The code says in general, the media should avoid pushing obscene, vulgar or offensive material unless such material contains news value which is necessary in the public interest. In the same vain, it says, publication of photographs showing mutilated bodies, bloody incidents, and abhorrent scenes should be avoided unless the publication of such photographs will serve the public interest. It further suggests Television stations must exercise great care and responsibility when presenting programmes where children are likely to be part of the audience.
These ethical values can best be examined by looking at four aspects of their moral principles. First the code talks about obscenity which is an extremely wide and controversial subject in journalism. Taste in journalism, another hot professional subject, can also be examined separately while TV and children is a subject about which many books have been written. The most controversial part of this ethical principle is probably the issue of various tones adopted by journalists while reporting both local and international events.
It is impossible to examine the subject of obscenity without looking into its legal angle because Chapter XVII of the Penal Code (CAP 63) is about “Nuisances and Offenses against Health and Convenience” and Section 181 of this chapter says clearly in subsection (1) that any person who: (a) for the purpose of or by way of trade or for the purpose of distribution or public exhibition , makes , produces or has in his possession anyone or more obscene writing , drawing, prints, paintings, printed matter, pictures, posters, emblems, photographs, cinematograph films or any other obscene objects, or any other object tending to corrupt morals ;or (b) for any of the purposes above motioned, conveyed or exported imports, conveys or exports, or causes to be imported , any such matters or things or in any manner whatsoever puts any of them in circulation ; or (c)carries on or takes part in any business, whether public or private concerned with any such matters or things, or deals in any such matters or things in any manner whatsoever, or distributes any of them , or exhibits any of them publicly , or makes a business of lending any of them ; or (d) advertises or makes known by any means whatsoever, with a view to assisting the circulation of or traffic in any such matters or things , that a person is engaged in any of the acts referred to in this section, or advertises makes known how , or from whom any such matters or things can be procured either directly or indirectly; or
(e) publicly exhibits any indecent show or performances tending to corrupt morals, is guilty of a misdemeanour and is liable to imprisonment for two years or to a fine of seven thousand shillings. Subsection (2) says if, in respect of any of the offences specified in paragraphs (a),(b), (c) and (d) of subsection (1), any constituent elements thereof is committed in Kenya , such commission shall be sufficient to render the person accused of such offence triable therefore in Kenya. Subsection (3) says a court, on convicting any person of an offense against this section, may order to be destroyed any matter or thing made, possessed or used for the purpose of that offence. Subsection (4) says a court may, on the application of the Attorney-General, the Solicitor-General, a State Counsel or a Superintendent of Police, order the destruction of any obscene matter or thing to which this section relates , whether any person may or may not have been convicted under this section in respect of the obscene matter or thing.
According to writers online encyclopedia Writersmarket.com obscenity is often used incorrectly as a synonym or pornography. It says, as I have pointed out above, obscenity has an alterable legal meaning, depending on evolving court rulings. The decision of Miller v California, for example, states that obscenity is determined by (a) whether “the average person, applying contemporary standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest... (b)whether the work depicts or describes in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined as prohibited by the applicable state law and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.”
The encyclopedia says that the local standards replaced national standards as the criteria for judging whether a work is obscene. This American law is indirectly observed in Kenya without people talking or complaining about it. Down at the coast an extremely prurient wedding dance Msondo perfumed only by women behind closed doors would be considered extremely obscene in some puritanical societies of Kenya. From the moment it first came up with a code of ethics for American journalists in 1932, the American Society of Newspaper Editor (ASNE) connected obscenity in journalism with attempts to gain readers attention in order to boost circulations. In a Section called Decency it said:
Today when ASNE accepts the existence of different codes of ethics for different states it still sees obscenity in journalism caused mainly by “Attention” rather than “Information”. Explaining this phenomenon Philip Meyer, graduate schools drop-out who occupies the Knights Chair of Journalism at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, says advertising-supported media are resorting to some bizarre strategies to capture their share of attention. He gives two examples: Pushing what he calls the envelop of tastelessness by promoting obscenity, and profanity even in what used to be television’s family hour.
