The Saitoti Helicopter Crash

Print Media coverage of the police helicopter crash

Report for MCK by Joe Kadhi, Lecturer, Journalism,

United Sates International University,

June 2012.

 

 

Introduction

 

This paper examines the coverage of the police helicopter crash that killed six people including the Minister for Internal Security George Saitoti and his assistant, Joshua Ojode on June 10^th 2012.  It looks as the professional challenges of the coverage of the sad event by diving the incident into five distinct occasions that had to be covered following the crash namely: the crash itself; followed by the day of speculation; and then the coverage of various activities when the mourning intensified; followed by the coverage of the burial of Saitoti and lastly the coverage of the burial of Ojode.

 

In normal circumstance the coverage of accidents and tragedies, which this crash can be classified as, come under what professionals describe as spot news stories as opposed to general beat stories or exposés. To appreciate what Kenyan journalists went through it is imperative to compare the characteristics of the three types of stories. The general beat stories happen so often and with such regularity that reporters covering them have become specialists in different fields where they occur. These include court reporting parliamentary reporting and to a certain extent crime reporting. Journalists covering events in these fields grow to become specialists with time.

 

In this day and age specialisation in journalism is nurtured by creating a basic foundation based on the field of study in the first university degree held by a reporter seeking specialisation in a particular field. A journalist with a first degree in economics, for example, would end up being a very valuable specialist in business, economic and may be even financial journalism. In many countries where journalism is taught in graduate schools first degrees could be in virtually any field.

Exposés, on the other hand, are done by writers who have mastered the art of investigative journalists. They could or could not be specialists in a particular subject. Unlike general beat stories whose deadlines are determined by the contemporaneous nature of the publication or news bulletins of broadcast house concerned, exposés normally require more time. They could be done within a long period of research depending on availability of information sought.

Between the two types of stories the pressure to meet the deadlines in the general beat stories is slightly greater than that in the exposés which normally takes a long time to be accomplished. Due to their exclusivity, which is a necessary ingredient of all exposés, editors have a lot of time to check their authenticity and adherence to both the law and ethical principles.

Totally different from the two types of stories discussed above, spot news stories happen with no notice at all. They take place abruptly, very often catching journalist totally unaware. Spot news stories are therefore more challenging to journalists all over the world. They require quick thinking, ability to make important decisions fast and accurately, fairly and within the requirements of all ethical principles as well as the law. In fulfilling these goals quick thinking is needed to determine the news peg of the story as well as the angle to follow and emphasize.

While all this is happening within fractions of seconds the journalists covering spot news stories have also got to have the mastery of the nuts and bolts of writing ability in order to get that  punch and also update the story as the new facts continue to emerge. As the events continue to take new shapes spot news journalists are expected to adherence to ethical principles that require them to be fair, accurate and remember the other ethical principles fast as the relevant media law remains on their fingertips.

Important ethical principles in covering tragedies

Whereas all ethical principles are important in covering every story including stories on tragedies, the coverage of disasters and calamities require the mastery of FOUR important ethical principles. These are: Intrusion into grief and shock; Use of Pictures and Names; Accuracy and fairness and Obscenity, taste and tone in reporting.

Needless to say, it is most important that all stories are fair and accurate. Stories of tragedy can be unfair when facts are wrong and therefore journalists should always remember that accuracy may need balance and even comments to be fair.  The use of pictures of a tragedy can be challenging so journalists need to remember that the most dramatic and newsworthy picture may be unethical. Even more important for them to remember is the fat that pictures received from unknown sources could be, and very often are, dangerous.

Intrusion into grief and shock is tempting to all journalists but they must also remember when people are grieving they should be left alone and when they are in shock they need no publicity. The ethical principle says (a) In cases involving personal grief or shock, inquiries should be made with sensitivity and discretion.(b) In hospitals, journalists should identify themselves and obtain permission from a responsible executive before entering non-public areas of hospitals or similar institutions to pursue enquiries.

The ethical principles on the use of pictures says as a general rule, the media should apply caution in the use of pictures and names and should avoid publication when there is a possibility of harming the persons concerned. It suggests that manipulation of pictures in a manner that distorts reality should be avoided. It also says pictures of grief, disaster and those that embarrass and promote sexism should be discouraged.

The ethical principle of accuracy and fairness says that the fundamental objective of a journalist is to write a fair, accurate and an unbiased story on matters of public interest. It clearly explains that all sides of the story shall be reported, wherever possible and suggests that comments should be obtained from anyone who is mentioned in an unfavourable context.

 Secondly the ethical principle says whenever it is recognized that an inaccurate, misleading or distorted story has been published or broadcast, it should be corrected promptly. Corrections should present the correct information and should not restate the error except when clarity demands. Thirdly it instructs that an apology shall be published or broadcast whenever appropriate in such manner as the Council may specify. And lastly it says when stories fall short on accuracy and fairness, they should not be published. May be the most fundamental aspect of this ethical principle is its suggestion that journalists, while free to be partisan, should distinguish clearly in their reports between comment, conjecture and fact.

The ethical principle of Obscenity , Taste and Tone says in general, journalists should avoid publishing obscene, vulgar or offensive material unless such material contains a news value which is necessary in the public interest. It also says that in the same vein, publication of photographs showing mutilated bodies, bloody incidents and abhorrent scenes should be avoided unless the publication or broadcast of such photographs will serve the public interest.

When the tragedy struck

On that fateful day the electronic media were guided by Timeliness as the news value and by and large they did a splendid job while engaging in cutthroat competition. When journalists got the sad news survival of the fittest in the struggle for existence took its Darwinian nature and everyone competed in being the first with the news. A number of ethical principles were violated but since this is a report on the print media these will be examined by other specialists.

The next day on June 11th the Daily Nation had a shocking picture of the wreckage and a straightforward reportorial story they called “Flight of disaster”. A clever inset of a recent picture of the victims (Saitoti and Ojode) together brought in the human interest angle into the fore. The use of file pictures made the journalists and the paper appear to be more professional than those in one electronic media which showed pictures of burning bodies of the victims.

On that same day The Standard talked of “Friendship to Death”. This clever usage of words gave the story a human angle that was emotionally very moving but not overdone to change the pathos into bathos. In an excellent highlighting of the human interest angle the paper talked of Saitoti and Ojode’s friendship to death. The picture used by the paper of the wreckage was horrifying but it obeyed the ethical principle of accuracy. The blown-up cut-outs of Saitoti and Ojode played the trick of avoiding showing the horrific pictures of burning bodies.

The People chose the mourning angle. Though the paper chose the sad angle of country mourning  with a headline saying “Country Mourns” ,it also boldly suggested that poor maintenance of the helicopter by the Police could have caused the accident. In a strap-line that was obviously obtained from a journalist who understood the importance of attribution as it is stipulated in the ethical principle of Unnamed Sources, the paper said: “Amid shock and grief, Police Air wing Officers speculate poor maintenance of aircraft could have led to crash that killed Saitoti, Ojodeh, 4 others”.  This suggestion was a bold journalistic adventure that could lead to further investigations. 

The Star chose the angle of Ministers’ death in horror crash. In a splash headline that said “Ministers Die In Horror Crash” the paper claimed in a speculative story that bad weather, pilot error or even mechanical problems could have caused the accident but it was an inset picture of the chopper “moments before the crash” that shocked everyone. The picture suggested to many readers that an explosion, possibly a bomb, blasted the helicopter before crashing. The controversial picture obviously suggested foul play.

