No one would disagree with the claim that ‘politics sells in Kenya.’ Kenyans love chatting about politics whenever they have some free time. Consequently, Kenya’s media heavily depends on politics. It appears that the popularity of politics – at the expense of other issues of immediate concern to Kenyans – is largely engineered by the media.
Kenyan radio and TV stations, newspapers and social media seem to behave as if they would not know how and what else to report to their listeners, watchers and readers if politics were to be banned from public talk.
Granted, politics is an important subject. It determines to a large extent access to power and use of that power. The power derived from politics is a resource but also key to the distribution of other resources such as employment in government offices, availability of money for development projects and even initiation of the said development.
Without a doubt, Kenyans need to know what their politicians are planning to do with the power they are granted through elections. And Kenyans recently granted politicians power and responsibility to govern them for five years. The general elections happened in August. The subsequent dispute over the results was resolved in September.
So, how is it that Kenya’s media, especially the newspapers are still obsessing about politics? What do these headlines by Star newspaper, “DP Gachagua to Azimio: It is our turn to eat first” and The Standard newspaper, “Ruto’s firm grip on power takes shape”, both of Monday October 10, 2022 stand for? How could these two leading papers report such news as if it were some uncontestable fact? What exactly is the implied message in the two headlines?
In fact, the story in The Star is quite deplorable. It reports that, “Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua has affirmed that those who never voted for Kenya Kwanza should not expect plum state jobs but wait for leftovers.” The entire article appears like a PR for the government and the DP. It rehashes some of the supposed controversial statements by the DP in the recent past. To its credit, Star publishes a riposte by Moses Kajwang’, the Homa Bay Senator, on the DP’s assertions.
But why did the newspaper carry the story on almost two pages as pure news, with a brief rejoinder from Kajwang’? Why didn’t the editors see it fit to get comments from other Kenyans on the topic? How can a national leader suggest that only loyalists will be rewarded in the new regime and a leading newspaper reports such claims as if they are facts? Don’t the editors know that only 65 per cent of Kenyans who were registered to vote were reported to have voted in August? Don’t the editors know that 51 per cent (if the winners were granted a margin beyond 50 per cent + 1) of that 65 per cent would just be 33 per cent of the voters who were registered to vote in August? Which would mean that those who didn’t vote for the winners is about 32 per cent.
The statistics would then show that just about 35 per cent of the registered voters didn’t vote at all, going by the declaration from IEBC. The 35 per cent plus 32 per cent gives 67 per cent.
One can then argue, for the sake of a counterargument, that an absolute majority of Kenyans did not vote for the winners in the August presidential elections. This isn’t complex mathematics. One would, therefore, assume that any serious editor would always temper claims such as those attributed to the DP with some facts, in the background, and ask if the supposed non-supporters of the winning team also include those who didn’t vote, for one reason or another.
As for The Standard story, the headline suggested that it was an analysis of how the President has stamped his authority on the different parts of the government. Indeed, the two articles on the subject repeat the known facts of the President having had some influence on the election of the Speakers of Parliament, chosen his Cabinet, and acting on the appointment of judges, etcetera. However, the lead article only offers anecdotes about the (ab)use of absolute power by presidents Jomo Kenyatta and Daniel arap Moi, especially by individuals around them.
The essay doesn’t really analyse the implications of the actions already taken for the President today – except the decision to allow GMOs in Kenya.
What the two leading headlines suggest is simply this: Kenya’s journalists seem to be losing the news plot. Clearly, thousands of Kenyans are besieged by famine. Millions are overwhelmed by an economic downturn. Kenyans are losing jobs every day; Kenyans can’t afford the basics of life; Kenyans aren’t being led by their politicians well, etcetera. Why would Kenya’s media continue to feed hungry, unemployed, poor and hopeless citizens with stories of politicians still obsessed with elections and its results?