His second example is what he calls “corrupting views and entertainment products by blending them with commercial messages so that the user never knows where the journalist’s or artist’s work ends and the pitchman begins.” Morality in media has become such a serious issue that an organization called Morality in Media. Inc. has been formed by people who regularly monitor the media obscenity content and when they are angered they take drastic steps including writing to the president. One such letter was written in January 2005 in which the President of MIM, Bob Peters said: “Years ago, TV broadcasters had a strong industry-wide code and self imposed internal standards that generally reflected community standards. However, this (is) no longer the case. Studies show how sexual (talk and action) and vulgar broadcast TV has become.”
Could a similar letter be written about vulgarity on Kenyan TV? To answer that question one can only say when TV was first introduced in Kenya one could never hear the “F” word mentioned. Today there are some programmes a strict African parent would be embarrassed to watch with his or her teenage children. Has our society changed or the standards of journalism become more influenced by attention rather than information? Obscenity laws and media codes are normally meant to protect children. In Britain a media institution could be sued for obscene libel when that country still had high moral values.
G.F.L. Bridgman of the Middle Temple, was a barrister and an honorary standing counsel of the National Union of Journalists in 1938 when he defined obscenity libel as writing or picture or presentation in some permanent form the decency of which has a tendency to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences and into whose hands the publication may fall. After that definition Bridgman says: “Here again the language and the tone of the matter published is all important. What is proper in a legal or medical text book may clearly be improper in the newspaper which, it must be remembered, is broadcast to all and sundry. The test is whether the publication is to the public advantage or the public harm.”
Sixty seven years after Bridgman wrote those words the President of MIM, Robert Peters, was still concerned about corrupting the minds of children through obscene publications and TV. Addressing the New York State Bar Association on January 24, 2005 he said: “Most Americans understand the difference between right and wrong. They understand the difference between cherished liberty and ruinous license. They understand that children are affected by the media they consume and that if the entertainment industry has a right to distribute whatever it wants, wherever and whenever it wants, children will be the loser. They understand that law is necessary to maintain a safe, healthy and decent society.”
Most Kenyans have more or less the same concepts of the differences between right and wrong and they may even have the same attitudes towards legal intervention to make sure their children are not exposed to immorality through the media .Unfortunately sometimes journalists are put in very difficult position when major events involving very important personalities in the society are engaged in immoral activities which, of necessity, are of very high news value. One such event was when the former US President, Bill Clinton, was engaged in extramarital activities with Monica Lewinsky. What they did privately in the Oval Office became international front page news in almost all newspapers in the world including the most conservative ones such as The Wall Street Journal in the United States , The Times in Britain and both the Daily Nation and The Standard here in Kenya.
With advanced technology which makes pornographic material easily accessible to children, editors have an even more daunting task about what to and not to publish. Discussing this issue for ASNE in November, 2001, Marilyn Greenwald, a former reporter for Columbia Dispatch, who is now a professor of Journalism at Ohio University says the current generation of editors is not the first to have to make tough decisions about how much detail to publish when sex is involved in a story, but many recent and dramatic changes in society have made it increasingly difficult to make those decisions. Advanced technology in particular, she says, have forced many previously complacent editors to rethink what to publish. If for instance, the local newspaper will not publish the graphic details of a local story, what do editors do when explicit stories roll off the wire?
She correctly answers that question by admitting that if the newspaper withholds details from a national story because of what it deems inappropriate content, readers can certainly go to online sources, 24-hour cable and magazines to find what they are missing. And newspaper editors who are used to shielding “innocent” youngsters from adult content know that these youngsters probably are more adept than their parents at getting such information over their home computers. The Kenyan youngsters are no different from the American ones. Greenwald raises another issue which is of greater concern to us than to the Americans. She says there are other changes in culture and society which have affected (editors’ decisions). She talks of the new generation diseases and advances in their treatments (which) raise questions about how explicit to get in conveying how these diseases are spread and treated.
She is of course talking about the spread of AIDS, the use of condoms and safe sex. When writing about the spread and control of AIDS journalists in Kenya must not be afraid of using explicit terms when describing what causes it and how to prevent it. This, in fact, is already happening and no one can be sexually aroused when reading such stories. As a matter of facts many of those stories are written for the benefit of teenage children.
About publications of disturbing photographs which show traumatic suffering of people the journalistic adage “when it bleeds it leads!” is normally what editors in this country and the rest of the world stick to no matter what the ethical rules say. In Kenya editors had a field day after the bomb blast of August 7th , 1998 when pictures were professionally used big. In the US horrifying pictures of people suffering following the September 11, 2001 were published all over the world for a long period after the blast.
