This study examined how three leading Nigerian newspapers, namely The Punch, The Guardian, and The Sun, covered irregular migration between January 2020 and May 2023. Anchored in agenda-setting, framing, agenda-building, gatekeeping, and social responsibility theories, the study employed a quantitative content analysis design. A sample of 362 articles was drawn from a population of 3,741 newspaper editions using the Taro Yamane formula and a stratified random sampling technique, with strata defined by newspaper and time period. A structured coding sheet was used to capture data on frequency and prominence, dominant frames, sources of information, and tone and slant of coverage. Findings showed that migration coverage was numerically sustained but spatially marginal, with only 13.3% of articles placed on front pages and 79.8% confined to inside pages. Episodic framing (74.0%) considerably outweighed thematic framing (26.0%), while the security (27.1%), humanitarian (23.5%), and criminal justice (21.0%) frames jointly accounted for 71.6% of coverage. Government agencies and international organisations supplied 49.5% of all cited sources, whereas migrants and returnees accounted for only 7.8%, indicating a pronounced source hierarchy. Negative tone characterised 48.6% of articles, migrants were portrayed as victims in 54.7% of reports, and stigmatising terminology appeared in 39.5% of articles despite explicit guidance from international ethical bodies. The Guardian consistently demonstrated more balanced and ethically grounded reporting than The Punch and The Sun. The study concludes that Nigerian newspapers privilege institutional voices and episodic drama over sustained, contextualised, and migrant-centred reporting, with implications for journalism practice, media policy, and migration governance in the Global South.
Keywords: Content analysis, Framing, Nigeria, agenda setting., irregular migration, newspaper coverage
