The likes of Mr. Joe Igbokwe are enthusiastically re-posting what Reno proudly shared as an “achievement” – being named the No. 23 most talked-about African on social media. Some of those named with him are not even aware. But before we applaud, we must ask: what truly qualifies one for such a title? What are the criteria for being named?

Who does not know that many of the most talked-about individuals include controversial figures such as Daisy Melanin, the Ghanaian woman infamous for her public scandal involving six men, or Baltasar Ebang Enogonga, the Equatorial Guinean internet sensation whose notoriety stems from nothing admirable? What about the legion of content creators who thrive on risqué tales and crude sensationalism? Being “talked about” is not inherently a virtue; often, infamy commands just as much – if not more – attention than merit. Indeed, this reminds me that even Bobrisky ranked No. 7 on that roster, where popularity is indistinguishably mixed with notoriety.

I say this because the list conflates genuine popularity with the disgusting notoriety that offends decency. Consider this absurdity: Mr. Peter Obi, who was once ranked No. 1, is listed as No. 9 this year, lumped together with characters like Bobrisky, Reno, Daisy, and Baltasar. This is why I urge the organisers to create two distinct categories: “The Most Popular Africans” and “The Most Notorious Africans.” It is disgraceful for figures like Peter Obi, Dangote, Ruto, Odunuga, and Okonjo-Iweala to be categorised alongside individuals whose conduct is a stain on society.

Joe Igbokwe, not content with merely sharing the list, went a step further, commending Reno for his so-called “deep thoughts,” as if such recognition requires an intellect like Uncle Joe’s to decipher. Is this not, perhaps, a classic case of “birds of a feather flocking together”?

It is worth noting that the award Reno celebrates did not describe him as “most popular” but rather as “most talked-about.” This distinction is significant. Is Reno among the most talked-about? The answer is a resounding yes—but the more pertinent question is, how and why? Today, Reno holds the dubious distinction of being Nigeria’s foremost master of chameleonic tendencies – a man whose shifting allegiances and moral elasticity have turned him into the subject of ridicule, an icon of inconsistency. If Plutarch were alive today to write parallel lives, it would be easy to pair Reno with Alcibiades!

How does one switch loyalties from person to person so effortlessly, leaving behind a trail of broken alliances, that their unsteady character becomes a butt of dinner jollity? Yet, amidst this chaos, Reno remains oblivious to the nature of his so-called “fame.” He fails to distinguish between notoriety and popularity. Instead, he inhabits a realm of notoriety – a place far removed from the dignity of genuine influence.

Take, for instance, Reno’s pattern of showering individuals with praise, only to later hurl scorn and obloquies upon them with the hatred aid enemies meet face to face in war. Consider what he once said about President Tinubu:
“Let us remember that Tinubu is a gangster, a known drug lord. He is vulnerable. He has his Achilles heel. And Tinubu’s sword of Damocles is the fear that he uses, like Satan, to control his kingdom.”

What do we call this behaviour? Opportunism? Betrayal? Or is it simply a lack of principle? Today, the same Reno, now Tinubu’s staunch defender, perhaps deserves a fitting Latin sobriquet: “Defensor Tinubenses” (Defender of Tinubu). And would you believe this? He eagerly anticipates an appointment from the very man he once vilified. This is why I describe him as a “characteres”—a person with no moral grounding. What Reno does on social media is the easiest task anyone without scruples can undertake.

Reflecting on my relationship with Mr. Peter Obi, if I were to announce publicly that I no longer support him, I have no doubt that the current administration would fall over itself to reward me with a prestigious appointment – perhaps as Secretary to the Government of the Federation or an equally esteemed post. But how could I, with a clear conscience, trade my principles for political gain and remain happy and at peace with myself? This is where I differ from characters like Reno. Whatever the game may be, even if it is”pankration” (a no-holds-barred ancient Greek contest), it must have rules.

I reject the notion that politics should strip men of their morals or turn them into nihilists – believing in nothing and anchored to nothing. As Gabriel Marcel rightly observed: “A man who depends on nothing and believes in nothing is a man without connection.” Principles are the bedrock of integrity. Without them, a man is adrift, like a leaf tossed about by every gust of opportunity. Epicurus captured this truth succinctly: “A man who has no firm beliefs is a leaf tossed by every wind.” Reno embodies this perfectly, though in the imagination of his admirers, he is celebrated as “smart.”

Ironically, when someone like Reno is hailed as the “most talked-about,” even on other planets, he mistakes the attention for honour. This reminds me of Anini, the infamous criminal of the 1980s, who dominated conversations – not because of virtue but because of vice. Reno’s celebration of this recognition, cheered on by his like-minded admirers, underscores a profound misunderstanding: notoriety, no matter how loud, can never equate to true popularity or respectability.