Writing for American Press Institute in an article titled: Tragedy in Photos, a New Standard? , Phil Nesbitt, a newspaper journalist for 34 years and a former director for API who is also the past President of Society for News Design who was also the Editor of the US Army’s weekly V Corps Guardian, says newspapers…have been running horrifying images for more than a generation, however, the process by which the selections ore made has changed a great deal – as has the acceptance of readers. About 9/11 he says: With the tragic event of Sept 11, news media were faced with constant stream of incredible images, one that initially reminded many of the latest action movies they had seen. Even though the visual media, especially the newspapers, showed great restraint in the type of images used in the first days after (the) attack.”
Be that as it may there were still some pictures used which became a subject of serious debate in the professional, legal and academic circles. One such picture was used by many American newspapers showing a man falling headfirst from WTC towers to his horrible death on a New York concrete street.
The most important question asked by Nesbitt in his article is: “Does the use of this picture and those like it constitute a change in the standards and ethics exercised in newsrooms across the country or something else?” In the same article Nesbitt quotes John Wilson who was the chief picture assignment editor of the New York Times on the day of the tragedy saying the use of that picture was heavily debated at the Times an “ we knew that some readers would find it objectionable . However it told a unique element of the story that many wouldn’t otherwise realize. And it was a horrific decision those people had to make, to jump. We (at the Times) saw various forms of this picture in many New York newspapers, but we felt this one told its own story.”
In Kenya Editors don’t appear to engage in any professional discussion about whether or not use ghastly pictures of dead people killed by the police because they were the most “wanted criminals”. The number of times Kenyan newspaper readers and TV viewers are shown horrible pictures of seriously injured people after road accidents are so many that I could give countless examples. Whoever suspects that journalists in Kenya are sadists who take great pleasure in other people’s suffering or even getting killed in the cruelest manner may not be far from the truth.
Paradoxically some pictures showing greasily death scenes win prizes. Bill Marimow , Editor of The Sun in Baltimore , Maryland recalls such pictures now known to all journalism students in the world: “ The Vietnam man shot on the street of Saigon ; the little girl running down the highway after being burned in Vietnam , and the little girl and her mother plummeting from a burning apartment house in Boston . I think that was a Pulitzer winner. These pictures show initiative and awful glimpses of death or near death,” he says.
Just like obscene pictures, scenes of violence affect children negatively. According to psychological research conducted by Abelard, a human knowledge source that is informative and educational for all, the three major effects of seeing violence on television include becoming less sensitive to pain and suffering of others, becoming more fearful of the world around them and behaving in an aggressive way towards others. I am not aware of any empirical evidence of how Kenyan children are affected by violence on TV but there must be a great number who have watched acts of violence on the screen. In September and October 2005 Kenyan children saw their parents fighting with chairs and stones as they campaigned just before the November 21st referendum on the so-called Wako Constitution.
According to Abelard studies by George Gerber at the University of Pennsylvania, children television shows contain about 20 violent acts each hour. The studies showed that children who watch a lot of television were more likely to think that the world is a mean and dangerous place. Here in Kenya a large number of children watch cartoons that contain acts of violence put across in very aggressive manner. Gerber’s study shows that “children who watched the violent shows were more likely to strike out at playmates, argue, disobey authority and were less willing to wait for things than those children who watched non-violent programmes.
The last part of the code talks about “tone” in reporting without really elaborating. Since the word “tone” is lumped together with “obscenity” and “taste” then in this context it must be a “tone” that suggests either “violence” or some form of “obscenity” yet when journalism scholars discuss various “tones” in reporting they are really talking about bias in journalism and what they have in mind is political bias . In his book Press Bias and Politics Jim A. Kuypers discusses how media frame controversial issues. Analysing the book, Amazon.com says it charts the effects the printed press – and by extension, broadcast media – have upon messages of political and social leaders when they discuss controversial issues.
After examining 700 American press reports Kuypers concludes that media bias hurts the democratic process in general by ignoring non-mainstream left positions and vilifying many moderates ands vast majority of right leaning positions. If similar studies were conducted in Kenya some form of bias in the Kenyan media will also be discovered. On October 17, 2005, for example, The Standard had a front page splash story with a heading saying “Kibaki Plans New Districts for Nakuru as Race Hots Up”.