Naturally The Star picture caused serious official complaints. Playing the story big on top of page seven The People said the State had lodged a complaint against The Star newspaper and that the complaint had been received by MCK chairman Levy Obonyo and the Executive Director Haron Mwangi. The paper quoted Obonyo saying the Council would put the complaint through the natural process by referring it to the Complaints Commission to take the necessary action.

This kind of criticism reported by one paper against the misdeed of another newspaper is a healthy professional intra media self-criticism that needs to be developed in Kenyan journalism. Superficially it may appear cannibalistic but in reality it is a process of holding mirrors on the faces of each other and exhibiting the ugliness of unprofessionalism that desperately needs to be exposed in this country.

Either because media houses are not too keen to wash their dirty linen in public , or because they would rather their sins were swept under the carpet, such open criticism against each other are very often discouraged. Hence no paper, apart from, paradoxically, The Star newspaper, which publishes the  Expression Today and an occasional article from its own public editor, print a regular column of media criticism.

It so happens that The Star reacted very professionally. The paper promptly published an apology on the next day’s paper which said: Yesterday The Star was duped into using the Internet photo of a helicopter crashing in its story “Ministers Die in Horror Crash”. A reader called and said he had taken the photo of a chopper emitting smoke as he returned from Namanga. The photo was in fact of a Robinson R44 helicopter in Europe and not the AS350 Eurocopter used by the people in Kenya. We apologise for the error to all concerned. Though stuck at the bottom of an inside page, it was still a correction. Ability for any newspaper to boldly admit to its readers when it is wrong is a sign of well-developed sense of professionalism. The quality of that professionalism however depends of the methodology of publishing a correction and the manner in which it follows the instructions of the Code of Conduct for the Practice of Journalism in Kenya.

Despite the intensity of criticism against the paper for the publication of the offensive picture the paper took an even more professional step. On June 13th it published a comment by its public editor Karen Rothmyer in which she explained in details how the error was made. Her article was obviously the result of internal inquiry of self-examination and criticism which should be emulated by all media houses. The article by Rothmyer explaining in details how the error occurred and what ethical principles were ignored amounted to a masterpiece of internal investigation leading to the exposure of the truth to the public which enhances professionalism.

Unfortunately The Star was not the only paper that had goofed by distorting facts through the dramatization of a burning helicopter while still in air. Though The Star was the only paper that published the fake picture of the burning helicopters, all other national dailies had in their stories published on June 11th suggesting that the helicopter caught fire in mid-air and not when it crashed! The Nation said on the front page that witnesses saw a ball of smoke and fire falling from the skies before explosion.  The Standard published a story on page seven saying unconfirmed report indicated that the aircraft caught fire before it crashed into the forest and The People published on page  four a story claiming  that  the chopper was  flying low and emitting smoke.

An even more shocking lack of professionalism was shown by the Weekly Citizen which wondered whether the two leaders were assassinated. The paper had the impudence of recalling the period when Saitoti was poisoned and connecting the story to the assassination of Dr. Robert Ouko. Seeming to break every professional rule of handling such a story, the paper came up with all sorts conspiracy theories that led to Saitoti and Ojode’s deaths. All that notwithstanding the paper’s right to exist is indeed protected by the Constitution and, arguably, its role as the alternative media is also very vital to the country.  But when all is said and done the fundamental question still remains: How should the professional fraternity deal with this kind of journalism?

Then followed the day of speculations

After the tragedy, followed the day of journalistic speculation which is typically characterised by lack of official sources of information. Despite the cutthroat competition caused by the news values of a running story the Daily Nation resisted the temptation to overdramatize the latest development of the story by straightforwardly remaining professional on June 12th when it said on the front page that investigation into a five minute flight will reveal the cause of the helicopter crash as President Kibaki had ordered a thorough investigation into how the plane “lost direction”. In my view that was the safest way of treating the story by simply sticking to the facts.

The Star took a step further by revealing to its readers that one of the pilots did not want to fly. The story head “Pilot Didn’t Want to Fly On Sunday” said one of the killed pilots, Sup. Nancy Gituanja, was worried about the mechanical condition of tǂ_' cueI a e˨k 8 2 said Gituanja did not want to fly on Sunday because she was scheduled to attend a family get together at her Kandara home. In my view this story created suspicion that all was not well with the helicopter. But the important professional question is: Was the story based on facts?  If the ethical principle of “Unnamed Sources”, which demystifies the attribution aspect of the story, was properly utilised in a manner that revealed more facts, then that ambiguity would have been put to a decisive end.

On the same day The People talked of hard queries. It predicted that senior police officers who procured the helicopter were likely to face hard questions after the crash as the President had ordered a thorough probe which would look at whether the accident was caused by poor maintenance of the helicopter. The paper was expressing confidence in the probe as The Standard was wondering whether the accident was caused by sabotage. The paper highlighted the fact that the State was saying the weather was fine, pilot competent and helicopter good but it said something still didn’t add up. This was bold journalism of posing relevant question after all that is the watchdog role of the Fourth Estate and in my opinion it was in fact one of the boldest treatment of the entire story !

And when MPs also started speculating the Daily Nation splashed the story quoting MPs questioning the account of the accident and demanding that the official inquiry be professional, impartial and open to public. This was the right professional treatment of the story given the fact that past inquiries concerning such accident bore no fruitful results. Obviously when MPs make such serious allegations journalists can simply not ignore them. Indeed the paper let the MPs have their say by giving MPs Gideon Konchella, Ephraim Maina, Nkoidila ole Lankas and Raphael Letimalo publicity as they were probably speaking for many Kenyans when they said there were more questions about the accident than there were answers. MPs said there was no point in having an inquiry that did not reveal the “truth”.

On the same day The Star splashed a similar story and quoted the MPs saying this was not an ordinary accident and revealed that they were planning to set up a select committee to conduct parallel investigations because previous inquiries of similar incidents were “shoddy”. Ignoring MPs’ concern would not have been professionally correct as all the five major news values were there. But The Standard went a step further. It said Saitoti always lived “in fear” and went ahead and said he lived on the edge “as if agents of death were staling him”. Was this the correct way to handle the story? What kind of possible causes of the accident were conjured in readers’ minds? The paper talked of “potential killer” walking in Saitoti’s shadow!

Yet the paper went big on that angle and said he was once poisoned and had extended his fears to the food he ate and how he travelled and even whose hand he shook. Whereas the exposure of Saitoti’s paranoia was of great human interest news value, was the timing of taking that angle professionally appropriate ethically? What mental picture does this approach create in the minds of the readers?

The papers also looked at political implication of Saitoti’s departure. Naturally journalists could not ignore this angle as their work was simplified by politicians who talked of Saitoti’s leadership. Top on that list was the retired President Daniel arap Moi who revealed that he was part of the strategy in Saitoti’s presidential ambition. The People splashed the story with a questioning headline saying “Was Moi Driver Of Satoti Power Bid?”. That headline alone showed the doubt in the Editor’s mind.

The paper didn’t let the matter end there .It went ahead and ridiculed Moi by revealing that the former President’s sentiments about Saitoti when he was dead was in sharp contrast to the manner in which the former VP when he worked under him. The paper said Moi “rudely shoved Saitoti aside in favour of Uhuru Kenyatta as his preferred successor”. Though of great human interest news value was this angle called for at the time of mourning? The question many of Moi supporters must have asked was: Couldn’t the media let the old man mourn in peace?

