Why Support Kenyan Independent Media?
Kenya’s establishment media is frequently cited as the strongest in East Africa, thanks to constitutional protections for freedom of the press, a broad plurality of media, bold journalists, and Kenyans’ healthy demand for news and information. But it still faces steep challenges in achieving media’s full potential as an agenda-setter and public watchdog. Long-standing political and commercial forces—and, to some degree, constraints related to skills and capacity—continue to hamper the media’s collective ability to sustain high-quality, independent reporting.
Right now, there is an opportunity to support the brave journalists and media entrepreneurs who are committed to greater government accountability through media oversight. Those who support free press and good governance can play a role in helping media achieve its potential, by assisting media actors overcome the systemic barriers—economic uncertainty, political interference, skills and capacity gaps, and weak links with civil society—they face in Kenya today. This report offers a close look at the current state of the Kenyan media, and provides a set of recommendations for how to best support a stronger independent press.
Support for independent media
Independent Kenyan media has experienced a decline in resources over the past few years, including donor support for media initiatives. This has led to downsized programs, staff layoffs, and the deterioration of core operating support that has been critical to the survival of independent media.
These declines in funding come at a time when most media respondents have perceived intensified efforts from government actors to undermine freedom of the press. Attacks on the press are not new in Kenya, but this downward shift has stood in contrast to the optimism inspired by the explicit protections for freedoms of press, expression, and access to information in sections 33, 34, and 35 of the 2010 Constitution. Supporters have typically focused on training and capacity, resource centers, reporting grants, and some operating costs for outlets. But support has been insufficient to address the significant economic and political pressures that limit media’s independence.
This report hopes to inspire a holistic approach to strengthening independent media in Kenya. This means addressing economic, skill, and capacity shortfalls while at the same time finding creative ways to shield journalists from political interference. Our goal is to offer analysis and recommendations to help media entrepreneurs, journalists, donors, investors, government actors, and other stakeholders develop a shared understanding of the powerful economic and political challenges faced by Kenyan media, in order to inform new collaborative efforts that can strengthen the ecosystem for independent media.
About this Report
This report was commissioned by Omidyar Network, which engaged Reboot to examine the current state of Kenyan media, and identify opportunities to support independent media in reporting on governance issues. To do this, research focused broadly on how decision-making is done in the media ecosystem: How do different media actors account for the needs and interests of diverse audiences when reporting on governance issues? What risks or challenges do different media actors face, and how have they overcome (or struggled to overcome) them? What are the various factors—e.g. political, ethnic, other considerations—that affect editorial and business decisions?
Researchers also looked closely at media’s interactions with other key actors in Kenya’s social accountability ecosystem—citizens, civil society, and government—to gain a broader perspective of how Kenyans view their media. Specifically, research sought to understand the extent to which these actors believed media was fulfilling its responsibilities in keeping citizens informed, influencing the public agenda, and holding government accountable.
The findings and opportunities presented seek to inform those interested in supporting independent media in Kenya, and are intended as a starting point for further exploration.
How this research was conducted
IPrimary field research was conducted over three weeks in July 2017, which included 61 in-person and 12 phone/video interviews, which were semi-structured and lasted 1 to 1.5 hours. One focus group was also conducted. Media actors with a wide range of profiles represented approximately half of the respondents. They included journalists and editors within establishment and independent media organizations, as well as freelancers with varying degrees of experience. The second half of the respondents consisted of civil society organizations (most of which work with media or on media-related issues), citizens, and government actors. The perspectives of these non-industry actors helped provide a holistic view of how media currently operates and is perceived in Kenya.
The analysis presented in this report is based on the synthesis of primary research, key informant interviews, and a desktop review. Researchers made an effort to capture the patterns surfaced across multiple respondents. In some cases, direct quotes and examples have been used to help illustrate the findings presented.
A note about the 2017 presidential elections
Source: Reuters/Baz Ratner
In the time since this research was conducted, Kenya’s media has faced significant challenges in covering the country’s extended election period. In August 8, 2017, Kenya held a presidential election. The leading candidates included incumbent president Uhuru Kenyatta on the Jubilee party ticket, and opposition leader Raila Odinga, of the National Super Alliance (NASA) coalition. Following a contested outcome, Kenya’s Supreme Court annulled the results of the August election. It then ordered an unprecedented second election, held on October 26, 2017, which Kenyatta ultimately won. Subsequently, in late January 2018, the government took unprecedented action against the media and forced four television stations off the air for covering the mock inauguration of Odinga.
While there has been vigorous public discussion on how well the press has covered a tense election period, we have limited analysis of the election itself in this report, as it took place after primary research was completed. Nevertheless, the many challenges detailed were on full display during the election period. For example, there were numerous reports of journalists being prevented from covering protests and accusations that the media failed to adequately investigate discrepancies in the vote collation process. Researchers frequently heard complaints that the media was failing to scrutinize the Jubilee and NASA campaign platforms. Of course, the dynamics and opportunities described in this report—which have affected coverage of the election period—run more deeply than current electoral politics, and are likely to persist through ongoing political changes.
Limitations due to geographic focus and timing
The research was based almost entirely in Kenya’s capital of Nairobi and its surrounding peri-urban areas. The capital was chosen because of its proximity to both the media industry and government actors, as well as other project constraints. However, as Kenya is primarily a rural country, confining the research to Nairobi limits the representativeness of findings in relation to Kenya at large. For one, while the team sought to speak to a variety of actors specializing in a range of mediums (radio, television, print, and digital), the sample has a slight leaning towards published and digital mediums.
The timing of this research also posed some limitations. Research took place just weeks before the August 2017 elections, a heightened time of polarization in the country. As a result, there was significant scrutiny on the performance of Kenyan media. In a country where ethnic identity influences political decision making, the media’s performance is heavily judged based on each media institution’s perceived alignment with specific ethno-political interests. As a result, this potentially sharpened respondents’ perceptions about the performance of media as an agenda setter and public watchdog.
Researchers also struggled to secure the desired level of input from politicians and government officials due to the electoral campaign period. However, in spite of these weaknesses, the timing was, on the whole, a positive. A highly-charged election season provided abundant evidence of the intricate relationships between Kenya’s media and its political system.