THE KENYAN MEDIA THAT IS, A DYING PROFESSION?

The Kenyan parliament is in its characteristic unpopular fashion again, this time choosing to aim jabs at the media. The so- called ‘Draconian Media Bill 2013’ was passed by parliament towards the end of last month and is currently waiting presidential assenting. The media has of course reacted bitterly and is now marshalling all efforts to convince the President not to assent it in what seems to be the very last kicks of a dying media.

The Media has been on the front-line spearheading the patriotic chants that have characterized the Jubilee regime. From the infamous ‘accept and move on’ call to the most recent (and more appropriate) ‘#WeAreOne’; the calls for blind patriotism have been overwhelming. Just a while ago, they were invited over to State house for tea in an event that saw a full house attendance! Which independent Media does that? Just how do you take ‘tea’ from someone who you are supposed to keep on their toes? Interestingly, there has been very little public outrage on the Bill contrary to expectations of many. The Media and the current government are so intertwined that it would not be surprising if anyone thought all Media houses are government- owned.

Growing up I admired Catherine Kasavuli then of KTN and swore that I would be like her someday. I also remember telling my dad I would someday become the first female Political Editor for ‘The Nation’, just because of the sheer authoritative reporting they used to do then. Fast forward now and things have totally changed. There is nothing encouraging about our Media or the kind of stories they do. Journalism is now about pure aesthetics and how many advertisers they can get while paying little attention to content. Even the so- called ‘investigative stories’ are so highly dramatized that one wonders if the target audience is pre-school kids in dire need of entertainment.

News on telly is utterly boring, shoddily done and awfully predictable. What happened to news being about ‘a man biting a dog’ and not the other way round d? Why on earth do Kenyan TV’s fragment one news item into several of them just to pass time? I honestly do not understand why several T.V stations and local newspapers have been using evidence currently being given by the ‘shrubbing’ witnesses at the I.C.C as their headline stories every day? Do not even get me started on the annoying rhetoric ‘opinion poll’ questions that we keep on being bombarded with every day during prime time news? Anything from a toilet being opened gets our telly’s doing a live coverage. Is it so dry out there for our Journalists to get news or is it just a case of a dying profession?

Many people have been touting Kenyan Media as being one of the ‘most progressive’, in Africa, that is. The reality however tells a different story. In most countries, the national broadcaster is ‘the voice and face of the country’; a heritage to be treasured. A glance at the UK’s BBC tells this story better than any other newscaster. Most of their programs are self developed and are syndicated on several other TV stations worldwide. Does anyone see K.B.C come up with something like ‘Top Gear’? I bet I’ll be chilling with my grandchildren by the time such a miracle happens! Still in the UK, newspapers are known to print stories that put politicians and public servants on the edge. The importance attached to news gathering there is untold of in our country. A lot of resources are dedicated to it and the result is news worth every penny spent on the newspaper.

Many people would rather happily watch Cartoon Network than watch national news. The Media is now the ‘voice of the government’ rather than stick to its primary role of speaking for ‘the voiceless’ that is, the normal citizen. Why haven’t journalists taken time to investigate allegations of witness bribery and even killings in the ongoing ICC cases?  Who are they so afraid of that any narratives about the ICC cases only border on how to save the country’s sovereignty? Why hasn’t anyone taken their time to give us a comprehensive scoop about the entire list of suspects of the P.E.V in Rtd Justice Waki’s report? Surely where there is smoke there must be a fire. And why is the President featured on news on a daily basis? Does anyone smell them ‘Moi days’ back with us albeit in a ‘digitalized’ form?

 Why didn’t anyone investigate the claims of rigging in the last general elections? What of the grave accusations against the Chief Justice, Supreme Court and JSC Commissioners? Don’t we have a right to such news? Why hasn’t anyone questioned the President about many failed election promises especially on cutting government spending, reducing tax burden on mwananchi and the promises of equity and inclusivity of all regions in the government? Why does it seem perfectly normal to have two tribes monopolize public appointments? The government has adopted the ‘kusema na kulenga’ policy and no one is raising their eyebrows.  Have public servants become like Caesar’s wife, beyond reproach? If we are made to pay taxes, don’t we have a right to get value for our money?