And when the President appointed a probe team the Daily Nation stuck to the facts and named appeal judge Kalpana Rawal as the head of the team which would look at possible causes of the accident including weather, human error, mechanical failure and sabotage. Obviously the paper resisted the temptation to speculate on the causes of the accident. The Standard was also professionally accurate .It talked of the President’s order for a detailed investigation as Amos Kimunya talked of a public inquiry while the Prime Minister called on Kenyans to maintain peace and VP Kalonzo Musyoka called for unity. But the paper also revealed the MPs displeasure with Kibaki for arriving at the meeting two hours late! Was this human interest angle appropriate at the time?

This time The Star  took a straightforward reportorial angle and said the President assured Kenyans of full investigation into the crash promising to release the findings of the probe and appealed to the people to remain calm ; but is this straightforward  conveyor- belt form of reporting what Kenyan readers expect from the Fourth Estate? Whatever the answer to that question is The People did exactly the same thing but in a more explanatory manner, showing a more professional form of interpretative reporting. The paper reported the President’s orders with interpretation which said that senior Government and police officers charged with procurement and maintenance of the Police Air-wing faced hard questions. The paper had also an angle about poor maintenance obtained from the police sources.

Two days later The Star had a different angle. It revealed that MPs were not quite satisfied with the probe team as the manner in which it was formulated violated the doctrine of separation of powers by appointing Rawal to head the team without Consulting CJ Willy Mutunga. The paper showed it believed that even in solemn occasions the law must be obeyed.  From the beginning of the coverage of this sad event The People suspected something. As early as 11th June the paper suspected poor maintenance to have caused the accident and Talked of “simmering anger” among members of Kenya Police Air-Wing over alleged poor maintenance condition of the aircraft. Investigative journalism that leads to exposés is always superior to general beat and spot news stories. 

On the very first day of the accident The Nation gave information about the chopper. In its first edition after the accident the paper took the trouble to tell its readers that the crashed chopper was new and powerful and that the Kenya Police Air-Wing was the first in Africa to purchase the model. The paper took the trouble to interview experts about the crashed helicopter – a professionally commendable way of demystifying the hidden “W”s as The Standard came out with the first exposé. On the second day of the crash the paper quoted Strategic Intelligence News (SIN) urging Kenya to look inward for answers claiming that by elimination of internationally recognized forensic audit, fingers pointed at lapse in security policing. But the big question remained: Does probing by journalists help or obstruct Rawal’s   efforts?

On the first publication after the accident The Nation had a graphic of the way the helicopter flew showing the route the ill-fated helicopter was taking before it crashed. Though the graphic was published by the paper the very next day a number of professional questions could be asked about the drawing:  Was it showing the exact route in which the helicopter flew? How authentic was the drawing?  And what value did it add to the investigations? If the illustration was by an aviation expert then it was a masterpiece of journalism. But if it wasn’t then it just added more cobwebs to harmful rumours and dangerous speculations.

On June 14th the Daily Nation dropped a bombshell! Not only did the paper reveal that the families of the two dead ministers wanted to be represented in the probe team but it also exposed the fact that the chopper was not insured. The implications of this sad fact could be quite devastating. The most natural follow-up of such an exposé   is a proper investigative assignment on uninsured government aircrafts and vehicles.

And when the mourning intensified

Photojournalists rightly had a field day and sub editors correctly used the pictures big. The Daily Nation had many dramatic pictures which were used big and, in my opinion, professionally in the right manner. The Star did more or less the same thing and made a very dramatic usage of pictures which it published in a professional manner. The People did the same thing by showing pictures of flags at half-mast and other pictures of ladies who were mourning together with the Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta who despite being the paper’s proprietor was given the same treatment as other mourners. The paper published a picture a lady it correctly identified as  Halima Montet a member of Kajiado CDF Committee.

 The Standard also did a good professional job but then it goofed ! Ms Motet was described as Margaret Saitoti, wife of the late Minister George Saitoti. And the correction was stuck at the bottom of page 6 three days later .Professional ethics demand that whenever it is recognized that an inaccurate, misleading or distorted story has been published or broadcast, it should be corrected promptly. It also says corrections should present the correct information and should not restate the error except when clarity demands. It further states that an apology shall be published or broadcast whenever appropriate in such manner as the Council may specify.

The fact that a correction was published at all was professionally commendable. But what did the correction say? It said: On Monday we erroneously referred to Mama Halima Montet (right) as the Internal Security Minister George Saitoti’s widow due to mix-up of photos . We have since established that  Mrs. Margaret Saitoti (left) is the wife of the late Minister. We regret the embarrassment  we may have caused Saitoti’s family and that of Montet. Long after the publication of that correction the question still remains: Was this published according to the Council’s specification?

And when Saitoti was buried

The Sunday Nation had a straightforward splash headline saying “Goodbye Professor” and in a fitting editorial the paper said the two men (Ojode and Saitoti) had special qualities and attributes which was a good a lesson for coalition Government. Needless to say this was a professionally correct way of handling such a story. The People talked of time to rest which was also professionally appropriate for the occasion in which the paper said leaders eulogised fallen Internal Security Minister as a true patriot, tribeless and humble Kenyan. It called for peaceful poll as fitting tribute which was an equally professional way of handling a funeral story.

The Standard too was appropriately punchy. It used a single common Kiswahili word “Kwaheri” .The paper penetrated many hearts in a journalistically punchy way of headline writing. “Kweheri”  was headline that was emotionally punchy.

And when Ojode was buried

The Daily Nation took an angle of calling for unity because Ojode stood above the usual party and ethnic divide in the Coalition Government. It said leaders had turned “Sirkal” burial into a campaign for national unity. With a headline saying “Call for Unity as Ojodeh Laied to Rest”  the paper exhibited its ability to combining the burial act with newsworthy utterances of leaders which is a superior  professional  headline writing  skill.

The People concentrated on the numbers of people at the funeral. Though the paper splashed the number of MPs at the event, it is the only paper that reported Mrs Mary Ojode’s scathing criticism of the media. She said her son Andrew, who studies in the UK, knew of his father’s death through the media. Was Mrs Ojode’s criticism fair or was she hitting below the belt?  Reporting Ojode’s funeral The Standard goofed yet again! In an otherwise good front page that described Ojode as a man who played the role of more than just a junior minister, the paper inserted a close-up picture of President Kibaki which was disrespectful and therefore professionally unethical. The controversial picture was, in fact, quite unnecessary.

The offensive picture showed the Head of State with a running nose as a result of shedding tears at the funeral. The picture certainly went against the ethical principle of Obscenity, taste and tone. It was in extremely bad taste. The next day the paper said it was sorry. In an apology stuck on at the bottom of page nine the paper explained that the picture was not meant to embarrass the President but only aimed at “showing the overwhelming emotion of a grieving nation”. At least the paper was bold enough to apologize

 

Conclusion

This exercise was an eye opener to me personally as a journalism lecturer. Its findings shows beyond any reasonable doubt that Kenyan journalists tend to overlook some vital professional ethical principles while covering spot news. This, needless to say, calls for an even more intensified approach to the training of journalists on specific ethical principles that must be strictly observed while covering spot news ranging from accidents, assassinations, natural catastrophes and other disasters and disasters.