That headline had a strap-line on to saying “Orange Sweeps Through Coast, Western and Predicts Victory while…” The ‘tone” of the entire story gave the impression that President Kibaki was planning to create new districts in Nakuru in order to win votes to support the proposed constitution in a referendum which was about to take place. The story below the headline said “ President Kibaki’s announcement is likely to be seen by the orange (No) platform as yet another campaign freebie planned by the government ahead of the November 21st referendum on the proposed new constitution.” On the back page of the Daily Nation of the same date the same story appeared with a very different tone. Its headline said “State To Consider District Plea.” Its kicker said “Kibaki agrees with MPs’ Call That Nakuru deserves Two New Units.” The story said: President Kibaki yesterday said the Government would consider proposals to create two new districts in Nakuru.”
The slant in the Daily Nation story is that the President was reacting to the demands of the people. It was a pro-Kibaki “tone”. The “tone” of The Standard was that the President was bribing people to support the new Constitution.
One of the most scathing attacks of the political tone in American journalism was made in 2003 by Al Franken in his book “Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them”. Reviewing the book on the net Salon.com says Al Franken (is the man) of the hour. For years we have suffered while right-wing bullies hijacked American politics and media...persecuting a President for consensual sex act ; stealing 2000 election ; trashing the country’s economy , environment and constitutional safeguards ; handing the government over to the highest corporate bidders deceiving the public into the bloody quagmire ; and then brazenly smearing anyone who dared to criticise this orgy of dreadful leadership as un-American. The instant runaway success of Franken’s new book is not just a result of Fox News’ inexplicable decision to shoot itself in the foot and head by launching an idiotic trademark infringement law suit, but also the author’s bold and roaring funny-knack for confronting the Bush Presidency and its prevaricating apologists.” Obviously among the apologists are journalists who slant the news and give it a pro-Bush “tone”.
I believe there is absolutely nothing wrong with columnists, commentators or even entire media houses declaring their political stand on any given issue. The problem with Kenyan journalism is that those stands can only be noticed through the “tone” of stories because almost every newspaper, radio and television station claim to be professionally independent, fair and absolutely objective. Readers, viewers and listeners know better!
These ethical values can best be examined by looking at four aspects of their moral principles. First the code talks about obscenity which is an extremely wide and controversial subject in journalism. Taste in journalism, another hot professional subject, can also be examined separately while TV and children is a subject about which many books have been written. The most controversial part of this ethical principle is probably the issue of various tones adopted by journalists while reporting both local and international events.
It is impossible to examine the subject of obscenity without looking into its legal angle because Chapter XVII of the Penal Code (CAP 63) is about “Nuisances and Offenses against Health and Convenience” and Section 181 of this chapter says clearly in subsection (1) that any person who: (a) for the purpose of or by way of trade or for the purpose of distribution or public exhibition , makes , produces or has in his possession anyone or more obscene writing , drawing, prints, paintings, printed matter, pictures, posters, emblems, photographs, cinematograph films or any other obscene objects, or any other object tending to corrupt morals ;or (b) for any of the purposes above motioned, conveyed or exported imports, conveys or exports, or causes to be imported , any such matters or things or in any manner whatsoever puts any of them in circulation ; or (c)carries on or takes part in any business, whether public or private concerned with any such matters or things, or deals in any such matters or things in any manner whatsoever, or distributes any of them , or exhibits any of them publicly , or makes a business of lending any of them ; or (d) advertises or makes known by any means whatsoever, with a view to assisting the circulation of or traffic in any such matters or things , that a person is engaged in any of the acts referred to in this section, or advertises makes known how , or from whom any such matters or things can be procured either directly or indirectly; or
(e) publicly exhibits any indecent show or performances tending to corrupt morals, is guilty of a misdemeanour and is liable to imprisonment for two years or to a fine of seven thousand shillings. Subsection (2) says if, in respect of any of the offences specified in paragraphs (a),(b), (c) and (d) of subsection (1), any constituent elements thereof is committed in Kenya , such commission shall be sufficient to render the person accused of such offence triable therefore in Kenya. Subsection (3) says a court, on convicting any person of an offense against this section, may order to be destroyed any matter or thing made, possessed or used for the purpose of that offence. Subsection (4) says a court may, on the application of the Attorney-General, the Solicitor-General, a State Counsel or a Superintendent of Police, order the destruction of any obscene matter or thing to which this section relates , whether any person may or may not have been convicted under this section in respect of the obscene matter or thing.
