CITIZEN WATCHDOG REPORT - Information changes … CITIZEN WATCHDOG REPORT NOVEMBER 2012-APRIL 2013...

CITIZEN WATCHDOG REPORT NOVEMBER 2012-APRIL 2013

EDNA IPALEI

© Internews 2013

NOVEMBER 2012-APRIL 2013

CITIZEN WATCHDOG REPORT

Contents

List of abbreviations and acronyms 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2

INTRODUCTION and METHODOLOGY 4

1. Background and rationale 4

2. Definitions of hate speech and dangerous speech 7

3. Radio stations and programmes monitored 9

4. Innovative data collection 10

5. Qualitative tools 11

FINDINGS 12

1. Findings on dangerous speech 12

2. Cases of dangerous speech 14

3. Cases of moderately dangerous speech 17

4. Findings on Issues Covered and Fairness 20

5. Countering Offensive Speech 24

6. Findings on Programme Coverage 25

7. Gender balance in the programmes 26

CONCLUSIONS and RECOMMENDATIONS 27

Appendix 1 – Questionnaire / Code Sheet 19

Appendix 2 – Focus Group Discussion Questions 35


1


List of Abbreviations and Acronyms

BVR Kit Biometric Voter Registration Kit

CORD Coalition for Reforms and Democracy

CW Citizen Watchdog

FFM Free and Fair Media

FGD Focus Group Discussion

ICC International Criminal Court

IEBC Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission

MCK Media Council of Kenya

MP Member of Parliament

NCI Act National Cohesion and Integration Act

NCIC National Cohesion and Integration Commission

ODM Orange Democratic Movement

ODK Open Data Kit

TNA The National Alliance

URP United Republican Party

WDM Wiper Democratic Movement

2


For six months between November 2012 and April 2013, fifty citizen watch-dog monitors carefully noted incidents of hate speech and dangerous speech broadcast by five radio stations in Kenya. It was part of Internews in Kenya’s Free and Fair Media (FFM) programme aimed at working with the media to ensure that they covered the General Election of 2013 fairly and responsibly.

Known as Citizen Watchdog, the exercise was not so much one of policing as one of accountability – to check incidents of hate speech and dangerous speech on air in the run-up to the 2013 General Election, during the election, and afterwards. Citizen Watchdog ran parallel to Internews’ support to the media through its Free and Fair Media journalism training activities focused on conflict sensitive journalism practices. The five radio stations included KBC Radio Taifa (Kenya Broadcasting Corporation), three vernacular radio stations, and one Swahili broadcaster based in the coastal region.

The findings of Citizen Watchdog showed a sharp decline in cases of dan-gerous speech documented over the six month period: from 20 in November 2012 to zero in April 2013. It was also evident from the findings that incidents of reporter bias had reduced from 32% in November 2012 to 3% in April 2013. The monitors attributed the decline to a combination of factors that included media monitoring, changes brought about by the radio stations, the conclu-sion of the 2013 general election, training of journalists on election coverage, and a better understanding of media ethics and the code of conduct by media practitioners.

The monitoring also took other media matters into account, such as gender, dangerous speech, issue-based coverage of news, and fairness and balance in reporting. The Citizen Watchdog monitors observed that the training of jour-nalist in conflict sensitive journalism, civic education on the National Cohesion and Integration (NCI) Act of 2008, the fear factor related to the International Criminal Court (ICC), and the end of political campaigning all had an effect on reducing incidents of hate speech in the media.

The radio stations monitored by the 50 Citizen Watchdog monitors – ten per radio station – developed mechanisms over the six months to counter offen-sive speech. In the case of offensive callers, they cut them off, while also warning listeners before the start of on-air programmes that hate messages would not be tolerated. One of the radio stations surveyed and monitored, Radio Salaam, even ran infomercials, asking listeners not to engage in hate speech. Two others, Kass FM and Ramogi FM, apologised to their audiences each time a caller or guest made what was considered an offensive remark on air.