In the coverage of the helicopter crash the ethical principle of Intrusion into Grief and Shock was particularly difficult to observe as culturally Africans normally mourn together. In situations where communities gather to express sympathy to the bereaved journalists find it extremely easy to get very close to the families of the departed people. Very often they just take pictures of the wailing people who have just learnt of the death of close members of the family.

That must have been what happened with the photographer of The Standard ended up with an extremely dramatic picture of a woman in tears at Saitoti’s home – a picture which ended up with an apology from the paper as the photographer took it for granted that the woman was Mrs Saitoti when in fact it was the picture of a close friend, Mama Halima Montet. Under normal circumstances photographers will always take pictures at events of mourning and grieving people. All professional journalists are required to do is to take pictures “with sensitivity and discretion” as required by ethical principle.

The other ethical principle which was violated during the coverage of the helicopter crash was even more serious as it constitutes the backbone of the entire journalistic profession. This was the ethical principle of Accuracy and Fairness. In journalism when a story is inaccurate, the mistake is taken so seriously that very often heads role. It is as serious a professional mistake is negligence is to doctors and stealing clients’ money is to lawyers. Unfortunately in the coverage of the helicopter crash The Star newspaper made that mistake by inaccurately describing a file picture of a burning helicopter as the fateful one.

As it were the paper was quick to apologize and explain to the readers how the mistake was done. But the manner in which the apology was published was not in conformity with the provisions of the Code of Conduct for the Practice of Journalism in Kenya.

The other challenging ethical principle to the journalists when they were covering the helicopter crash was Obscenity, Taste and Tone. The example could be found in The Standard which published a picture of President Mwai Kibaki with a running nose on the front page during Ojode’s funeral. Though the paper claimed it wanted to show how sad everyone was including the President of Kenya, it later realised that the picture was in extremely bad taste and apologised.

The manner in which the apology was published was also not in conformity with the requirements of the ethical principles, which goes to prove that the need for an intensified training on ethical principles for the practitioners now working as journalists is indeed very urgent. The matter is made worse by an apparent inability of Kenyan journalists to work under pressure while adhering to the vital ethical principles in their profession.

The Mombasa Republican Council

Report on the the coverage of MRC phenomenon for the MCK

 

By Joe Kadhi, Lecturer, Journalism,

United States International University,

Nairobi, 21st July, 2012

 

Introduction

Nothing, of late, has challenged journalism in Kenya more than the coverage of the mysterious Mombasa Republican Council. Engaging in conveyor-belt reportorial presentation of stories journalists have only been writing about utterances of the organisation’s leaders threatening to secede from Kenya and the rebuttals from national leaders expressing their views on how to deal with the situation.

An in-depth exposé telling the real story that would answer a number of questions in Kenyans’ minds about the organisation has yet to be written. What is the origin of the shadowy organisation calling itself MRC? Who finances it and for what purposes? Is it a political party or a tribal organisation? Are its demands genuine or are they a concoction of politicians out to win the next general elections?

All the questions and many more are yet to be answered by journalists covering MRC stories. Reporting MRC, and indeed many other important current events, through exposés or simply by engaging in interpretative coverage is a serious professional as well as ethical challenge to Kenyan journalists. Due to its controversial nature the coverage of the MRC is, for all practical purposes, the coverage of conflict. Ethically, journalists in Kenya are required to follow very well defined principles of concerning conflict. These principles gives three specific instructions journalists in Kenya have to observe.

Called “Covering Ethnic, Religious and Sectarian Conflict” the ethical principle says news, views or comments on ethnic, religious or sectarian dispute should be published or broadcast after proper verification of facts and presented with due caution and restraint in a manner which is conducive to the creation of an atmosphere congenial to national harmony, amity and peace. Then it requires provocative and alarming headlines to be avoided. And lastly it suggest news reports or commentaries should not be written or broadcast in a manner likely to inflame the passions, aggravate the tension or accentuate the strained relations between the communities concerned. It further suggests articles or broadcasts with the potential to exacerbate communal trouble should be avoided.

While covering conflict or any other controversial story, journalists in Kenya are extremely lucky to be protected by the supreme law of the land which creates an environment so conducive to the free practice of journalism that the vibrancy of the Kenyan fourth estate is quite conspicuous to any visitor. Article 33 of the Constitution, for example, clearly says every person has the right to freedom of expression, which includes freedom to seek, receive or impart information or ideas; freedom of artistic creativity; and academic freedom and freedom of scientific research.

By using this part of the Constitution journalists have actually allowed MRC leaders to say virtually everything they have wanted to about their amorphous organisation. While doing so, however, journalists ought to know that the same part of the Constitution also says the right to freedom of expression does not extend to  propaganda for war; incitement to violence;  hate speech; or  advocacy of hatred that  constitutes ethnic incitement, vilification of others or incitement to cause harm; or  is based on any ground of discrimination specified or contemplated in Article 27 (4) which says  the State shall not discriminate directly or indirectly against any person on any ground, including race, sex, pregnancy, marital status, health status, ethnic or social origin, colour, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, dress, language or birth.

Looking at that provision of the law, journalists in Kenya should realise that they have quite a free hand in covering the MRC though they are expected to be very careful in making sure the derogatory statements by the organisation’s leaders, which at time come close to incitement and could therefore cause harm, are properly doctored professionally. The Constitution also says in the exercise of the right to freedom of expression, every person shall respect the rights and reputation of others.

Article 34 of the Constitution says freedom and independence of electronic, print and all other types of media is guaranteed, but does not extend to any expression specified in Article 33 (2) discussed above. Be that as it may, the supreme law says the State shall not exercise control over or interfere with any person engaged in broadcasting, the production or circulation of any publication or the dissemination of information by any medium; or penalise any person for any opinion or view or the content of any broadcast, publication or dissemination.

Because of this provision a number of FM stations down at the Coast have given a lot or freedom to the so-called leaders of the MRC mainly because the Constitution also says broadcasting and other electronic media have freedom of establishment, subject only to licensing procedures that are necessary to regulate the airwaves and other forms of signal distribution; and are independent of control by government, political interests or commercial interests. By examining this particular section of the Constitution the ownership of a number of FM station at the Coast could be said to be contravening the law as a number of them actually belong to politicians and could therefore not be categorized as independent of political interest.

Today State-owned media are much freer to professionally select stories as they please because the Constitution gives them the liberty to determine independently the editorial content of their broadcasts or other communications and be impartial; and afford fair opportunity for the presentation of divergent views and dissenting opinions. Despite this freedom however there has not been any noticeable in-depth reporting by the State-media about of the MRC.

The matter is made worse by the existence of Article 35 of the Constitution which gives journalists, like all other citizens, the right of access to information held by the State; and information held by another person and required for the exercise or protection of any right or fundamental freedom. For the first time in history the Constitution allows journalists to engage in investigative exercise of their profession knowing very well the supreme law protects the people’s right to know. Despite all this journalists have not made use of the Constitution to engage in any meaningful investigation about the MRC. At the time of writing this report there were quite a number of pertinent questions about MRC that still remained mysterious and therefore unanswered.