Remember how local Media handled the infamous Westgate terror attack with kid gloves? Isn’t it a shame that most of them had to use early pictures of the attack from international Media like Reuters when all of them are in fact located within Nairobi? Remember the infamous ‘Daily Nation’ cover page photo? Just where did CNN get their intensive coverage of the story that our Media couldn’t reach? The much we got were patriotic chants and drama. Why is there a consistent anthem of ‘patriotism’ in the Media? Who is very concerned about getting Kenyans to sing praises to the government than ask tough questions? Is there a big brother lingering around Media Houses that they have become the lead choir for the government rather than do their job independently?

Personally I think that the only newspaper that still got balls is ‘The Star’ perhaps owing to the fact that it is a newcomer and is yet to get distracted with things like ‘tradition’ that seems to be part of what is making most Newspapers too cowardly to do any serious reporting. We need new blood in the form of new Media houses that will begin nurturing the Journalism dream afresh.

 Meanwhile I am waiting to see the kind of pressure Media houses will put on the President not to assent to the draconian Media Bill. Will they return the ‘tea’ he served them the other day? Talk of not biting the hand that feeds you! We can only pray that the Media falls out with the government further so that we can get some serious scoop from them and not PR press releases disguised as news. As for the Media Bill, it is quite depressing to have government seek to gag the Media but as the Swahilis put it; ‘msiba wa kujitakia hauna pole’.

                                                        

THE PHALLOCRACY QUESTION; A FEMINIST ANSWER

 “Our enemy isn’t man but phallocracy; that is, the imperialism of the phallus” (Fouque 1987: 52)

This text borrowed from the introduction of Dani Cavallaro’s ‘French Feminist Theory’ (2003) shall form the basis for my discussion today. Slightly a week ago, I happened to attend some interview where 9 out of the 10 interview panelists were men. While I am not one to be intimidated by men, still I thought to myself: wow, this process is probably going to be centered on a male point of view, poor female me! While the little girl inside me told me to maintain a smiley face throughout and keep off any gender political stances to be on the safe side, the much more mature woman in me preferred that I focus on the professional bit of the process and forget the glaring display of androcracy in the room. I cannot recall which direction I took but what I know is that I gave up even before they had asked me any question. I faced the reality of women having to put in thrice more effort than men to convince anyone that they are competent. I cringed at the thought of any of them asking how I would manage to balance between PMS (pre-menstrual stress) and my job or that sort of thing; luckily for me no such ludicrous questions came my way but the structure of the entire process served me my very first dose of the so called ‘glass ceiling’ that prevents most women from advancing in their careers or otherwise; that is, the imperialism of the phallus.

‘Phallocracy’ simply put means ‘a government controlled by men’. From there the trend trickles down to other structures in the society- including the social ones and in the end it creates a complex male-based structure that formulates and implements policies that are based on the male way of doing things; a structure that primarily believes in male dominance and female subordination. The system which dates way back is the problem then, men are just serving it continuity. While the law is said to be a double- edged sword, phallocracy on the other hand is a single- edged sword; only cutting in ways that suit the already existent andro- system. Women therefore have to find some sort of way to work around this system- the whole thing about always ‘being sweet, helpful, looking beautiful at all times and shutting up’. Well, many women are not complaining, seeing as the same system is the judge and jury here.

The African gender socialization process championed by our largely patriarchal social structures nurtures women to accept the system as the appropriate- to accept the fact that the male is the superior while the female is inferior, vulnerable even and can only be saved by the male should he choose to do so. Once the ‘inferior’ and ‘vulnerable’ fears have been properly implanted into the female psyche through a process of specified discriminative gender roles that relegate women to the position of serving men, discriminative language (phrases like’acha umama’) and denial of economic and educational opportunities, phallocracy then fits in nicely promising ‘protection’ and ‘providence’ to the female and the result is women who are totally arrested in the position of the ‘second sex’. Any person who tries to go against this is seen as an enemy of both genders, so to speak. While a lot of rhetoric is going around about how women are ‘fully empowered’ in the modern African societies, the reality on the ground is heartbreaking. While there is commendable progress especially in the education and legal sectors, a lot still needs to be done to change the mentality of both genders. You can empower women with all the tools of emancipation but subjecting them to the same Stone Age system that still subverts them to positions of subservience is pointless.