Executive Summary

3


Of concern was the gender disparity in the various programmes monitored by the Citizen Watchdog teams. Women were under-represented, both as studio guests and as radio presenters. With regard to hate speech and its dangers to society, the monitors recommended that the National Cohesion and Integration Commission (NCIC) conduct a country-wide civic education programme to educate the public, noting that they believed that it should be a continuous engagement and not an event to be conducted only dur-ing elections. In addition, based on the findings, it is recommended that the Media Council of Kenya (MCK) and other stakeholders invest in strength-ening journalists’ skills specifically related to interviewing techniques and moderation, both of which require a high level of professionalism, critical to doing the job well.

The Citizen Watchdog component of Free and Fair Media was a unique and innovative way to engage citizens in monitoring the airwaves for incidents of hate speech or dangerous speech. Part of the monitors’ remit also included checking the media’s adherence to the Kenyan Constitution of 2010 and the NCI Act of 2008. In addition, listeners of the five radio stations participated in focus group discussions to evaluate and give deeper insight into their attitudes, perceptions, opinions and responses to specific media content.

The project should be seen against the background of Kenya’s major political transformation shifts since the 2007 election. In the six months that Citizen Watchdog was being implemented, new political alliances was struck, the electoral process became mired in controversies related to technical failures and irregularities, and on 4 March 2013, 86% of the nation’s population went to the polls to elect a new President, Members of Parliament, Senators, Governors, and Ward Representatives. On 30 March 2013, the Supreme Court upheld Uhuru Kenyatta’s election as President of the Republic of Kenya after the outcome of the election was challenged. While the high court’s decision was cause for jubilation for the Jubilee Coalition supporters, CORD coalition supporters was frustrated, as many had expected the Supreme Court to order a run-off, given the close out-come of the election. This frustration was vented on social media platforms, particularly on Facebook, where an online “war of words” erupted between Jubilee and CORD supporters and ultimately, between communities. While Kenya remained largely peaceful after the election, and prior to and during the election, the country remains polarized along political and ethnic lines.

4


The Free and Fair Media (FFM) programme of Internews in Kenya was estab-lished to build the capacity of journalists to report fairly and responsibly on the 2013 General Election process and play a positive role in electoral information dissemination. Journalists were trained to professionally report on the electoral process, using conflict-sensitive approaches; identify and avoid hate speech; effectively use polling data; and mitigate conflict of inter-est arising from political ownership of media houses.

1) Background and rationale

After the post-election violence of 2007/08, journalists and local media were identified as a source of misinformation and hate messaging in the run-up to the election, which ended in bloodshed and political instability. The media was either not prepared or did not have the capacity to ensure responsible coverage of the highly disputed election. In some cases political ownership of outlets resulted in manipulated content.

Most mainstream media played a constructive role in the run up to the 2007 election, providing coverage of issues such as the party campaigns and examining and monitoring key electoral issues. When post-election violence erupted, they practiced proactive journalism and called for national unity. However, at times, political bias and partisan news management seemed to influence the news coverage.1 A particular grouping of media outlets – mainly vernacular radio stations – were blamed for encouraging division and ethnic animosity through the use of hate speech. The stations’ inability to militate against the sentiments expressed in call-in shows meant that they sometimes found themselves hostage to the populations they served.2

Since the 2007 election, Kenya has undergone major political transforma-tional shifts. On August 4, 2010 a new Constitution was adopted after a referendum, and promulgated on August 27.The new Constitution prepared the way for major reforms in the country, including stronger political checks and balances, more rights for citizens, stronger state institutions, and land reforms. While the outcome of the refen-dum was encouraging, laying the foundation for a more credible vote in 2013, much more needed to be done to ensure balanced coverage of the General

1 BBC World Service Trust, “The Kenya 2007 Elections and their Aftermath: the Role of Media and Communication”, Policy Briefing 1, April 2008.2 Somerville Keith, “Kenya: Violence, Hate Speech and Vernacular Radio”, Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies, March 2010.

