14. Intrusion into Grief and Shock

The code simply says in cases involving personal grief or shock, inquiries should be made with sensitivity and discretion. This is probably the most violated code in Kenyan journalism. Reporters, backed by their editors, seem to take great pleasure in publishing pictures of people in grief and personal shock. There is hardly a paper in Kenya that hesitates to publish shocking pictures of people in grief following accidents or violent crimes. Sometimes journalists go as far as taking pictures of injured people in hospitals accompanied by their relatives and medical personnel. Yet there has been no complaint from anybody about this wanton disregard of ethical principles.

Journalists in Kenya are in a field day when others are suffering. In Britain the primary concern of their code in times of grief or shock is the protection of vulnerable people from possible press intrusion. The Press Complaints Commission (PCC), and the industry’s code, recognize that at time of grief or shock – especially in cases of recent bereavement – the attention of the Press can be unwelcome.[1] Though Kenyan journalists are normally quite free to report details of crime, accidents and even court proceedings involving gruesome examination of causes of death, they have now made it a habit of publishing pictures of bereaved people weeping and screaming.

Sometimes it is not even possible to know whether the journalists are not welcome to make such intrusions because very often the grieved people talk to journalists even as they continue weeping and yelling. In Kenya mourning period is known as matanga [2] during which all sorts of activities take place in a bereaved homestead including dancing, singing and even drinking of home made beer. A reporter covering matanga normally is readily welcome to talk to anyone about the deceased and how he or she died. This will normally be discussed superficially without actually revealing the cause of death. The real cause of death is normally a well guarded secret particularly if it was the dreaded AIDS which is still regarded a shameful disease. There are many modern Africans who do not observe matanga and may not be quite willing to talk about their dead relative to a journalist. Whenever reporters come across such a situation they should respect the wishes of the bereaved.

Whether they succeed to obtaining a story or not their approach to the bereaved should always be done in a polite and most sympathetic manner. It is certainly a better way than writing something that will lead to getting a phone call complaining of published story that distresses people in grief.

Tulloch (2001) says nowhere in the conflict between professional values of journalists and ordinary people more apparent in the UK than in the Press coverage of families grieving or victims of accidents or crimes. He says attempts from the beginning of 1990s to forbid press intrusion into grief or shock have been steadily resisted by the British PCC whose voluntary code of conduct requires journalists to make inquiries and publish materials with “sympathy and discretion.”[3]

Though the Kenyan code makes similar demands there has never been any complaints despite the journalists’ open intrusion into grief and shock. Many will probably argue that the exposure of victims of crime and accidents are in the interest of the public. The fact that many relatives of the victims willingly talk to journalists is clear evidence that they welcome reporters and photographers. The apparent lack of empathy and compassion by journalists has never been a subject of discussion in professional circles including the Media Council of Kenya.

Culturally, grief is not a private matter in Kenya. When someone dies, the whole community mourns – his household, his clan, his tribe and his whole village. This is probably the reason why journalists plus their cameras are welcome to moan with the grieving people. Westerners watching our television and reading our dailies must be thinking that journalists here pay only lip-service to the part of the code of ethics that deals with intrusion into grief and shock. The cut throat competition among media houses means the usage of stories on grief are becoming the order of the day for purposes of boosting circulations and pointing out to the authorities the increase in crime and recklessness in driving of public vehicles.

In Britain Editors’ Code of Practice Committee was in 2006 very concerned with the way journalists also covered suicide not only because of intrusion into grief and shock but also because of prevention of copycat suicides. They therefore added a specific close to their code demanding care to be taken to avoid excessive details about the method used in suicide reported.[4]

The then Code Committee Chairman , Les Hiton said: “During our annual review, we receive convincing evidence from the Samaritans ( a public charity ) and others , that media reporting of suicide often prompted copycat cases. It is an international phenomenon.”[5] The Samaritans backed the move by Editors’ committee and its Chief Executive then said: “It means we will see more informative reporting of suicide as an issue, and far less about methods and sensational aspects which don’t help and at times can genuinely be harmful.”[6] The advice by Samaritans should be taken seriously by Kenyan journalists who in my view should emulate the British on this particular issue though we must always appreciate the public’s right to know.

May be the most difficult aspect of this code which will always confront journalists in Kenya is when there is a conflict between personal grief or shock and matters of public interest. When it is absolutely essential to report on matters involving grief the code only advices journalists to make inquiries “with sensitivity and discretion”; but what is sensitivity and discretion in journalism? The Collins English dictionary defines sensitivity as the state or quality of being sensitive. It says discretion is the quality of behaving and speaking in such a way as to avoid social embarrassment or distress.[7]

Buttry (2007) says journalists intrude because a news event thrusts a private person into the public eyes.[8] He argues that even when other considerations (call) for caution, journalists must find a way to publish information that illustrates a public debate or inform the public about matters of safety. He suggests that journalists should identify the people they write about unless strong valid considerations argue for protection of their privacy. Buttry is particularly worried about a phenomenon known as “suicide contagion” where attention to one suicide is believed to contribute to other suicides in the same community.[9]

In Kenya there are not ethical rules about the coverage of suicide. Every time someone commits suicide or even tries to and fails journalists write everything they know about the incidents without any self censorship or restrictions from editors.

An example of this is a story by Cyrus Ombati of The Standard who described in details how a policeman went berserk and shot dead a colleague and his two children before he tried to commit suicide. Ombati wrote: “He sustained a neck injury while trying to shoot himself. The bullet scratched trough the neck slightly injuring him”.[10] If Ombati had more information about how the suicide attempt was done there was nothing to stop him writing about it. In Kenya reporters can describe how suicides are committed without any public outcry. On April 28, 2007, The Standard published a story by Alex Kiprotich about Thomson’s Falls and why it remains an attractive option for “those who are out to commit suicide.”[11]

The story did not lead to an increase of reported suicide cases at the falls. Alarm bells would have been sounded if Kiptanui’s story was followed by high incidents of suicide cases. Very much like in Kenya the most intrusive practice in Australia is the televising of family member’s reaction to the news of death. Whereas journalists in Kenya routinely interview relatives of people who die in accidents and crimes, in Australia they risk losing their jobs for doing so. But Australia’s cultural values are different from ours.










[1] www.pcc.org.uk
[2] Matanga is a Swahili word but is now used in many communities in East Africa. It is the period during which the community joins the bereaved people to participate in all sorts of celebrations to respect the spirit of the dead person as well as to comfort the living relatives.
[3] Ibid
[4] Editors’ Code of Practice Committee “Press Information” of June 29, 2006.
[5] Ibid
[6] Samaritan Statement Number 219432 of 2007.
[7] Collins English Dictionary. Harper Collins Publishers. 2005.
[8] Buttry, Steve. “When Do Private Matters Become News”. American Press Institute Website. Visited in 2007.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ombati, Cyrus. “ Police Shoots Dead Colleague , Two Children” in The Standard of June 5, 2007
[11] Kiprotich, Alex. “Thomson’s Falls and Its Fatal Attraction” in The Standard of April 28, 2007.