The Standard newspaper headline on August 8 read: “eCitizen billions trail.” Online, the story was headlined: “How billions were moved in a shadowy web through e-Citizen.”
The story by Josphat Thiong’o said that Sh9.4 billion was moved from the eCitizen platform in questionable transactions. The front-page blurb added:
“A damning audit report has exposed how the money may have been siphoned off through illegal payments, unaccounted-for convenience fees, and questionable withdrawals. The revelations… point to a system plagued by opacity, poor oversight, and possible collusion.”
The story was backed by infographics showing four companies associated with e-Citzen and their owners. Up to Sh6.3 billion passed through Pesaflow Limited, the payment platform, the infographics showed. A fifth company, Electronic Citizen Solutions Ltd, received Sh459 million but was “not a party to the support contract; ownership unknown.”
But here’s where The Standard did something cheeky. To illustrate the mystery company, they used a silhouette image, a head strongly resembling the satirical “Kasongo” meme often linked online to President William Ruto. This was a subtle but unmistakable reference.
That raises the question: Did The Standard cross an ethical red line?
The good
This was strong investigative journalism. The story is based on the Auditor-General’s report. It points to a broken system where billions moved through eCitizen with weak controls. Parliament is now investigating, and Kenyans deserve answers.
The visual infographics helped readers understand a complex financial web. The language used was bold, clear, and relevant. The journalism did what good journalism should do: inform the public, hold power accountable, and spark debate.
The problem
The head silhouette was unnecessary – and risky. Using a figure resembling a meme for the President introduces speculation without evidence. It blurs the line between reporting and insinuation.
Yes, satire has its place. But in a front-page corruption exposé based on a state audit, this kind of wink can cast doubt on the story’s objectivity. It shifts attention from facts to innuendo.
The verdict
“The Standard” may have gotten the facts right, the reporting solid, and the tone serious. But the subtle visual jab was a misstep. It was clever – but in this case, cleverness undercut credibility.
Trust is everything in ethical media. Such suggestions – especially without proof – can be seen as unfair or politically loaded. The media must remain impartial, especially when covering issues as serious as alleged theft of public funds.