Introduction and Methodology

5


Election to avoid a repetition of the mistakes of the 2007 electoral coverage. As more complex political and international justice processes unfolded, it was fitting that the media facilitated an understanding of the various mechanisms and political realignments for their audiences. As such, journalists needed to understand the new devolution structure and the new voting system. Within this context, the FFM project sought to promote a journalistic culture that supports democratic and responsible elections, striving to enhance journalism that was responsive to the voters� needs and expectations.

From 2010 to 2013, there were many key and at times controversial moments that tested the media’s capacity and abilities to provide effective and fair coverage of events as they unfolded prior to the election, during and in the aftermath. One of them was the formation of parties and alliances.

In December 2012, political parties had to meet the legal deadline to submit the details of party alliances. This resulted in political parties hastily setting up coalitions, creating some surprises for political analysts. Although the leaders the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) and the Wiper Democratic Movement (WDM) had been reluctant to work together during the five years of the Grand Coalition Government, they now formed the Coalition for Reforms and Democracy (CORD). Another coalition, Jubilee, was formed by Uhuru Kenyatta’s The National Alliance (TNA) party and William Ruto’s United Republican Party. This alliance did not come as a surprise as the two leaders – linked by an International Criminal Court (ICC) indictment for having engaged in crimes against humanity in 2007/08 – had started campaigning together in early 2012. CORD and Jubilee would be the two main political forces of the 2013 general election.

18 January 2013 was the deadline for the political parties to complete their nominations – a process which was regarded as shambolic and rife with dis-organization and irregularities country-wide. Most telling was that the parties did not put in place effective dispute resolution mechanisms as required by the IEBC, which ended up having to act as arbiter, settling disputes. Some of these ended up in the Supreme Court.

Although all the parties had started their campaign activities much earlier, the official start was on 1 February 2013. With the exception of a few isolated cases of discord, such as supporters of opposing sides in the political race disrupted each others’ meetings, this period was largely peaceful. A few days before the election, the presidential candidates held joint peace rallies, calling on their supporters to remain calm during election week, and to accept the outcome of the election. They also participated in Kenya’s first presidential debates (a two-part series), which represented an opportunity to answer ques-tions about their manifestoes and their leadership.

6


In total, there were 33,689 polling stations throughout the country. The IEBC established the National Elections Tallying Centre at the Bomas of Kenya in Nairobi a few weeks before the election. On 4 March 2013, most of the polling stations opened on time, all with the neccesary polling materials and equipment to conduct an election. However, it quickly became known that in many parts of the country that the Electronic Voter Identification machines had malfunctioned, forcing electoral officers to use printed polling books that caused delays in voting. Then the Electronic Results Transmission (ERT) system failed, leading to delays transmitting results to the central tallying point at the Bomas of Kenya. (IEBC officials would later acknowledge a massive system failure.) The results were now being tallied manually, a slow and laborious process that caused anxiety among political parties and vot-ers. The country however remained peaceful, even as Kenyans waited more than four days for the final results. And in spite of these hitches, the voter turn-out had been a striking 86%.

On March 9, 2013, the IEBC officially declared Uhuru kenyatta of Jubilee the 4th elected President of the Republic of Kenya. He had garnered 6,173,433 votes out of 12,330,028 votes cast, representing 50.07 per cent of the total votes cast, and at least 25% in 32 of Kenya’s 47 counties, meeting another constitutional condition for becoming head of state.

On the same day, CORD presidential candidate Raila Odinga announced that he would challenge the outcome of the elections in court. On 16 March 2013, he filed a petition with the Supreme Court, challenging the IEBC’s decision to declare Kenyatta the winner of the presidential election, and the credibility of the general election due to the information technology failures and disrepect of the rule of law. On 30 March 2013 the Supreme Court upheld Uhuru Kenyatta’s election as President. While the country remained mostly peaceful, the police deployed additional forces on 31 March in Nairobi and Kisumu. Mr. Odinga however urged his supporters to look to peaceful ways of resolving the issue.