Back in my days as the Daily Nation’s Managing Editor my efforts to expose police brutality faced a tough personal reprimand from President Daniel arap Moi himself demanding to kill complete stories including the coverage of the Saba Saba in 1990 when a number of people were killed in Nairobi. On that day I had to defy orders from the President to let Kenyans know about riots that followed peaceful demonstrations for multi-party democracy in their own capital. I witnessed a lot of brutality during the demonstrations in the city but when I decided to publish it, I was condemned. So I deliberately published to be damned! Today journalists don’t have to go through this professional trauma as they have all the freedom to publish the truth about almost any subject of their choice including the MRC.

Because of the freedom given by the Constitution, journalists are free to cover the MRC issues from many angles which are professionally stipulated in the art of news reporting. A professional examination of the coverage of MRC, therefore, requires looking at three types of reporting: Reportorial conveyor-belt presentation of stories; Interpretative presentation of stories and Commentaries and editorialized presentation of stories.

Reportorial presentation of MRC stories

The majority of MRC stories are reportorial presentations of utterances by Kenyan leaders condemning MRC, or pledging to work with the group, or MRC leaders explaining their position. One such story was published by the Sunday Nation on February 5^th 2012, when the paper claimed to have “unmasked” MRC. The paper had a front page story warning that the Government was staring at a major security threat over the rise of MRC. It also cautioned that despite the Government banning the group it had refused to go. The paper talked of anxiety gripping upcountry people as reports warned the outlawed group advocated split with Kenya and that it was gaining popularity among indigenous people including MPs.

The only effort by the paper to demystify MRC was shown when it revealed the name of its leader as   ex-policeman, Omar Suleiman Mwamnwanzi who is said to be the Chairman of the Governing Council. In the same story the Sunday Nation quoted Omar Hassan, a former Commissioner of KNCHR and a highly respected personality from the Coast region, calling for one nation. Though the story was well displayed in the centre spread, it begged more questions about the MRC than it provided answers. It said the State appeared to be without a solution and seemed to be at a loss on how to handle MRC. It also talked of a violent disruption of the group’s meeting at Shika Adabu followed by a meeting between the Coast PC, Earnest Munyi, and the group as the late Saitoti condemned calls for secession.  The interpretative journalism displayed by the paper appeared to paint a hopeless picture.

At about the same time The Standard published reportorial stories on MRC which quoted Kenyan leaders saying a number of things about the MRC. Their utterances however showed differences between them on how to deal with the illegal organisation. The story highlighted differences between President Mwai Kibaki, who was saying the Government would not tolerate separatists and Prime Minister Raila Odinga, who was calling for dialogue with MRC as Deputy Prime Minister, Musalia Mudavadi, was calling for a motion in Parliament to establish dialogue with MRC. Needless to say this story created more cobwebs in the minds of Kenyans about the MRC. Kenyan leaders did not even see eye to eye on how to deal with the prohibited organisation.

The MRC story has also been used a number of times by the FM stations. Capital FM station, for example, quoted Mwai Kibaki in an April 24^th broadcast in which   the station claimed the President had for the first time spoken out strongly against the outlawed Mombasa Republican Council (MRC) and told the illegal group to forget about secession of the coastal region from Kenya. Kibaki is painted by the media as a man who regards MRC followers as enemies of Kenya. On that same day the station reported the death of a MRC man killed by a stone thrown by a rioter in Mombasa after police blocked members of the outlawed group from entering a court house.

According to the story riot police fired teargas to stop more than 100 members from reaching the court to hear a case in which they were challenging the ban on their group. In general the media have always reported confrontation between the police and the MRC without giving any satisfactory explanations about the real causes of the riots and confrontations.  Engaging in reportorial presentation of the MRC stories journalists have concentrated in quoting government sources. On June 10^th 2012, for example, The People newspaper, quoted the NSIS Director, Michael Gichangi , saying that the Government was aware of secret relationship between politicians and illegal organisations such as the MRC and that the intelligence service was watching keenly and declared the war on MRC was on .

The paper also quoted the NSIS boss warning MPs who began embracing MRC and added that the new found relationship posed a serious threat to peace and national security ahead of the polls. On June 14^th The Star quoted Coast clerics telling voters to reject illegal groups including the MRC. The story quoted the Coast Interfaith Council of Clerics urging the people not to boycott elections but it also quoted Coast Supkem Chairman, Shariff  Mohdhar, warning religious leaders against  taking political stands. Used big in the inside pages the story was quite punchy!

The People also had a similar story on the same date when it quoted clerics urging the Coast people not to boycott election as demanded by MRC. It also quoted the Supkem Coast boss Mohdhar criticising the government for not taking steps against leaders who preached hatred. Though used in the inside pages the story was quite punchy too.

Interpretative reporting of the MRC stories 

Like the reporting of all other stories in Kenya that of MRC fell short of professional interpretative handling .This requires a thorough knowledge of both the topic and the methodology of investigative journalism. Interpretative reporting leads to a superior presentation of stories which are based on the ability to investigate and a thorough understanding of the topic. A good example of interpretative reporting could be the call by MRC to boycott elections. Reportorial conveyor-belt presentation would quote subjects speaking for or against the call .Interpretative reporting would tell readers a lot more such as who would really benefit from the boycott; what does the law say about the right to vote; how the MRC real goals would be achieved by not participating in elections and what the MRC secret plans are to enforce election boycott?

Throughout the coverage of MRC issues journalists have shown very  limited knowledge of  the clandestine organisation .Lack of thorough investigative skills has led to the presentation of article that tell very little inside stories about the MRC. A very impressive academic research on MRC has been done by Paul Goldsmith; but reporters have shown very little inclination to use the academic report, yet they have not come up their own in-depth analysis of the organisation.

The Goldsmith report shows the issues fuelling MRC activism; the Kaya Bomba raiders and human rights abuses; the Mombasa Republican Council agenda and the opportunities for engaging the MRC. In my view, journalists could perform a much better job by making proper use of the good old 5ws and H. Used properly this could play the professional trick.  For example, everyone seems to know WHAT the MRC is: an illegal organisation banned in 2008 but; WHAT are its secrets?  WHAT are its sources of funds? WHAT external forces back it? WHAT are the possible outcomes of the MRC?

Who are really behind it? Goldsmith tells us that the Swahili, Arab, and Miji Kenda segments of the indigenous coast population are the people WHO are members on MRC but; WHO can be credited with the originality of MRC; WHO are the Kenyan politicians secretly backing it? WHO are totally opposed to it and ready to go to war? WHO has a solution to the entire problem?

When was it really established? Goldsmith also tells us that the events that were precipitated by the Kaya Bombo raiders in 1997 constitute the time WHEN the MRC phenomenon come into existence but; WHEN did the real problem start? WHEN did the Coastal people start feeling marginalized? WHEN did politicians decide to use it as a stepping stone to get re-elected or gain higher offices? WHEN is the problem likely to be solved?

Where is the MRC really strong? Though it is  believed that it is in the coastal counties of Kwale, Kilifi, Malindi, Taita-Taveta, and Tana River WHERE  the MRC is spread ; WHERE in these regions is it most popular? WHERE in the region is it least popular? WHERE do its leaders secretly meet? WHERE, outside Kenya, does it get its support from?

Whereas many believe that historical injustices are the reasons WHY Mombasa Republican Council was established; WHY has the MRC suddenly become current? WHY has the problem become so serious now? WHY are leaders divided on the issue? WHY has MRC united people? WHY do MRC leader claim it is not a political party?