When Hon. Martha Karua decided to have her name on the ballot box in the Kenyan Presidential elections in 2013, there was a lot to be said about her, and much had nothing to do with her leadership capabilities. Both women and men were guilty on this one. The men were of course unsettled with her kind of boldness and intelligence while the women had to deal with the guilt of not showing solidarity with ‘one of their own’, confirming the notion that ‘women are their own worst enemies’ a false phrase coined by a smart man to make women not to just fear men, but fear themselves too. What am I driving at? Well when it comes to women, the question of their gender always has to crop up. You are seen first as a woman, then your title or competencies next. You will never hear of terms such as ‘male M.P’, ‘male president’ etc but in the case of women, your competencies cannot be recognized before first being reminded about your position in society, that of a woman. The society cannot therefore claim to have achieved human civility if gender still supersedes individuality. People should be treated as independent individuals without any gender undertones that serve to discriminate them.

While men and women are creatures with distinct differences, physical that is, this should not serve as a tool for gender inequalities in society. I refuse to believe that it is ‘a man’s world’; even then, this shouldn’t mean that the condition is perpetual. Men and women need each other in many ways and this co-existence can further be improved if both genders work towards eliminating the androgynous system that is a hindrance to human development. Men have to appreciate the fact that none of us is ‘a threat’ to their existence. The fear that liberated women will wipe out the entire male species has to be done away with and women included in all structures unconditionally, based on their competencies just as their male counterparts. Unless women are placed in positions where they can influence major decisions that affect society, we shall continue being subjected to male perspectives and policies that do not necessarily conform to the dynamics of female emancipation. Let’s embrace differences dictated to us by nature but use the nurturing process to enhance unity and harmonious co-existence of both genders through inclusivity and fair treatment in all aspects of life. While feminism works towards ensuring an equitable society for the benefit of all genders and tackles the bigger picture of human development, phallocracy on the other hand seeks to go against human civilization and development of the society as a whole and eliminating it not optional, it is mandatory. Thus:

“Our enemy isn’t man but phallocracy; that is, the imperialism of the phallus” (Fouque 1987: 52)

                                  *****

A friend of mine debated on whether this piece or a similar one could be published in any local dailies based on content. We both agreed that it could not, well, all Editors of the major newspapers are male and I doubt if phallocracy rings any bells to them. They would rather run a whole spread poking fun at how a certain female leader was battered by her male counterpart and whether she has ‘learnt her lesson’. No hard questions asked about the criminality of the male leader’s actions or the kind of example his gutting actions set. Do not ask me why I do not read local newspapers anymore.

            

 “Our enemy isn’t man but phallocracy; that is, the imperialism of the phallus” (Fouque 1987: 52)

This text borrowed from the introduction of Dani Cavallaro’s ‘French Feminist Theory’ (2003) shall form the basis for my discussion today. Slightly a week ago, I happened to attend some interview where 9 out of the 10 interview panelists were men. While I am not one to be intimidated by men, still I thought to myself: wow, this process is probably going to be centered on a male point of view, poor female me! While the little girl inside me told me to maintain a smiley face throughout and keep off any gender political stances to be on the safe side, the much more mature woman in me preferred that I focus on the professional bit of the process and forget the glaring display of androcracy in the room. I cannot recall which direction I took but what I know is that I gave up even before they had asked me any question. I faced the reality of women having to put in thrice more effort than men to convince anyone that they are competent. I cringed at the thought of any of them asking how I would manage to balance between PMS (pre-menstrual stress) and my job or that sort of thing; luckily for me no such ludicrous questions came my way but the structure of the entire process served me my very first dose of the so called ‘glass ceiling’ that prevents most women from advancing in their careers or otherwise; that is, the imperialism of the phallus.

