Kenya is currently going through one of its most difficult political periods. Coming after the hung Presidential elections of 2022, the stability of the government hinged on a cliff.
The Kenya Kwanza government found an economic environment that was hostile to novel development projects. The debt burden was huge and therefore it had to impose new and more taxes to raise funds.
The recurrent and development needs of the government required colossal amounts of resources. The first budget had its fair share of resistance - with the sufuria demonstrations along the streets of major towns.
The opposition found itself on the receiving end of police brutality. Several court cases were initiated to stop the many provisions of the new tax regime.
Some were successful and stalled a number of grand projects, such as the housing and universal health levies. In the second year of the administration, things got worse.
The opposition were getting bolder and pushy in Parliament. Then the GenZ protests took the country by storm.
The unprecedented demonstrations caught the security agencies unawares and threatened the stability of the government. The President backed down.
He returned the controversial Finance Bill, 2024 to Parliament, dissolved Cabinet and reconstituted it with the inclusion of opposition leaders.
The broad-based government was hailed as a master stroke and calmed the rising political tensions.
The climax of the political roller-coaster of the year was the impeachment of Rigathi Gachagua as Deputy President.
This has never happened in the history of Kenya and had multiple effects on the body politic of the nation. Much as members of the Kikuyu community still held key posts in government, there was a general feeling of betrayal.
The split in the Kenya Kwanza coalition had shown early signs. When Gachagua addressed a press conference in Mombasa moments after the President’s at State House, it was clear that the drift was irreversible.
Then came the church’s anger and open hostility to President William Ruto. He had been a beneficiary of the support of the clergy through his generous contributions.
It was therefore baffling that they would turn away his contributions later. More confounding was the coincidence between the DP’s impeachment and the scathing letter by Catholic and Anglican bishops.
During these tumultuous occurrences, the media found themselves in the mix. Under normal circumstances, the media is expected to be impartial.
However, they often find themselves sandwiched between competing interests. When political interests coincide with the political pursuit of the key players, journalists find the environment conducive.
When the two interests become diametrically opposed, journalistic practice becomes challenging. It is generally agreed that the media has not been as objective as expected.
Except for very few, media outlets fell into the trap of provincial cleavages. They actively pursued and buttressed the narrow interests of the protagonists.
Some openly canvassed for the agenda of the political formations of their liking. Some with sister vernacular stations turned them into propaganda and campaign tools for their preferred political alignments.
During the Gen Z protests and its aftermath, the media appeared undecided on how to balance the real time happenings and the need for caution.
Many mainstream media took sides against the movers and pushers of the motion.
Prominence in reporting was granted to the forces opposed to the process. The chaos at the scenes of the public participation were glorified as acts of heroism against an oppressive regime.
Experts with partisan standpoints were invited to studios to give analysis of events as they unfolded. News coverage was skewed and against the grain of journalistic ethics.
Digital platforms have provided valuable spaces for engagements. Social media was strategically deployed by the Gen Z during their historic occupation of Parliament.
However, its raw nature has brought to question the sensitivity of media in relation to its actors and victims. Many social media personalities are influencers of public opinion.
There is nothing untoward by citizens exercising their rights to disagree with government policy. In fact, this should be treated as a fundamental and human right, which the constitution protects.
But without adequate safeguards, social media platforms are likely to be hijacked and misused by reactionary forces. Further virtual platforms give a false sense of security to keyboard warriors.
Criminal activities, including fanning ethnic animosity, have been easily perpetrated in such spaces. As the country moves into the next half of Kenya Kwanza’s first term, the media has a huge responsibility.
Media owners, practitioners and influencers must use their positions of privilege to champion open governance, national cohesion, equity, justice and respect of human dignity.
In the same vein, they
should not promote tribal bigotry
and corruption.
