<table class="contentpaneopen"><tbody><tr><td class="contentheading" width="100%">The price of negligence and incompetence </td>
<td class="buttonheading" align="right" width="100%">
<a href="http://www.eastafricapress.net/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=573" target="_blank" onclick="window.open('http://www.eastafricapress.net/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=573','win2','status=no,toolbar=no,scrollbars=yes,titlebar=no,menubar=no,resizable=yes,width=640,height=480,directories=no,location=no'); return false;" title="PDF">
<img src="http://www.eastafricapress.net/templates/ja_teline_ii/images/pdf_button.png" alt="PDF" name="PDF" align="middle" border="0"></a>
</td>
<td class="buttonheading" align="right" width="100%">
<a href="http://www.eastafricapress.net/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=573&pop=1&page=0&Itemid=79" target="_blank" onclick="window.open('http://www.eastafricapress.net/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=573&pop=1&page=0&Itemid=79','win2','status=no,toolbar=no,scrollbars=yes,titlebar=no,menubar=no,resizable=yes,width=640,height=480,directories=no,location=no'); return false;" title="Print">
<img src="http://www.eastafricapress.net/templates/ja_teline_ii/images/printButton.png" alt="Print" name="Print" align="middle" border="0"></a>
</td>
<td class="buttonheading" align="right" width="100%">
<a href="http://www.eastafricapress.net/index2.php?option=com_content&task=emailform&id=573&itemid=79" target="_blank" onclick="window.open('http://www.eastafricapress.net/index2.php?option=com_content&task=emailform&id=573&itemid=79','win2','status=no,toolbar=no,scrollbars=yes,titlebar=no,menubar=no,resizable=yes,width=400,height=250,directories=no,location=no'); return false;" title="E-mail">
<img src="http://www.eastafricapress.net/templates/ja_teline_ii/images/emailButton.png" alt="E-mail" name="E-mail" align="middle" border="0"></a>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="font-size: 10pt;">OUR VIEW</span>
<p>
<span>While the Media Institute condemns the outrageous
selfishness exhibited by Members of Parliament in passing what is clearly a
retrogressive law, the media must not escape culpability for what has befallen
it. It has become norm for the media to cry
wolf when faced with any encroachment on its turf, especially its own welfare.</span>
</p>
<p>
<span>In fact, in the public domain, the strident
wailing of the media has become all too familiar and sympathy is
waning. And
why not; there are many sectors of our society whose cry for attention
when
their welfare is similarly threatened by government action or
legislation hardly get a fraction of the interest the media devotes to
its own selfish
interests. Truth be told, the media is insensitive and uncaring most
of the time.</span>
</p>
<p>
<span>And it gets worse. The media are not even
competent in superintending over their own matters either because they are out
of depth, they cant fathom the implications of some developments - such as the
just enacted Bill - or they are just consumed by their pursuit of profit and
basic competition to comprehend the threats to their survival or
operations.<span> </span>That cannot be said of the
ICT sector, which too is the subject of the same Communications Amendment Bill 2008, but which has had its
issues discussed and thrashed out in numerous online lists and discussion
forums.</span>
</p>
<p>
<span>Not surprisingly, some media
chiefs only came to grips with the implications of the Bill when it had
sailed
through the First Reading in Parliament a month ago. They long left the
job of minding the rights enjoyed by the media almost exclusively to
non-governmental organisations that the media cares less about.</span>
</p>
<p>
<span>Consider this:<span> </span>A fortnight before the Bill went to the Third
and final phase in the House, an alarmed International Commission of Jurists
(Kenya) called a meeting to sensitize the media about the impending law.<span> </span>And when they turned up, some of the media
chiefs not only knew zilch about the Bill but what they did after that was even
more scandalous. All of them were unavailable for the action proposed to
forestall the passage of the law. Even when a press conference was called to
raise the alarm, all of them were either busy or conveniently absent.</span>
</p>
<p>
<span>Rather than mobilize the sector, they
retreated to their usual boardrooms and adopted the ineffective strategy of
molly-coddling MPs, ministry of information officials and other emissaries
through informal methods to drop selective clauses deemed
to be threatening to commercial interests (principally, the prohibition of
cross-ownership).<span>
The media did not even give adequate publicity to the Bill prior to the
brouhaha, let alone the other aspects relating to ICT. </span>Needless to say, we failed spectacularly and now we are back in our regular dark pit of moaning. </span>
</p>
<p>
<span>What was a clear case of an attempt to
abridge freedom of speech was conveniently couched in terms of
commercial
interests, protection of frequencies, turfs, and so forth. The
reporting of the aftermath itself has been terribly wanting. The
Communications Bill has all of a sudden become ICT Bill, Media Bill,
and other names we have baptised it. How is the public to keep track of
our lamentations? </span>
</p>
<p>
<span>In our bid to attract sympathy, ok appeal, to the public, we have
also pressed the sensational button, and the inaccuracies are
staggering. For one, the offending Sect. 88 was not introduced by the
new Bill. It is already in the existing Communications Act and what was
on the table was whether to repeal it. That of course, is clouding
issues and
confusing the bigger picture. </span>
</p>
<p>
<span>At stake is an attempt by the political class
to equip itself with the ammunition to circumscribe the fundamental freedom of
expression, and arm itself with the ammunition to control the media if it is
deemed as unbecoming or threatening to its interests, diverse as they may be.
In this regard one cant help but sympathise with the wing of the coalition that
is always crying about being shortchanged in the power sharing deal - of what
benefit is this new law to the objective of freedom of information in this
country? <br>
</span>
</p>
<p>
<span>Yes, to be candid, the media is far from
innocent. Some of the vulgar content on the airwaves at supposedly neutral
hours should not be allowed. Yes, on their own they have demonstrated utter
irresponsibility in setting standard thanks to the greed for profit.<span> </span>But to sit and wait for government to
legislate their content is perhaps the worst demonstration of lack of
leadership among the media management.</span>
</p>
<p>
<span>While the Media Institute joins others in appealing
to the Head of State to demonstrate statesmanship and respect for democracy by
not assenting to the law, it must be observed that the media has overspent its
goodwill and earned its just fruits.</span>
</p>
<p>
<span>Our hope is that the President will not be
motivated by short-term parochial interests to endorse a bad law. The Bill clearly
impinges on freedom of expression and the media, which are democratic
principles that he and other leaders have professed to respect. To turn around
and begin to claw back on that at a time when the country is on the democratic
assent and awaits proper constitutional reform will be both anachronistic and an
undeserving of his legacy. </span>
</p>
<span></span><a href="http://www.eastafricapress.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=573&Itemid=79">http://www.eastafricapress.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=573&Itemid=79</a><br clear="all">
<br><br>