According to writers online encyclopedia Writersmarket.com obscenity is often used incorrectly as a synonym or pornography. It says, as I have pointed out above, obscenity has an alterable legal meaning, depending on evolving court rulings. The decision of Miller v California, for example, states that obscenity is determined by (a) whether “the average person, applying contemporary standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest... (b)whether the work depicts or describes in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined as prohibited by the applicable state law and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.”
The encyclopedia says that the local standards replaced national standards as the criteria for judging whether a work is obscene. This American law is indirectly observed in Kenya without people talking or complaining about it. Down at the coast an extremely prurient wedding dance Msondo perfumed only by women behind closed doors would be considered extremely obscene in some puritanical societies of Kenya. From the moment it first came up with a code of ethics for American journalists in 1932, the American Society of Newspaper Editor (ASNE) connected obscenity in journalism with attempts to gain readers attention in order to boost circulations. In a Section called Decency it said:
Today when ASNE accepts the existence of different codes of ethics for different states it still sees obscenity in journalism caused mainly by “Attention” rather than “Information”. Explaining this phenomenon Philip Meyer, graduate schools drop-out who occupies the Knights Chair of Journalism at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, says advertising-supported media are resorting to some bizarre strategies to capture their share of attention. He gives two examples: Pushing what he calls the envelop of tastelessness by promoting obscenity, and profanity even in what used to be television’s family hour.
His second example is what he calls “corrupting views and entertainment products by blending them with commercial messages so that the user never knows where the journalist’s or artist’s work ends and the pitchman begins.” Morality in media has become such a serious issue that an organization called Morality in Media. Inc. has been formed by people who regularly monitor the media obscenity content and when they are angered they take drastic steps including writing to the president. One such letter was written in January 2005 in which the President of MIM, Bob Peters said: “Years ago, TV broadcasters had a strong industry-wide code and self imposed internal standards that generally reflected community standards. However, this (is) no longer the case. Studies show how sexual (talk and action) and vulgar broadcast TV has become.”
Could a similar letter be written about vulgarity on Kenyan TV? To answer that question one can only say when TV was first introduced in Kenya one could never hear the “F” word mentioned. Today there are some programmes a strict African parent would be embarrassed to watch with his or her teenage children. Has our society changed or the standards of journalism become more influenced by attention rather than information? Obscenity laws and media codes are normally meant to protect children. In Britain a media institution could be sued for obscene libel when that country still had high moral values.
G.F.L. Bridgman of the Middle Temple, was a barrister and an honorary standing counsel of the National Union of Journalists in 1938 when he defined obscenity libel as writing or picture or presentation in some permanent form the decency of which has a tendency to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences and into whose hands the publication may fall. After that definition Bridgman says: “Here again the language and the tone of the matter published is all important. What is proper in a legal or medical text book may clearly be improper in the newspaper which, it must be remembered, is broadcast to all and sundry. The test is whether the publication is to the public advantage or the public harm.”
Sixty seven years after Bridgman wrote those words the President of MIM, Robert Peters, was still concerned about corrupting the minds of children through obscene publications and TV. Addressing the New York State Bar Association on January 24, 2005 he said: “Most Americans understand the difference between right and wrong. They understand the difference between cherished liberty and ruinous license. They understand that children are affected by the media they consume and that if the entertainment industry has a right to distribute whatever it wants, wherever and whenever it wants, children will be the loser. They understand that law is necessary to maintain a safe, healthy and decent society.”
Most Kenyans have more or less the same concepts of the differences between right and wrong and they may even have the same attitudes towards legal intervention to make sure their children are not exposed to immorality through the media .Unfortunately sometimes journalists are put in very difficult position when major events involving very important personalities in the society are engaged in immoral activities which, of necessity, are of very high news value. One such event was when the former US President, Bill Clinton, was engaged in extramarital activities with Monica Lewinsky. What they did privately in the Oval Office became international front page news in almost all newspapers in the world including the most conservative ones such as The Wall Street Journal in the United States , The Times in Britain and both the Daily Nation and The Standard here in Kenya.