Goldsmith also believes efforts to secure coastal autonomy  which represent a regionally and historically specific type of sovereignty pursued by mwambao activists  could explain HOW  MRC was formed but HOW is the MRC really organised?; HOW  are its members recruited? HOW is its propaganda spread? HOW does the Government intend to deal with it? HOW difficult is the effort to establish dialogue?

Answering these pertinent questions through investigative journalism during the reporting stage and presenting the stories in an interpretative manner during the writing stage, in my opinion, would go a long way towards demystifying the Mombasa Republican Council. The watchdog role of the fourth estate has been seriously neglected in both the reporting and writing of the MRC stories.

Commentaries on MRC

The Standard Digital of 14^th June had a commentary By Dann Mwangi saying:  In the recent past, the outlawed Mombasa Republic Council (MRC) has been making secessionists demands that are not founded on law, facts and history.  Inasmuch as they have been invoking a frivolous and outdated colonial agreement that the Coast Province no longer belongs to Kenya, this is not true. They continue to abuse our territorial integrity and national sovereignty and this must not be tolerated by the Government. In a nutshell Mwangi is saying: 1.MRC is abusing our territorial integrity 2. Do not tolerate it.

The Daily Nation sounded a warning on June 12^th when the paper had a commentary by Jackson Mwalulu saying: MRC insists it’s pursuing a just cause, top of which is Coast people’s land rights. All of us buy into their agenda. People of the Coast need land with title deeds. Of late, though, MRC has been associated with both verbal and physical violent expression of their agenda. The declaration that no elections will take place next time at the Coast; the burning of the Electoral Commission’s property; attacks on police officers; the Pwani si Kenya mantra with its secession clarion call, are pointers to the unveiling of a guerrilla movement. In a nutshell Mwalulu is saying: A guerrilla movement is in the making!

The Star talked of MRC as a monster. In a commentary on 3^rd  June by By Muthui Kariuki the paper says: The activities and pronouncements of this organization  (MRC)have clearly proved that it is not your regular neighbourhood welfare chama. It has all the makings of a monster that will end up eating the chicken, the children and the foolish master! In a nutshell Kariuki is calling the MRC a dangerous monster!

The Sunday Nation proposed devolution. In his column “The Week that Was” Kwendo Opanga says :I do not support secession of the Coast as demanded by the MRC. I support the Constitution I believe the Coast’s challenge in part arise from failed leadership. Therefore the MRC should move to legally fill this void. It must plot to win all seats in the Region in the coming general election legally. Then it should embark on changing the Coast in accordance with the Constitution. In a nutshell Kwendo is saying: Get your autonomy legally!

Except for the commentary by Kwendo Opanga all the others can be described as adversarial. They say: Don’t tolerate it; a guerrilla movement is in the making because it is a dangerous monster. Whereas every media house, indeed every journalist, is protected by Article 33 defence of freedom of expression, the same Constitution says freedom of expression does not extend to propaganda for war; incitement to violence; hate speech; or advocacy of hatred that constitutes ethnic incitement, vilification of others. Besides that the ethical principle calls for news reports or commentaries not to be written or broadcast in a manner likely to inflame the passions, aggravate the tension or accentuate the strained relations between the communities concerned.

Journalists are nationalists and the subject of secession can be extremely emotive. Despite that, however, they are expected to be professionals first and adhere to professional ethics as much as they obey the law. The fact that the MRC exits is itself very important news. But looked at the whole phenomenon as the existence of a serious and may be legitimate conflict, then the coverage of the whole scenario must be approached from a professional way of covering conflict which is growingly becoming a very important area of specialisation in the profession.

Conclusion

Examining the few examples of the coverage of the MRC phenomenon elucidated above, leads one to conclude that the manner in which the stories were written could not, strictly speaking, be said to be ethically upright.  The stories examined showed the tendency for journalists, backed by their editors, to concentrate on reportorial conveyor-belt presentations of stories instead of engaging in a much more professionally admirable method of interpretative reporting. By and large the print media exhibited an impressive ability to adhere to the ethical principle of impartiality, which, from the moment it was first established many years ago, called for the avoidance of tendentiousness in news presentation.   

The same, however, cannot be said about the FM stations down at the Coast, where the MRC is said to be gaining popularity through local MPs who secretly back the banned organisations. The matter is made worse by the fact that a number of them own the stations which are said to be sympathetic to the movement. I obtained this information from a number of journalists who work for the FM stations and with whom I rubbed shoulders when I was training them in Mombasa recently.

According to the stories published about the MRC, journalists point out that the leader of the organisation is the uncharismatic and unassuming Suleiman Mwamnwanzi whose background is only said to be that of a simple policeman. The obvious professional scream for an urgent personality interview with the man obviously went unheard and so the mystery of MRC continues to deepen. Such an interview could probably reveal where the MRC gets funds from to launch a regional campaign of propaganda covering Kwale, Kilifi, Malindi Tana River and Taita Taveta counties.

An attempt by the Sunday Nation of February 5^th to demystify the organisation was commendable; but was not professionally done to the level of leaving no stone unturned. Though the paper painted a hopeless picture of the future of MRC, it didn’t give any reasons for that conclusion. Journalists gave the Director of NSIS, Michael Gichangi, a lot of publicity when he revealed that the Government was aware of a number of politicians associated with MRC. Yet they made no attempt to find out who the concerned politicians were.

An attempt to get answers to a series of FIVE “Ws” and “H” questions posed above would have formed the basis for news editors’ briefing and debriefing of reporters covering the MRC. That, together with techniques of investigative reporting, could have helped the country understand the many intricacies surrounding the illegal organisation.   

 

Is Journalism in Kenya a profession or a craft?*

The just ended East African journalists’ convention at the Kenyatta International Conference Centre was an eye opener in more than one way. It brought into the fore the hard realities of semantic differences in interpreting vital terminologies in the profession between the traditional adversaries in journalism. This time the tug of war rope was the term journalism itself. Does it signify a profession, a trade or a craft?

On one end of the rope were qualified practitioners backed by academics and some lawyers who believed journalism in Kenya ought to be, if indeed it isn’t already, a profession. They strongly argued that if journalism in the region wasn’t a profession then the process of professionalizing it legally ought to have started ages ago. On the other end of the rope were believers in keeping journalism as a craft for fear of introducing regulations to professionalize it with the danger of controlling its practice.

The convention came to an end without the two seeing eye to eye. To give the subject room for further debate I believe the first step to be taken must be defining what a profession is. The best definition of a profession as far as journalism is concerned is, in my opinion, from my good friend Michael Kunczik , a Journalism Professor at the Johannes Good Mountain University Mainz in Germany with whom I co-authored the book “Ethics in Journalism: A reader on their perception in the Third World”. He says a profession is a vocation or an occupation that requires special skills that are based on theoretical foundations which are acquired through systematic training and then tested in a special professional examination which regulates entry into the profession whose members are bound by a Code of Ethics through a legally constituted professional organisation.

I believe we can put journalism in Kenya under a microscope of ten pertinent questions which should then reveal to us whether the fourth estate in this country is manned by people we can correctly describe as professionals. The first question is: Does journalism as a vocation require special skills? The fact of the matter is that whether one is in the print or electronic media he or she cannot survive in Kenya’s vibrant journalism without mastering  many special skills needed in news gathering, writing, editing and  presenting through various media.

