Framing Protest: A Stuart Hall Reading of CNN’s EndSARS Coverage Lens: Stuart Hall’s Encoding/Decoding Model

 To begin with, Stuart Hall’s encoding/decoding model emphasizes the process by which media messages are constructed (encoded) and then interpreted (decoded) by different audiences. CNN’s documentary report, “How a Bloody Night of Bullets Quashed a Young Protest Movement,” presents a powerful and emotionally charged account of the Lekki Toll Gate shooting that occurred during Nigeria’s #EndSARS protests in October 2020. Through carefully selected video footage, survivor testimonies, forensic evidence, and a serious narrative tone, CNN encodes the report with a dominant meaning: that Nigerian security forces violently suppressed peaceful protesters and attempted to cover it up. The editorial choices, such as the use of dramatic music, graphic visuals of gunfire and wounded protesters, and close-up interviews with victims, are not neutral. They are intentional constructions designed to prompt empathy, shock, and international concern.

Moreover, the structure of the report supports this encoded message by building a timeline of events backed by satellite images and digital evidence, which together build a sense of undeniable truth. CNN’s investigation seeks to establish journalistic credibility while confronting the Nigerian government’s denial. The dominant reading expected by the producers is one of outrage at state violence and solidarity with the Nigerian youth who were attacked while exercising their democratic rights. By employing a global media platform and English-language framing, the report is tailored not only for Nigerian viewers but for international observers who may lack local context. Thus, CNN encodes its message with urgency, moral clarity, and evidence-based accountability, positioning itself as a truth-teller in a politically contested event.

In contrast, when decoding occurs, audiences bring their own cultural backgrounds, political knowledge, and emotional investments into the interpretation of the media message. For international audiences, particularly those in Western democracies, the dominant reading encoded by CNN is often accepted with little resistance. These viewers are likely to decode the coverage as a truthful and shocking exposure of authoritarian brutality. The visual evidence, survivor narratives, and forensic support align with Western values of human rights, freedom of speech, and civil protest. As such, this audience decodes the message dominantly, internalizing CNN’s framing as legitimate journalism and viewing the Nigerian government’s denials as dishonest or even criminal.

However, some viewers within international contexts may adopt a negotiated position. For instance, audiences with more critical perspectives on Western media might question CNN’s motives or selective focus. They may accept that the violence occurred, but interpret CNN’s coverage as part of a broader pattern of Western media highlighting dysfunction in African nations while ignoring similar abuses in the West. These viewers might sympathize with Nigerian protesters but also remain skeptical about whether CNN’s motives are purely journalistic or subtly patronizing. Thus, even among international viewers, decoding is not always straightforward; cultural, racial, and geopolitical biases inform how audiences perceive narratives of African suffering. This negotiated reading acknowledges the truth of the coverage while remaining cautious about its underlying power dynamics.

Turning to local reception, Nigerian audiences are far more divided in their decoding of the CNN report. On one side, many Nigerian youths, especially those directly involved in the #EndSARS protests, received the report with relief and validation. After weeks of government denial and misinformation, CNN’s report became a form of international confirmation. For these viewers, the decoding aligned dominantly with the encoded message. The report reinforced their lived experiences and offered hope that international pressure could hold the government accountable. In this sense, CNN’s message provided both psychological and political support. It was decoded not just as news, but as evidence in the struggle for justice and change.

Yet, other Nigerian audiences, particularly government supporters, older generations, and state-controlled media consumers, decoded the report oppositely. They viewed CNN’s investigation as foreign interference, a deliberate attempt to discredit Nigeria’s sovereignty and destabilize the country. This oppositional reading was fueled by official statements denying the shootings, nationalist rhetoric, and suspicion of Western agendas. For this audience, the report’s framing of the military and government as aggressors was seen as biased or exaggerated. They rejected the dominant meaning encoded by CNN and instead interpreted it as part of a hostile narrative that undermined Nigerian pride and control. Additionally, this group often emphasized the chaos and violence that accompanied protests in other states, using this context to frame the Lekki Tollgate incident as a necessary security response rather than a massacre. Hall’s model shows how ideological positions can lead to such direct oppositional decoding, regardless of the factual content.

Furthermore, CNN’s report demonstrates how media framing is not just about what is shown, but how it is constructed for emotional and political effect. The decision to use survivor voices, slow-motion replays, satellite imagery, and digital verification lends the coverage a tone of forensic credibility. This makes it harder for audiences to dismiss it outright, yet, as Hall argues, meaning is never fully fixed. The power of the report lies not only in its content but in how it resonates with viewers’ identities. Nigerian youths, who felt gaslit by their own media, saw in CNN a mirror of their trauma and truth. The report became a tool for collective memory and resistance. By contrast, for audiences already aligned with state narratives or skeptical of Western influence, the same content appeared manipulative or imperialistic.

This dynamic highlights the central insight of Hall’s model: the audience is not passive. Their social location, political beliefs, and media literacy deeply shape interpretation. CNN may have controlled the encoding, but decoding is an unpredictable, context-driven process. The power of the #EndSARS report lies in its ability to provoke discussion and force competing narratives into the public sphere. It reveals how a single media text can mean radically different things to different people, even while claiming objectivity. In the case of Nigeria, where media trust is fragmented and political polarization is high, CNN’s report became a battleground for truth, memory, and legitimacy.

In conclusion, CNN's report on the Lekki Tollgate shooting shows how media messages are interpreted differently based on viewers' backgrounds. CNN's intended message of state violence was received as such by many, but others had different interpretations due to their beliefs and distrust. This highlights that media creates narratives influenced by culture and politics, making reports battlegrounds for meaning rather than just sources of information.