Journalists are professionals who are expected to present the world objectively without twisting the facts and appearing to be seen to perpetuate inequality among people. It is prudent that if people form part of the ‘raw material’ for your news, then they ought to be treated with the dignity that they deserve. Portraying individuals as insignificant/lesser beings in more ways than one continues to stoke the ever-burning embers of inequality that precipitated the sorry state that visited our country after the disputed 2007 polls. One cannot fail to remember the degrading terms that were used in Rwanda to refer to the minority Tutsis who were, consequently, murdered brutally in the 1994 genocide. They were being referred to as cockroaches.
In Kenya, however, it is the use of terms like ‘kwekwe’, ‘madoadoa’, ‘viraka’, ‘wabara’, ‘shifta’ and the ilk that often elicit anger and violence whenever they are used for the intent of sidelining – labeling one as ‘other’ and ‘not one of us’, at very odd times as these when the country is engaged in high political gear ready for next year’s unprecedented general elections, not forgetting the delicate road of constitutionalism that we are in the midst of.
Beneath this fire of discrimination among Kenyans by the use of these names, lies a more dangerous trend that appears to be propagated and condoned by the media/press. Whether knowingly or unknowingly, is not the question. But the crux of the matter is: why would a sincere journalist, who is true to his professional ethics, fail/forget to rightfully identify another patriotic Kenyan whose very picture he uses as a caption for his story on the local daily time and again, while on the same page spending more space than is necessary to name some politicians/big-shots ‘rich’ names – including those who can hardly be recognized from the background of the caption? Any journalist who is worth his/her profession will spare a minute after clicking his camera, to ask and scribble down the name(s) of the person he photographs so as to include it with the caption on the paper. Unless it is a picture of a tumultuous crowd like the ones that throng state functions at Uhuru Park. Every Kenyan knows elected officials represent their interests in government, but their representation does not include that of the individual image.
Kenyan people have value and dignity. And they are not asking for anything more (or anything less). It is irresponsible for a photojournalist to post a picture of a fellow Kenyan on the newspaper and refer to her/him as “a woman”, “a man”, “a resident of bla bla bla” etc. It is understandable if it is a picture of a crowd, but not when it is a couple of people. Unless one chooses not to have his/her name included in the paper together with the photo, these individuals should always be identified rightfully. Courtesy demands that the journalist do this as part of his/her job duty.
I do not have a copy of the “Journalists Constitution” in my library but my crystal ball tells me such behavior is not welcome in professional journalism. It is unethical to say the least. If Mzalendo Kibunja is reading this ergo, he should tell us why such behavior should not fall under the category of ‘hate reporting’ or ‘discriminative journalism’. Looked at keenly, this could be worse than negative ethnicity, for it paints the picture of a Kenya of “Wananchi” versus “Wenyenchi”.
Figure this, for times without count, a leading newspaper has been posting a picture of a ‘desperate mother wailing, hands high in the air and a sandal clutched in one hand during the post election violence’. It is 2011, over three years since the incident, but the same image, without a name, continues to appear on the papers, safe for one or two times when a good journalist bothered to include her name. Let the world, or at least Kenyans know who this beautiful mother is. She is someone’s child, mother, grandma, sister etc. She is a Kenyan. And like the photojournalist who took her picture, her name needs to appear beneath her caption on the newspaper. If anything, the caption bears her image and not that of the photojournalist. As a society, we are known to honor even the dead. As a victim of the PEV, that lady too, and all others in the IDP camps deserve to be honored and respected.
Ever since ICC prosecutor Louis Moreno-Ocampo made public the names of the PEV suspects, their names have prominently featured in the print and electronic media hundreds if not thousands of times. The six are just suspects, at least as of now, and that being the case, are presumed innocent until otherwise proven in a court of law. Having said that, looking at the way the names of the six have been sequenced/chronologized leaves one with more questions than answers. It is highly suspect, for it appears like there is an established pecking order among the Ocampo-six as they are infamously referred to these days. I do not know which Math professor would agree, for instance, that Radio presenter Sang’s name always comes last in the list as a matter of probability or coincidence. Or is it that his other co-accused’s names always precede his just by chance? Come on people! One need not be a rocket scientist to figure out that the media has, and is, treating fellow Kenyans with bias and contempt.
The media can either glue our society together, or shred it apart like tatters. We sure do not want to go the 2007/2008 way again, or the Rwanda way where human beings were treated with utmost contempt and disregard to the extent of being branded as “cockroaches”.
We all appreciate the good work done by journalists and the media in general. They are an integral part of our society. However, if issues like these are not brought to the forefront and addressed, then as a society, the gap between “wananchi” and “wenyenchi” will keep widening/rifting, creating a precarious cliff dangerous to both groups.
No comments:
Post a Comment