With advanced technology which makes pornographic material easily accessible to children, editors have an even more daunting task about what to and not to publish. Discussing this issue for ASNE in November, 2001, Marilyn Greenwald, a former reporter for Columbia Dispatch, who is now a professor of Journalism at Ohio University says the current generation of editors is not the first to have to make tough decisions about how much detail to publish when sex is involved in a story, but many recent and dramatic changes in society have made it increasingly difficult to make those decisions. Advanced technology in particular, she says, have forced many previously complacent editors to rethink what to publish. If for instance, the local newspaper will not publish the graphic details of a local story, what do editors do when explicit stories roll off the wire?
She correctly answers that question by admitting that if the newspaper withholds details from a national story because of what it deems inappropriate content, readers can certainly go to online sources, 24-hour cable and magazines to find what they are missing. And newspaper editors who are used to shielding “innocent” youngsters from adult content know that these youngsters probably are more adept than their parents at getting such information over their home computers. The Kenyan youngsters are no different from the American ones. Greenwald raises another issue which is of greater concern to us than to the Americans. She says there are other changes in culture and society which have affected (editors’ decisions). She talks of the new generation diseases and advances in their treatments (which) raise questions about how explicit to get in conveying how these diseases are spread and treated.
She is of course talking about the spread of AIDS, the use of condoms and safe sex. When writing about the spread and control of AIDS journalists in Kenya must not be afraid of using explicit terms when describing what causes it and how to prevent it. This, in fact, is already happening and no one can be sexually aroused when reading such stories. As a matter of facts many of those stories are written for the benefit of teenage children.
About publications of disturbing photographs which show traumatic suffering of people the journalistic adage “when it bleeds it leads!” is normally what editors in this country and the rest of the world stick to no matter what the ethical rules say. In Kenya editors had a field day after the bomb blast of August 7th , 1998 when pictures were professionally used big. In the US horrifying pictures of people suffering following the September 11, 2001 were published all over the world for a long period after the blast.
Writing for American Press Institute in an article titled: Tragedy in Photos, a New Standard? , Phil Nesbitt, a newspaper journalist for 34 years and a former director for API who is also the past President of Society for News Design who was also the Editor of the US Army’s weekly V Corps Guardian, says newspapers…have been running horrifying images for more than a generation, however, the process by which the selections ore made has changed a great deal – as has the acceptance of readers. About 9/11 he says: With the tragic event of Sept 11, news media were faced with constant stream of incredible images, one that initially reminded many of the latest action movies they had seen. Even though the visual media, especially the newspapers, showed great restraint in the type of images used in the first days after (the) attack.”
Be that as it may there were still some pictures used which became a subject of serious debate in the professional, legal and academic circles. One such picture was used by many American newspapers showing a man falling headfirst from WTC towers to his horrible death on a New York concrete street.
The most important question asked by Nesbitt in his article is: “Does the use of this picture and those like it constitute a change in the standards and ethics exercised in newsrooms across the country or something else?” In the same article Nesbitt quotes John Wilson who was the chief picture assignment editor of the New York Times on the day of the tragedy saying the use of that picture was heavily debated at the Times an “ we knew that some readers would find it objectionable . However it told a unique element of the story that many wouldn’t otherwise realize. And it was a horrific decision those people had to make, to jump. We (at the Times) saw various forms of this picture in many New York newspapers, but we felt this one told its own story.”
In Kenya Editors don’t appear to engage in any professional discussion about whether or not use ghastly pictures of dead people killed by the police because they were the most “wanted criminals”. The number of times Kenyan newspaper readers and TV viewers are shown horrible pictures of seriously injured people after road accidents are so many that I could give countless examples. Whoever suspects that journalists in Kenya are sadists who take great pleasure in other people’s suffering or even getting killed in the cruelest manner may not be far from the truth.
Paradoxically some pictures showing greasily death scenes win prizes. Bill Marimow , Editor of The Sun in Baltimore , Maryland recalls such pictures now known to all journalism students in the world: “ The Vietnam man shot on the street of Saigon ; the little girl running down the highway after being burned in Vietnam , and the little girl and her mother plummeting from a burning apartment house in Boston . I think that was a Pulitzer winner. These pictures show initiative and awful glimpses of death or near death,” he says.
