Disruption in the media industry in Kenya and by large extension on the lives of journalists is worrying.
Not because Kenya is an exception but there are basic things if done can minimise the effects of the disruptions. Media management books and research are available and make cogent proposals on how to sustain the media business and journalism amidst the current challenges.
The mass sackings in the media targeting the already frustrated and overworked staff will not and is not in tandem with the global media sustainability and viability approaches.
That the media sector in Kenya, just like the rest of the industries and profession is going through tremendous transformation and requires new innovative business models is no longer in question.
Media owners and chief executives are grossly wrong and the direction, which seems routine, has and will not yield the required results.
What ails the media in Kenya is not the highly and frequently paid journalists- or the company’s wage bills- but huge monies spent on non-core business issue and ego that has seen huge wastage of resources.
The core media companies have not bothered, despite their influence, to engage the government to discuss, a creation of a conducive operating environment for the business- tax reduction or zero rating of taxes on printing paper, broadcast equipment, lowering of costs of content distribution on digital platforms, and more internally on joint productions or sharing infrastructure and only compete on content.
Globally, among the key transformation approaches to running the media business is following the dictum “content is the king and quality, and professionalism is the queen.”
It’s this that will be bring back the audience, interest and money to the companies – and this can only maturely be managed by a fusion of experienced and skilled staff and young focused journalists- not just cheaply paid labour of any person who can throw content on your digital platforms.
The mass sacking of highly experienced journalistic hands because of salary and cost reduction, is not going to help.
Embrace joint work and approaches- one wonders why for example we have four major printing presses in Nairobi for the four print media companies, daily we have four sets of vans distributing papers in the same regions, we have huge spaces in the name of regional bureaus, many times we have broadcasting equipment on functions where it can easily be shared- what would happen- if we had a printing machine in the four major towns which is shared.
Elsewhere media groups have engaged government and established media funds, firms approaching government supported C0vid-19 recovery funds for the private sector, tax rebates- and more recently approaching philanthropy groups and civil society - the advertising revenue model failed already especially from government- to support professional and public interest journalism.
I am not sure why even after routinely sacking journalists in big numbers over the years and without any success to write home about- they insist on this.
There are more tested and stable approaches to dealing with an industry in transformation including dealing with declining revenues and crisis- least of them destabilising their human resources pool, through sackings and retrenchments.
Content cannot be the king, when you have a skeleton and unstable work force- getting off the newsrooms the most experienced and resourceful staff, will not help deal with the current need for more in-depth and well source news that will make content the king as it were.
Discussion around the effects of the current disruption in the business models in the industry that saw for a long-time reliance on advertisement revenue and especially from the government is very relevant.
Media enterprises must relook at their business models, which a number are already doing, but need legal and policy support including making the global technology firms pay for content they get from the local media.
In addition, there are calls for tax reforms on media equipment and payment of debts owed to the media and other players to ease the pressure on the establishments, as measures that will allow the industry to play the national duty expected of it.
This proposal has been opposed by some people on the position that such funding of the media from the taxpayers kitty will compromise media independence, a position I find not holding.
Taxpayers funding of the media is not unique to Kenya, its practiced in many countries including Sweden, Canada among others- for freedom of expression and access to information are fundamental to human rights and national development.
The media business is a very expensive investment, and the operating environment must be made conducive to allow the sector not only to play its central role in the democratic process, but a business can makes returns.
With nearly 200 radio stations, 85 television stations, 100 print publications and 200 online media outlets, the media industry in Kenya is a big contributor to the national economy and employer, thus should not just be looked at in terms of news reporting.
Averagely one requires in addition to the costs of forming a community group and registering it, Sh700,000 to start a community radio station, Sh3m for a small commercial station including costs of registering a company, acquiring broadcasting equipment and hire of staff, while an average television station requires Sh10m to start and operate annually in Kenya.
For example the cost of content distribution for a national TV station with one channel is Sh300,000 per month, the cost of acquiring a licence is Sh180,000 having been revised from Sh300,000 previously.
Cost of equipment installation for TV is nearly Sh5m. For newspapers, in addition to the investment in equipment and staff, the Books and Newspaper Act requires that you deposit a bond.
In addition, the media enterprises must pay the other relevant national and county government loans and levies which has made the business very expensive.
It is wrong for media managers to continue journalists as the reasons for the reduced revenues for the industry. Studies have shown that companies lose the most valuable and experienced staff during such panicky interventions to deal with crises.
The most independent minded, versed and experienced tend to leave when such turbulence is being experienced by the sector, who can get huge pensions, start their own independent work or are likely to be employed by other firms. Remaining with cheap labor and employees who feel being assisted is not the kind of approach a serious business wants to run.
See attempts by the government to reduce government spending through focusing on reducing the wage bill, and how severally this approach failed.
The World Bank has done studies elsewhere and noted serious impact of the unintended consequences relating to use of the reduction of the wage bill approach to managing strains on industries.
“Downsizing and capacity building initiatives failed to produce permanent reductions in civil service size and to overcome capacity constraints in economic management and service delivery,” (World Bank 1999, ii).
At the same time, encouraging employees to retire early could lead to a hike in pension payments, might not lead to quick wins, and are more likely to produce quick losses. And indeed, many of the media companies sacking have been unable to clear of the workers, pay them their dues, thus face labor related issues.
Given the huge debts, many are unable to get loans from financial institutions and are listed by CRB.
Victor Bwire is the Deputy Chief Executive Officer and Programmes Manager at the Media Council of Kenya.