Critically, in 2013, no media outlet was singled out for having broadcast or published hate speech – a very different picture from that of the 2007 election. This time, the media was praised for its positive role in information dissemination and civic education during the electoral period, which is the main objective of FFM.

FFM included the innovative and unique “Citizen Watchdog” (CW) activity that involved citizens directly in monitoring the media, as well as supporting the media’s role in promoting peace and mitigating conflict.

7


Fifty citizens were selected through an interactive screening process to establish listener groups, who received training on monitoring radio con-tent. The monitors were selected based on their age and the mastery of their respective vernacular languages. Internews chose youthful citizen watchdogs, aged between 21 and 35 years old. Each participant was taught to flag dangerous speech, to assess interaction on live call -in shows, and to listen for certain key terms and phrases. Citizen Watchdog was officially launched in November 2012 in Nairobi.

This report is the summary of the CW findings from the months November 2012 to April 2013, based on debriefing sessions between CW Coordinator Edna Ipalei and the monitoring groups at the end of each month. The results were shared with the media outlets. The information will also aid Internews trainers in refining curriculum development for the future.

2) Definitions of hate speech and dangerous speech

Section 13 of the National Cohesion and Integration (NCI) Act 2008 defines hate speech as:

13. (1) A person who-(a) Uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or

displays any written material;(b) Publishes or distributes written material; (c) Presents or directs the public performance of a play; (d) Distributes, shows or plays, a recording of visual images; or(e) Provides, produces or directs a programme;

which is threatening, abusive or insulting or involves the use of threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour commits an offence if such person intends thereby to stir up ethnic hatred, or having regard to all the circumstances, ethnic hatred is likely to be stirred up.

(2) Any person who commits an offence under this section shall be liable to a fine not exceeding one million shillings or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both.

(3) In this section, “ethnic hatred” means hatred against a group of persons defined by reference to colour, race, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins.

Internews, like other stakeholders in the media industry in Kenya, grap-pled with the ambiguity surrounding the legal definition of hate speech and with the difficulties to “operationalize” the legislation on hate speech: the expression “threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour” is vague

8


while the reference to “colour, race, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins” is too limited. More broadly, hate speech is defined as the promotion and encouragement of violence against an indi-vidual or a group on the basis of religion, race, ethnicity, colour, gender, political opinion, sexual orientation, amongst other. Moreover, in a post-conflict scenario, some dangerous speech that does not meet the thresh-old of hate speech still creates a dangerous and hostile environment and promotes intercommunity ill feelings.

Susan Benesch of the World Policy Institute3 was one of the first research-ers to define dangerous speech. Benesch developed a methodology to monitor and identify dangerous speech in countries at risk of mass vio-lence. At its core are five variables that fluctuate with the level of danger of a particular speech act: a powerful speaker with influence over an audi-ence; an audience vulnerable to incitement; content of the speech that may be taken as inflammatory; social and historical context of the speech; and an influential means of disseminating the speech.

The most dangerous hypothetical speech act is one for which all five variables are maximized, but any variable may increase the effect, in other words, the likelihood that incitement will succeed. For example, the same speech act is more dangerous if made by a speaker with influence and authority over a fearful audience that does not have access to other sources of information.

The CW project opted to use dangerous speech rather than hate speech to monitor media content, breaking it down into three degrees:

- Offensive speech: insulting speech targeting an individual and/or a community;

- Moderately dangerous speech: speech that is abusive and/or uses emotions against an individual or a community but does not call for action;

- Extremely dangerous speech: inflammatory speech that incites hatred, contempt, discrimination or violence against an individual and/or a community.

3 Susan Benesch is the Project Director for WPI’s “Dangerous Speech on the Road to Mass Violence” working to identify speech that is likely to catalyze violence, and to find the best policies to limit the force of such speech without curbing freedom of expression.

