<![CDATA[This study assesses residents' exposure to, perceptions of, and self-reported experience of television broadcast in the management of environmental health issues in Odogunyan, an industrial and residential community in Ikorodu, Lagos State. Odogunyan faces well-documented environmental health pressures, including improper waste disposal, drainage blockages, and industrial effluent, and television remains a dominant source of public information in the community. The study adopted a cross-sectional, quantitative survey design. Using the Taro Yamane (1967) formula against an estimated population figure of 1,248,000, a sample of 400 was calculated; a multi-stage sampling technique combined purposive selection of Odogunyan with simple random selection of streets and respondents. All 400 distributed questionnaires were retrieved and used in analysis. Data were analysed descriptively in SPSS using frequencies and percentages. The study was guided by the Agenda Setting Theory and the Diffusion of Innovations Theory. Findings show that residents hold television broadcast in high regard as an authoritative and urgency-creating source of environmental health information: 86.5% affirmed its educational responsibility, 81.1% rated it more credible than word of mouth, and 80.3% agreed it makes environmental health feel urgent. Self-reported effectiveness was strongest for awareness-related outcomes — disease-prevention education (73.3%) and message clarity (72.0%) — and weaker for behaviour-related outcomes, including changed waste-disposal habits (53.0%) and community-level environmental improvement (51.3%), a pattern consistent with a knowledge–action gap. Irregular electricity supply (45.8%) was the leading reported barrier to accessing broadcast content, followed by poor programme timing, weak signal, and language mismatch. The study concludes that television functions as a credible but not sufficient instrument for environmental health management in Odogunyan, and recommends Yoruba-language programming, revised scheduling, infrastructure investment, more procedural (how-to) content, and integration with community-based interventions. Methodological limitations, including a population/sample mismatch and an analysis plan that specified inferential testing not carried out in the reviewed data, are discussed and should be addressed before peer submission.]]>
