What Happened With the 99Pluz Thread

What you need to know

• Two days ago 99Pluz published a public thread asking why international attention on recent attacks in Nigeria spiked.

• Screenshots later circulated showing an unknown individual offering to pay a micro-influencer to quote-tweet that thread.

• 99Pluz has not paid anyone; we archived the screenshots and will share them with verified journalists or investigators on request.

• This article explains what the original thread said, what the screenshots actually demonstrate, and why both victim protection and media literacy matter.

Two days after our original thread, the conversation moved quickly — and not always carefully. A public post that asked straightforward, uncomfortable questions about timing and international attention on Nigeria’s violence was met with private solicitations, public screenshots, and an avalanche of accusations: that 99Pluz paid people to amplify the thread, that we denied victims, and that we pushed an agenda.

Here’s what actually happened, what we stand by, and how you can verify the facts.

What the 99Pluz thread said — and what it did not say

To be clear: the original thread did not deny that attacks are happening in Nigeria. It did not dismiss victims or call suffering a fiction. It posed a narrow, public-interest question: why did heightened international attention — celebrity statements, media interviews, and the circulation of a video — cluster at this particular moment?

Our intent was to provoke literacy, not to silence victims. We asked Nigerians to apply curiosity and scrutiny, not reflexive amplification. Questioning patterns of attention is not an excuse for inaction, nor is it a denial of suffering.

Two truths can coexist: Nigerians are suffering real violence, and at the same time, patterns of international attention deserve scrutiny.

The screenshots and the private solicitation: what they prove

Screenshots have circulated showing a private message sent to a micro-influencer offering payment to quote-tweet our public thread and supplying a scripted caption. Those screenshots demonstrate one clear fact: a third party attempted to pay someone to amplify the thread.

They do not prove that 99Pluz commissioned or paid for any amplification. They do not show any payment trail from 99Pluz accounts. They do not contain a message from any 99Pluz staff member instructing paid promotion. The recipient of that outreach declined the request.

In short: the screenshots show a third-party solicitation that used our public content — not evidence of brand-sponsored paid promotion.

(For investigators or journalists who require direct access to the archived images, we have preserved the screenshots and will share them with verified journalists or investigators on request.)

What 99Pluz has verified so far

• 99Pluz published the public thread that raised questions about timing and attention.

• We have seen screenshots of a private approach asking for paid amplification of that public thread.

• We have found no evidence that 99Pluz instructed, financed, or organized paid amplification tied to this thread.

• We have not paid ₦15,000 (or any amount) to anyone to promote or deny anything related to the thread.

• The recipient who shared the screenshots declined the offer.

If credible evidence emerges linking 99Pluz staff or official accounts to payments or instructions for covert amplification, we will investigate and publish our findings. Until such evidence exists, the screenshots should be understood as evidence of a third-party attempt to leverage public content — not proof of brand-directed influence buying.

Timeline (key public facts)

• 19 Nov 2025 — 99Pluz thread published: A short public thread asked why several signals — celebrity commentary, interviews, and a circulated video — seemed to amplify at once. - Check out the thread here

• 19–20 Nov 2025 — Screenshots appear: A micro-influencer shared a screenshot of a DM in which an unknown account offered payment to quote-tweet the 99Pluz thread. The influencer declined and shared the screenshot publicly.

• 20 Nov 2025 — Public accusations surface: Social accounts began accusing 99Pluz of paying influencers; conversations spread quickly across platforms. 99Pluz archived the screenshots and preserved metadata for verification.

Why this matters beyond brand defence

This episode is not just about 99Pluz. It is a case study in how narratives are shaped online and why media literacy matters:

• Public content can be repurposed by actors with their own agendas.

• Small payments to micro-influencers are a low-cost tactic used to simulate grassroots consensus.

• Rapid public reaction without verification amplifies confusion and punishes nuance.

• Protecting victims’ dignity and demands for verification are not mutually exclusive.

Our call remains simple: read before you amplify; verify before you accuse.

What we are doing next

1. We have archived the screenshots and preserved metadata. We will share the archives with credible journalists and investigators upon verification of their requests.

2. We are inviting independent fact-checkers and journalists to examine the materials. Verified reporters and investigators may contact info@99pluz.com for access; we will require standard press verification before sharing raw files.

3. We will continue publishing evidence-backed analysis — timelines, historical precedents, and contextual reporting — as part of our ongoing coverage of insecurity in Nigeria.

How readers should approach this topic

• Read the full thread before reacting. Context changes interpretation.

• Pause on claims that tie originators (like 99Pluz) to third-party outreach unless direct evidence is published. Screenshots alone are suggestive; payment trails and account-ownership records are decisive.

• Demand receipts and metadata for any claim of paid amplification.

• Protect victims’ dignity: ask about corroboration and verification of footage and testimonies before amplifying.

Final note

We are not retreating from the questions we asked. Asking why patterns of attention emerge at certain moments is a legitimate public-interest inquiry — and a necessary one. But we also recognise the responsibility that comes with asking those questions in the middle of real human suffering.

If these questions make you uncomfortable, let that discomfort lead to better verification and calmer, better reporting — not faster accusation.

— 99Pluz

Editor’s note

This article accompanies the public thread posted earlier this week. Screenshots of a private solicitation that referenced our thread have been archived and are available to verified journalists and investigators on request. We will cooperate with independent verification. For access to the archived images, please contact info@99pluz.com and include your press credentials; we will require verification before sharing.

FAQ

Q: Did 99Pluz deny that violence is happening?

A: No. Our thread explicitly acknowledged that Nigerians are dying. It asked why international attention appeared to cluster at this moment and urged readers to scrutinise patterns — not to dismiss victims.

Q: Did 99Pluz pay people ₦15,000 to promote or deny anything?

A: We have found no evidence that 99Pluz paid anyone to amplify the thread. We have not authorised payments to promote or deny anything in relation to that post. If credible proof appears, we will investigate and publish findings.

Q: Who sent the private message seen in the screenshots?

A: The screenshots show a third-party account soliciting an influencer. At present, there is no public evidence linking that account to 99Pluz. We are preserving the screenshots and will share them with verified journalists and investigators on request.

Q: Why didn’t 99Pluz delete the thread once accusations started?

A: Because the thread raised a public-interest question based on observable events. Deleting it would have prevented scrutiny and signalled capitulation rather than accountability. We will, however, correct any factual errors if they are substantiated.

Q: What should readers do if they see similar private solicitations?

A: Archive the messages, record timestamps and account handles, and—if safe—share them with credible journalists or investigators. Do not spread screenshots without context. If you are a targeted influencer, decline and preserve the record.

If you want more evidence-backed reporting and timelines like this, join our newsletter so you never miss our investigations.