Freedom of the Press
Is the Kenyan media free, devoid of any interference from personal, situational, economic and well emotional attachment? Is it as objective as it is supposed to be, delivering news and other media products in a completely objective way? Are media practitioners subject to external, as well as internal forces causing them to take sides and not sit on the fence as they should?

Kivutha Kibwana(1990) notes that frustration is a culmination of the government trying to censor broadcast. If for any reason the citizens feel as if they are not free to air their views, especially on government related issues, they will definitely be inclined to only air what those in power want to hear. The media in Kenya may at times air content that “defames” the people in power. This is a risk though which could cost one even his job. Is the media therefore really free from government control? Actually, he (Kivutha) further notes that ideas which are locked in the minds of citizens are not likely to be of value to development endeavors.

Economic, social and cultural dormancy is the repercussion. When ideas are not in a continuous generation and dissemination in a society, dormancy as a plaque is inevitable. A free press ensures flow of ideas to all and sundry who have access to the means. The Kenyan media can not however be taken to be the best example of free press. In regard to the 2007-2008 post election violence, is it really post election violence or election violence? Where did the term “Post Election Violence” come from? It could be argued that those in positions of power coined up the term to hide the source as well as the gravity of the issue! The violence could have been pre-, post- or even in the course of the elections.

When the newsmakers ideology is taken as the true gospel, who will perform the vital surveillance function that the media ought to? When they label a happening as P.E.V and the media duplicates the same without a critical analysis, who will tell the masses the truth? Gathering and disseminating information is not enough, in that every bit should be critiqued before, looking at the angles with a keen eye.

Freedom of expression has the freedom to receive ideas and information without interference as a tenet. Interference basically refers to the act or an instance of hindering, obstructing, or impeding. How easy is it for one to access the leaders in government? Are they always accessible or is it their Personal Assistants and secretaries who insinuate their role? If civil servants can go on strike yet the concerned minister is without reach, can we talk of freedom as a reality in Kenya?

The right to receive and read any lawful materials for purposes of developing ones ideas is vital. It is the function of the law-makers to determine what is legal and what is illegal. Under Section52 of the Penal Code, the government is empowered to prohibit the importation or ban any publication it deems objectionable-compromises public order, health morals, security or jeopardizes the administration of justice, defence and is reasonably justifiable in such a democratic society.

How does a minister come to the conclusion that a publication is worth banning? A publication could be banned after exposing something that those in power want concealed. Kivutha (1990) gives examples of banned publications but does not give the reasons for the same. Njogu (2011) claims that the publication Beyond, a religious magazine, was banned for exposing how Mr. Moi rigged an election. The magazine portrayed clearly how the election was rigged leading to Mr. Moi’s, leading to its extinction. If this claim is true, is the media really devoid of government control in terms of content?

Another component of the Freedom of Expression is the freedom to communicate ideas and information without interference. Censorship should be lifted for one to communicate any idea, news and information, whether to the public or to any individual or class of persons. The previous elections saw the government issue a directive banning any live broadcast. News could consequently not be aired as this takes place live. What the government forgot to consider is the presence of international journalists Kenya who continued airing news (Nabea 2011). Anyone with a satellite dish (the financially able) continued watching the news. The bigger masses were denied access to news, enjoying nonstop entertainment and having more time to further engage in acts of violence.

This study is founded on the Free Press Theory which holds that the press exists to inform the public and protect the people’s rights and liberties.

In the 17th Century, authoritarianism reigned supreme. The press of the day existed chiefly to support the policies of the government in power. Freedom was foreign, with the press put in place to serve the state (Siebert et al: 1963). Truth was the product of a few wise men I position to guide and direct their followers, not of the masses of people. The ruler had absolute power and control over ownership, content ad use of the mass media.

With the overthrow of the monarchical authoritarians, libertarianism was birthed. It was a political and press system that came with the concept of press freedom. Truth was no longer at as the property of power but rather as one of the inalienable natural rights of man. In the search for truth, partnering with the press is unavoidable. This s the case because the press is  a device for presenting evidence and arguments for the masses to check on the government and make up their minds as a policy.

The idea of the freedom of the press first evolved as a component of the libertarian social philosophy, originating in England after the revolution of 1688. Free Press Theory was therefore adopted in England in 1688 and in the USA in the First Amendment of then Constitution. It is globally and ideally guaranteed by Article 19 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The theory has three tenets. The first is the assumption of multiplicity of voices on public issues all the time. This basically suggests that competition in terms of ideas should exist. Competition here refers to debates and arguments aiming at enabling the masses to air their views.

Secondly is the absence of state control in the operations of the news media in line with the laissez faire enterprise doctrine of capitalism. It is worth noting that the state was thought of as a major source of interference on the rights of an individual and his property. State ownership of the press is also forbidden as the right to publish is fundamental for a democracy. Permitting state control would mean allowing rulers to censor the media.

Thirdly is the emphasis on financial freedom. This aims at guaranteeing freedom of the press and individuals. Any form of inducements, payment or promise for the sake of publishing is unexpected. As a matter of fact, any paid for media product should be viewed as a an advertisement. News and other such-like stories should be published on merit and not for any form of monetary gain.

By: Githuku Njogu (2011)