The second question is whether the skills used in journalism are based on theoretical foundations. The truth is  modern journalism is  based on strict theoretical foundation based on writing skills, interviewing techniques, ethical principles and a lot of  knowledge of media law. Do these qualify to be described as theoretical foundations? In my view, yes. The third question is whether these skills are acquired through special training.

Anyone who has gone through a reputable school of journalism will tell you that training in journalism is becoming very special both in its introductory level and in its various areas of specialisation in both the print and electronic fields including online journalism. New innovations have made the training both more technical and challenging. The fourth question is whether journalism is tested through special professional examinations. The answer to that is, without a doubt, yes.

Again anyone who has been to any journalism school worth its salt will tell you for nothing that to get a degree in journalism one has to pass professional examinations at university level which are set after thorough moderations by professors who examine whether they are of the required degree acceptable levels which may include research and projects as well as hands-on assignments. The fifth question is whether journalism university exams regulate the entry into the profession. The answer to that is unfortunately no.

 The fact of the matter is that in Kenya, like in all other East African countries represented at the convention which included Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi and Southern Sudan, it is only the proprietors who determine the entry into the profession through unilateral methods of closed shop system in reverse. The tough question is: Does this domination and control by proprietors need re-examination?

The sixth question is whether the manner in which journalists enter the profession is regulated by law at least as far as Kenya is concerned. Section Two of Kenya’s The Media Act of 2007 defines a journalist as any  person who holds a diploma or a degree in mass communication from a recognized institution of higher learning and is recognized as such by the Media Council, or any   other person who was practicing as a journalist immediately before the commencement of the Media Act, or who  holds such other qualifications as are recognized by the Council, and earns a living from the practice of journalism, or any  person who habitually engages in the practice of journalism and is recognized as such by the Council.

It can be argued that that legal definition of a journalist in Kenya does, for all practical purposes, professionalize journalism. The seventh question is whether a professional organisation for journalists exits in Kenya.  It so happens that members of the fourth estate in this country have belonged to many different, and sometime adversarial, organisations which include the  Kenya Union of Journalists , Media Owners' Association, Editor’s Guild,  Kenya Correspondent Association, Media NGOs, Media Training Institutions, Public Media and the   Alternative Press, among others.

In 1993, when the then Attorney General Amos Wako threatened to come up with a code of ethics for journalists, all these otherwise confrontational organisations joined hands to form a Media Industry Steering Committee which was instrumental in the formation of the first self-regulating and independent Media Council which framed up the existing code of conduct. The question is: Can the present shape and structure of the Media Council pass for a professional organisation for journalists?

The eighth question is whether a functioning and acceptable Code of Ethics exists for the journalism profession in Kenya? The Second Schedule of the Media Act of 2007 talks of CODE OF CONDUCT FOR THE PRACTICE OF JOURNALISM. Was there a deliberate avoidance of the use of the term “ETHICS”? There are known editors in this country who are opposed to professionalization and are against the term “ethics”. They give it its philosophical, rather than professional, meaning. Be that as it may the Code lists 25 principles as part of the law. Is there room for the improvement of this code?

The ninth question is whether the Media Council adequately fulfils its mandate as a professional body? The answer to that is to be found in the Act which says its functions are to mediate or arbitrate in disputes between the government and the media, between the public and the media and intramedia; and to promote and protect freedom and independence of the media. It also says that among its important duties is to promote high professional standards amongst journalists; and enhance professional collaboration among media practitioners.

Essentially these are duties of a professional organisation and the law also says that the Council’s functions will include promoting ethical standards among journalists and in the media; and ensuring the protection of the rights and privileges of journalists in the performance of their duties. It also says that the Council will be expected to advise the government or the relevant regulatory authority on matters pertaining to professional, education and the training of journalists and other media practitioners. These are normally the functions of a proper professional institution.

While examining this specific question journalism scholars always ask whether the law on recommendations on employment criteria is strong enough or whether it needs reinforcement so as to professionalize journalism properly in Kenya. Whatever the case may be the law says the Council’s duty is to make recommendations on the employment criteria for journalists. The law also says the Council shall uphold and maintain the ethics and discipline of journalists as set out in the Act and any other relevant law.

It also says the Council shall do all matters that appertain to the effective implementation of the Act by compiling and maintaining a register of journalists, media enterprises and such other related registers as it may deem fit. It also gives the Council powers to conduct an annual review of the performance and the general public opinion of the media, and publish the results in at least two local newspapers. With this kind of law in existence in Kenya it is hard not to accept the fact that journalism has been professionalized in this country.

The tenth and last question to ask is: What does the Constitution say about journalism in Kenya? The simple answer to that question is that apart from Article 33 which deals with Freedom of Expression, Article 34 of the Constitution protects freedom of the Media and Article 35 guarantees Access to information. But it is Article 34 of the Constitution which can be said to be referring to professionalization by stating that Parliament shall enact legislation that provides for the establishment of a body, which shall be independent of control by government, political interests or commercial interests; and which shall reflect the interests of all sections of the society; and set media standards and regulate and monitor compliance with those standards.

When all is said and done this part of the Constitution is indeed talking about the Media Council. But despite the recommendation by the Constitution there are still some very strong forces opposed to the professionalization of journalism in Kenya which leads me to pose yet another question: What interest groups normally oppose the professionalization of journalism? In general there are three groups which can be categorized as powerful proprietors, despotic Governments and untrained practitioners derogatorily called “quacks” in the journalistic fraternity.

The most provocative, may be even controversial, question to ask is whether in Kenya we have proprietors who unilaterally determine entry into journalism because of their sole powers to hire and fire. Arguably some of them go as far as interfering with the ethical principle of INDEPENDENCE in editorial decision making process. Naturally professionalization would change all that. In the UK the most notorious proprietor is Rupert Murdoch whose “News of The World” closed down in July last year for lack of professionalism in adhering to ethical standards.

If journalistic professionalism can be measured at all then three yardsticks seem to be most appropriate. The most obvious of these are the nuts and bolts of news gathering, editing and dissemination without which journalism would exist. Secondly professionalism can be measured by practitioners’ ethical standards. Unethical journalists, like those who worked for Murdoch’s “News of the World” cannot be considered to be professionally upright. Thirdly professionalism can be measured through training with those without any considered to be less professional. 

After publishing for 168 years the “News of The World” was exposed by The Guardian as telephone hackers – an extremely unprofessional thing to be. Its victims included the Royal Family, celebrities, family members of crime victims and families of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is despite the fact that Britain has a fairly reputable Press Complaints Commission, which in this case had failed to guide journalists at NoW. Could the mess at the British paper have been avoided if journalism had been professionalized in that country?

The second group opposed to professionalization of journalism in Kenya is made up of untrained journalists who see the process either as making them lose their jobs or taking them back to school to acquire the minimum required qualifications. Needless to say even with professionalization citizen journalists will still have a role to play in social media through the blogosphere, podcasts and twitters.

The third group opposed to professionalization of journalism includes despotic governments eager to muzzle the media without real professionals independently establishing a proper fourth estate. In Kenya when the Media Act was first drafted in 2007 by the Government an attempt was made to introduce a section that would compel journalists to disclose sources of their information. This led to hundreds of journalists marching silently through Nairobi streets to condemn the proposed section of the law. The international community including Article 19 condemned the authorities in Kenya for trying to take the country back to the Moi dictatorship.