‘Phallocracy’ simply put means ‘a government controlled by men’. From there the trend trickles down to other structures in the society- including the social ones and in the end it creates a complex male-based structure that formulates and implements policies that are based on the male way of doing things; a structure that primarily believes in male dominance and female subordination. The system which dates way back is the problem then, men are just serving it continuity. While the law is said to be a double- edged sword, phallocracy on the other hand is a single- edged sword; only cutting in ways that suit the already existent andro- system. Women therefore have to find some sort of way to work around this system- the whole thing about always ‘being sweet, helpful, looking beautiful at all times and shutting up’. Well, many women are not complaining, seeing as the same system is the judge and jury here.

The African gender socialization process championed by our largely patriarchal social structures nurtures women to accept the system as the appropriate- to accept the fact that the male is the superior while the female is inferior, vulnerable even and can only be saved by the male should he choose to do so. Once the ‘inferior’ and ‘vulnerable’ fears have been properly implanted into the female psyche through a process of specified discriminative gender roles that relegate women to the position of serving men, discriminative language (phrases like’acha umama’) and denial of economic and educational opportunities, phallocracy then fits in nicely promising ‘protection’ and ‘providence’ to the female and the result is women who are totally arrested in the position of the ‘second sex’. Any person who tries to go against this is seen as an enemy of both genders, so to speak. While a lot of rhetoric is going around about how women are ‘fully empowered’ in the modern African societies, the reality on the ground is heartbreaking. While there is commendable progress especially in the education and legal sectors, a lot still needs to be done to change the mentality of both genders. You can empower women with all the tools of emancipation but subjecting them to the same Stone Age system that still subverts them to positions of subservience is pointless.

When Hon. Martha Karua decided to have her name on the ballot box in the Kenyan Presidential elections in 2013, there was a lot to be said about her, and much had nothing to do with her leadership capabilities. Both women and men were guilty on this one. The men were of course unsettled with her kind of boldness and intelligence while the women had to deal with the guilt of not showing solidarity with ‘one of their own’, confirming the notion that ‘women are their own worst enemies’ a false phrase coined by a smart man to make women not to just fear men, but fear themselves too. What am I driving at? Well when it comes to women, the question of their gender always has to crop up. You are seen first as a woman, then your title or competencies next. You will never hear of terms such as ‘male M.P’, ‘male president’ etc but in the case of women, your competencies cannot be recognized before first being reminded about your position in society, that of a woman. The society cannot therefore claim to have achieved human civility if gender still supersedes individuality. People should be treated as independent individuals without any gender undertones that serve to discriminate them.

While men and women are creatures with distinct differences, physical that is, this should not serve as a tool for gender inequalities in society. I refuse to believe that it is ‘a man’s world’; even then, this shouldn’t mean that the condition is perpetual. Men and women need each other in many ways and this co-existence can further be improved if both genders work towards eliminating the androgynous system that is a hindrance to human development. Men have to appreciate the fact that none of us is ‘a threat’ to their existence. The fear that liberated women will wipe out the entire male species has to be done away with and women included in all structures unconditionally, based on their competencies just as their male counterparts. Unless women are placed in positions where they can influence major decisions that affect society, we shall continue being subjected to male perspectives and policies that do not necessarily conform to the dynamics of female emancipation. Let’s embrace differences dictated to us by nature but use the nurturing process to enhance unity and harmonious co-existence of both genders through inclusivity and fair treatment in all aspects of life. While feminism works towards ensuring an equitable society for the benefit of all genders and tackles the bigger picture of human development, phallocracy on the other hand seeks to go against human civilization and development of the society as a whole and eliminating it not optional, it is mandatory. Thus:

“Our enemy isn’t man but phallocracy; that is, the imperialism of the phallus” (Fouque 1987: 52)

                                           *****

A friend of mine debated on whether this piece or a similar one could be published in any local dailies based on content. We both agreed that it could not, well, all Editors of the major newspapers are male and I doubt if phallocracy rings any bells to them. They would rather run a whole spread poking fun at how a certain female leader was battered by her male counterpart and whether she has ‘learnt her lesson’. No hard questions asked about the criminality of the male leader’s actions or the kind of example his gutting actions set. Do not ask me why I do not read local newspapers anymore.