Just like obscene pictures, scenes of violence affect children negatively. According to psychological research conducted by Abelard, a human knowledge source that is informative and educational for all, the three major effects of seeing violence on television include becoming less sensitive to pain and suffering of others, becoming more fearful of the world around them and behaving in an aggressive way towards others. I am not aware of any empirical evidence of how Kenyan children are affected by violence on TV but there must be a great number who have watched acts of violence on the screen. In September and October 2005 Kenyan children saw their parents fighting with chairs and stones as they campaigned just before the November 21st referendum on the so-called Wako Constitution.
According to Abelard studies by George Gerber at the University of Pennsylvania, children television shows contain about 20 violent acts each hour. The studies showed that children who watch a lot of television were more likely to think that the world is a mean and dangerous place. Here in Kenya a large number of children watch cartoons that contain acts of violence put across in very aggressive manner. Gerber’s study shows that “children who watched the violent shows were more likely to strike out at playmates, argue, disobey authority and were less willing to wait for things than those children who watched non-violent programmes.
The last part of the code talks about “tone” in reporting without really elaborating. Since the word “tone” is lumped together with “obscenity” and “taste” then in this context it must be a “tone” that suggests either “violence” or some form of “obscenity” yet when journalism scholars discuss various “tones” in reporting they are really talking about bias in journalism and what they have in mind is political bias . In his book Press Bias and Politics Jim A. Kuypers discusses how media frame controversial issues. Analysing the book, Amazon.com says it charts the effects the printed press – and by extension, broadcast media – have upon messages of political and social leaders when they discuss controversial issues.
After examining 700 American press reports Kuypers concludes that media bias hurts the democratic process in general by ignoring non-mainstream left positions and vilifying many moderates ands vast majority of right leaning positions. If similar studies were conducted in Kenya some form of bias in the Kenyan media will also be discovered. On October 17, 2005, for example, The Standard had a front page splash story with a heading saying “Kibaki Plans New Districts for Nakuru as Race Hots Up”.
That headline had a strap-line on to saying “Orange Sweeps Through Coast, Western and Predicts Victory while…” The ‘tone” of the entire story gave the impression that President Kibaki was planning to create new districts in Nakuru in order to win votes to support the proposed constitution in a referendum which was about to take place. The story below the headline said “ President Kibaki’s announcement is likely to be seen by the orange (No) platform as yet another campaign freebie planned by the government ahead of the November 21st referendum on the proposed new constitution.” On the back page of the Daily Nation of the same date the same story appeared with a very different tone. Its headline said “State To Consider District Plea.” Its kicker said “Kibaki agrees with MPs’ Call That Nakuru deserves Two New Units.” The story said: President Kibaki yesterday said the Government would consider proposals to create two new districts in Nakuru.”
The slant in the Daily Nation story is that the President was reacting to the demands of the people. It was a pro-Kibaki “tone”. The “tone” of The Standard was that the President was bribing people to support the new Constitution.
One of the most scathing attacks of the political tone in American journalism was made in 2003 by Al Franken in his book “Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them”. Reviewing the book on the net Salon.com says Al Franken (is the man) of the hour. For years we have suffered while right-wing bullies hijacked American politics and media...persecuting a President for consensual sex act ; stealing 2000 election ; trashing the country’s economy , environment and constitutional safeguards ; handing the government over to the highest corporate bidders deceiving the public into the bloody quagmire ; and then brazenly smearing anyone who dared to criticise this orgy of dreadful leadership as un-American. The instant runaway success of Franken’s new book is not just a result of Fox News’ inexplicable decision to shoot itself in the foot and head by launching an idiotic trademark infringement law suit, but also the author’s bold and roaring funny-knack for confronting the Bush Presidency and its prevaricating apologists.” Obviously among the apologists are journalists who slant the news and give it a pro-Bush “tone”.
I believe there is absolutely nothing wrong with columnists, commentators or even entire media houses declaring their political stand on any given issue. The problem with Kenyan journalism is that those stands can only be noticed through the “tone” of stories because almost every newspaper, radio and television station claim to be professionally independent, fair and absolutely objective. Readers, viewers and listeners know better!
No comments:
Post a Comment