The journalists, drawn from all media houses in the country, also presented a petition to the then Head of Public Service and Secretary to the Cabinet, Mr Francis Muthaura. They were petitioning President Kibaki not to assent to the Media Bill. The Bill had to be changed quite drastically before it was published into the current law which establishes journalism as a profession in this country.

*A shorter version of this article was first published by The Star newspaper of 14^th May 2012

The Media Bill Must Be Discussed

Soon Parliament in Kenya will have to accept or reject the Media Bill which the Minister for Information and Communications, Mutahi Kagwe, has tabled and seen it through the First Reading. When it reaches the Second Reading it will be the cause of what promises to be a very heated debate among parliamentarians before they reject or accept it as the law regulating the media in Kenya. So far the public debate about the Bill shows that very many people oppose it though the debate itself has been extremely biased for a number of reasons.

To begin with the debate has been conducted mainly in the print media where editors determine what will be printed. Secondly the print media are all controlled by the media owners who would like the Bill killed and have publicly said as much. Thirdly media owners today control the Media Council which they claim should not be statutory as the Bill suggests. Fourthly media owners oppose professionalization of journalism which the Bill indirectly backs.

Kenyans, therefore, have never been given an opportunity to examine the Bill objectively and they are not in a position to know whether Kagwe’s intentions are to muzzle or protect the media. The only solution is to examine the Bill thoroughly before either accepting or damning it. The Bill’s Memorandum of Objects and Reasons claims its principle object is to provide for the establishment of the Media Council of Kenya and the Media Advisory Board, bodies which “will regulate the practice of journalism in Kenya.”

The Bill, according to the memorandum, seeks to create the framework that will allow journalists and other media practitioners “to exercise their freedom freely and responsibly in a sound and professional manner and also seek to promote self regulation and accountability in the media industry”. It is without a doubt that the mass media in Kenya today enjoy one of the freest environments on the continent of Africa ; but everyone also agrees that professional standards of journalism could do with some improvement. Whether that improvement could come about through the law regulating the media or be left to independent self regulation should be the focus of the debate on Mutahi’s Bill.

The arguments currently advanced by those who oppose the Bill warn that a statutory Media Council could only be controlled by the Government and could not possible be self regulating. This tough stand is not supported by the Bill which clearly says in Section 3 (2) that the Council will be a body corporate which will promote and protect freedom and independence of the media. If he Bill is passed that obviously will be the law. There is nowhere in the Bill that says the Council will be part of the Government and, as a matter of fact, Section 5 (h) says one of its functions will be to advise on various regulatory authority on matters pertaining to professional education and training of journalists and other media practitioners .

Today there are all sorts of bogus training institutions all over the country purporting to be training journalists yet the current Media Council, of which I happen to be a member, can do absolutely nothing about it. The only way the mushrooming schools of journalism could be controlled is to make the Media Council stronger with enough powers to close down sub-standard so called schools. The power and strength of the Media Council could only come about by making it a statutory body.

Section 5 (i) of the Bill empowers the Council to make recommendations on employment criteria for journalists. All properly trained journalists in Kenya have been crying for that because proprietors who as I said earlier own the Media Council, have not only been exploiting journalists unfairly but have also been employing really unqualified people who have been responsible for the bad name journalism has in Kenya as far as professionalism is concerned. On matters of ethics the draft Bill suggests that one of the functions of the Council shall be to uphold and maintain ethics and discipline of media practitioners.

The Bill provides on the Third Schedule the Code of Conduct for the Practice of Journalism which includes Accuracy and Fairness, Independence, Integrity, Accountability, Opportunity to Reply, Unnamed Sources, Confidentiality, Misrepresentations, Obscenity, Taste and Tone in Reporting, Paying for News and Articles, Covering Ethnic, Religious and Sectarian Conflict, Recording Interviews and Telephone Conversations, Intrusion into Grief and Shock, Sex Discrimination and Financial Journalism.

With very few exceptions these are the same principles of the current code and conduct and practice in Kenya as agreed upon in April 2001 by eight members of the Media Industry Steering Committee which is made up of the Kenya Union of Journalists, Media Owners’ Association, Editors’ Guild of Kenya, the Alternative Press, Media NGOs and State Media. With the exception of the Alternative Press, Media NGOs and State Media all the rest will be represented in the suggested Council. There are probably very good reasons to exclude the three from the new Council and among them is the fact that the owners, practitioners and editors of both the alternative media and state media could belong to other institutions which will compose the statutory body. Media NGOs are really not practicing journalists and if they have the evidence that they are then they should either belong to the union of media owners’ association.

Questions have been asked as to why COTU, religious organizations, Association of Professional Societies in E.A, United Disabled Persons of Kenya, Kenya National Chambers of Commerce and Industry and Kenya Private Sector Alliance should belong to the Media Council. I believe the membership of these institutions should be reviewed though they happen to be the ones that have always complained of mistreatment by the media. Also to be reviewed should be Section 7 (2) (b) of the Draft which disqualifies any person who is directly or indirectly an owner, shareholder, director or partner of media establishment in Kenya. With this part of the Draft unchanged it would be difficult for members of Media Owners’ Association to be represented in the Council.

The one part of the Bill which will be willingly accepted by most Kenyans in Section 6 which deals with operations of the Council. This part of the Draft suggests that the Council shall operate without any political or other bias or interference and shall be wholly independent and separate from the government, any political party or any nominating authority. This will be the law and the government will be breaking the law if it interferes with the operations of the Council.

The controversial part of the Bill deals with the establishment of the Media Advisory Board whose principle function is to advise the Council generally on the exercise of its powers and the performance of its functions. As a non corporate it looks like the Board is likely to be used by the Government to influence the Media Council. If the Board will be part of the Government how can it be expected to “advise” the Council when Section 5 (h) says it is indeed the Council which will have the role of advising the Government? So who will be expected to advise whom? That deliberate confusion should be disentangled during the Second Reading and may be even the Third Reading if the Bill reaches that stage.

Though Section 22 of the Bill categorically says the Board shall, in performance of its functions, not be subjected to direction or control of any person or authority it says that it shall include the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Information and Communications who is likely to be its most powerful individual in it. The fact that the money to run both the Board and the Council will be appropriated by Parliament proves that both institutions will be public and could easily be influenced by the powers that be.

The most positive yet controversial aspect of the Bill is to be found in Part V Section 29-37 which deals with provisions on making complaints and resolutions of disputes that arise. One of the weakest aspects of the present Media Council is the manner in which it deals with complaints and dispute resolution. Its ineffectiveness has led it to be described as “toothless”. So the establishment of a statutory Media Council will, without a doubt, give the Council some teeth which unfortunately could also be used to bite journalists. Section 33 9(d) for example gives the Council powers to deregister a journalist and withdraw his or her accreditation for a specified period. This section is probably going against Section 79 of the Constitution of Kenya which protects freedom of expression.

The powers of the Council’s Complaints Committee to be found in Section 33 (b) will
not go down very well with editors as it gives the Council authority to order an offending party to publish an apology and correction in a manner as the Council may specify. This is despite the fact that Section 38 (3) says the Council shall not seek to control or direct journalists in the execution of their professional duties. Is correcting an error not part of those duties? Rather than throwing the Bill in the dustbin, however, I believe it should be discussed objectively and be reshaped in such a manner as to be acceptable to both sides . The Bill could be saved and serve a useful purpose in protecting freedom of expression in Kenya.