participant represented as ASUU.

Figure 6:

Showing FG’s schemes and ASUU’s supposed corrective tool.

Source: Vanguard, November 11, 2017 (https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/11/buhari-asuu-promises/).

Figure 7 is a follow-up on Figure 6. Here, the cartoonist successfully gives a metaphorical visual representation of how FG was able to, once again, through his empty promise, outsmart ASUU. There is now a change in the pictorial position of FG and ASUU, with the ASUU man lamenting his unachievable efforts. The textual undertone in the use of Pidgin in the expression “Pikin wey no allow him mama sleep, e no go sleep too” which literarily means “a child that will not allow his mother to sleep will not rest as well” sums up the pictorial dialogue in Figure 6 on how language has been used as a semiotic resource in the ongoing metaphorical representation of ASUU strike in Nigeria.

Figure 7:

Showing outwitting of ASUU by FG.

Source: Encomium.ng (October 3, 2013) (http://encomium.ng/nigerians-creative-jokes-on-asuu-strike/asuu-strike-cartoon/).

4.1.6 Visual representation of non-impact of ASUU strike on Nigerian politicians’ homes

Figure 8 represents participants with different affordances. Using slicing as a tool for framing, the predominant participants are a father and son in a foreign university at an oversea graduation ceremony. Foregrounded in the image above is a group of graduates celebrating their graduation ceremony. The first participant here is the father, a Nigerian politician. One observes a disposition of interaction between the man and his son. The politician in his native attire agbada is presented condemning ASUU for their incessant strikes. The textual mode “CAN YOU IMAGINE ASUU IS EMBARKING ON FRESH INDEFINITE STRIKE?” furnishes the viewers with information about the Academic Staff Union of the University’s strike action. The conversation was brought to a hurt based on the son’s response, who is unaware of what ASUU stands for. Therefore, the textual mode “DADDY WHAT IS ASUU?” depicts the son’s lack of awareness of the ordeals of the indigent students whose parents could not afford overseas education.

Figure 8:

Showing conversation between father and son in a foreign Institution.

Source: Opinion Nigeria February 8, 2022. https://www.opinionnigeria.com/as-asuu-strike-looms-who-is-to-blame-for-playing-with-our-future-by-abdulrasaq-isiaq-mustapha/.

The four major represented participants in Figure 9 are categorized into two families. The participants are a politician and his son, then a farmer and his son. The participants are represented in three domains: abroad, city and rural areas, with the domain further divided into foreign land and Nigeria. The cartoon also depicts power relations and dominance in terms of status in the framing above. In support of Kress and van Leeuwen’s (2020) upper and bottom on the information value of images, the picture in Figure 8 is an instance of dominance and power relations. Here, the cartoonist positioned the politician and his son in the upper part of the picture, depicting the power relation. On the other hand, the farmer and his son are positioned in the lower part of the picture.

Figure 9:

Showing conversations in two different Nigerian families.

Source: Nairaland.com, June 23, 2022 (https://www.nairaland.com/7172332/nigeria-state-nation-cartoons/5).

The use of multiple modes in the above cartoon manifests in the various visual and textual modes. The textual modes in the first frame are “DADDY I AM ABOUT TO GRADUATE. THERE IS NOTHING LIKE ASUU STRIKE HERE” and “YES MY SON THAT’S WHY I SPENT A LOT OF MILLIONS TO SPONSOR YOU ABROAD”. The two modes give viewers information about the educational system’s stability overseas. Unlike the scenario painted in the second frame of the cartoon with the textual mode “SINCE ASUU REFUSED TO RESUME YOU WILL BE GOING TO THE FARM WITH ME”. Both frames depict a conversation between the two fathers and their sons. The first is the outcome of the oversea study, and the second is the outcome of the ASUU strike necessitated by poor education funding by the Federal Government of Nigeria. The question now is, had the oversea universities failed to spend on their educational system, would the Nigerians be able to send their children abroad? This question is left unanswered.

4.1.7 Visual representation of imminent end to education in Nigeria

In Figure 10, four important visual metaphorical are highlighted as semiotic resources: First is the image of two hands representing FG as shown by ‘F’ and ‘G’ holding a knife; secondly, we have a hardcover book with the inscription ‘EDUCATION’; the third visual representation is that of a university lecturer and finally, a visual portrayal of a university student all situated within a context. There are also textual representations in terms of “POOR FUNDING”, “STRIKE”, “ASUU STRIKE CONTINUES…”, ‘F’ and ‘G’ representing the Federal Government, as well as “!?”.

Figure 10:

Showing scraping of education in Nigeria.

Source: Vanguard, December 23, 2018 (https://www.vanguardngr.com/strike-we-want-to-say-govt-has-continually-falsely-raised-hopes-of-nigerian-public-asuu/).

The two hands are visually represented and given superordinate dominance in this context. The hands are strategically positioned at the top, projecting the biblical mighty hands from above “heaven”. With the aid of the knife, the hand is seen scraping EDUCATION as a sign of elimination. Initially, the Academic Staff Union of the University accused the Federal Government of poor funding of education, but the worse scenario is taking place at this point. As a result, the ASUU man and student were shocked by removing/cutting off the education, which signifies a nonchalant attitude of the Government regarding education in Nigeria. The pictorial signs of shock and exclamatory/question marks above the student’s head serve as semiotic resources that reflect the Government’s attitude towards the educational system in Nigeria.

There are animate and inanimate objects functioning as represented participants in Figure 11. These are a man carrying a shovel, a book and a signage with the textual mode “EDUCATION: 1840–2022”. The pictorial view in Figure 11 metaphorically depicts the Federal Government’s attitude towards education. Here, everything about education in Nigeria, from the inputs of missionaries in 1840 to the point of ASUU’s struggles in 2022, is about to be buried by the Federal Government. The man in the picture is seen performing an action known as the “going on” thing in SFL. The action of the FG is happening in an era when other countries of the world are busy investing in the educational system in their various home countries in the areas of technology, research and innovation for the advancement of their societal well-being.

Figure 11:

Showing the burial of Education in Nigeria May 20, 2022.