9


3) Radio stations and programmes monitored

The five CW groups were asked to monitor five radio stations:- KBC Idhaa ya Taifa (public, using Kiswahili)- Kass FM (private, using Kalenjin language)- Ramogi FM (private, using Dholuo language)- Kameme FM (private, using Kikuyu language)- Radio Salaam (private, using Kiswahili)

The five media outlets were selected: a) on the basis of reach, listenership, popularity and coverage of different ethnic groups; b) because they demon-strated the potential to act as incendiary agents for ethnic animosity at the height of the 2007/08 post election violence; and c) because of ownership.

Ten monitors assigned to each radio station were tasked with monitoring prime-time news bulletins (7.00 a.m., 10.00 a.m., 7.00 p.m. and 9.00 p.m.) and prime-time political talk-shows. Although the CW project’s main objec-tive was to monitor dangerous speech in the media, it also aimed to appraise the general performance of the selected media outlets that included: gender balance, fairness, accuracy, balance, and issue-based coverage.

Each citizen watchdog monitor was asked to fill out a media monitoring questionnaire on a daily basis. Questions included identifying the stories monitored, time of day it was broadcast, main issues discussed and oppor-tunities for listeners to comment, and whether the radio presenter could counter offensive callers. The full questionnaire (and code sheet) is available as Appendix 1.

CITIZEN WATCHDOG REPORT: NOVEMBER 2012‐APRIL 2013 | INTERNEWS IN KENYA 6

‐ Kameme FM (private, using Kikuyu language)

‐ Radio Salaam (private, using Kiswahili)

The five media outlets were selected: a) on the basis of reach, listenership, popularity and

coverage of different ethnic groups; b) because they demonstrated the potential to act as

incendiary agents for ethnic animosity at the height of the 2007/08 post election violence; and

c) because of ownership.

Ten monitors assigned to each radio station were tasked with monitoring prime‐time news

bulletins (7.00 a.m., 10.00 a.m., 7.00 p.m. and 9.00 p.m.) and prime‐time political talk‐shows.

Although the CW project’s main objective was to monitor dangerous speech in the media, it

also aimed to appraise the general performance of the selected media outlets that included:

gender balance, fairness,

accuracy, balance, and issue‐

based coverage.

Each citizen watchdog monitor

was asked to fill out a media

monitoring questionnaire on a

daily basis. Questions included

identifying the stories monitored,

time of day it was broadcast, main

issues discussed and

opportunities for listeners to

comment, and whether the radio

presenter could counter offensive

callers. The full questionnaire

(and code sheet) is available as

Appendix 1.

4. Innovative data collection

The media monitoring questionnaire was submitted daily using smart phone technology. The

smart phone application, Open Data Kit (ODK), is an open‐source tool that helps organizations

author and manage mobile data collection4. ODK software provides a solution for users to: 1)

build data collection forms or survey forms; 2) collect data by filling in the ODK forms installed

4 http://opendatakit.org/

FIGURE 1: UNDERSTANDING OPEN DATA KIT (ODK)

10


4) Innovative data collection

The media monitoring questionnaire was submitted daily using smart phone technology. The smart phone application, Open Data Kit (ODK), is an open-source tool that helps organizations author and manage mobile data collec-tion4. ODK software provides a solution for users to: 1) build data collection forms or survey forms; 2) collect data by filling in the ODK forms installed on a mobile device; 3) submit the saved forms to a central server; 4) aggregate the data on the server; and 5) extract the aggregated data in useful formats. Tools of operation include Google Play, ODK, a server and a phone. ODK facilitates the communication between the server and the monitor.

Internews first developed the code sheet before building the ODK appli-cation. Using Google Play, the monitors downloaded the application and installed it on their phones. They were then able to download the survey form from the server, fill it out and submit it using the application.

Data were analysed using spreadsheets and statistical analysis software to reflect the radio stations, scope of coverage, geographical areas, incidents of hate speech, gender presence, programs, issues covered and presenters’ gender.

4 http://opendatakit.org/

Figure 2: Citizen Watchdog monitors participating in Focus Group Discussions.

11


5) Qualitative tools

The CW Coordinator used face to face interviews and Focus Group Discussions (FGD) as qualitative data collection methods to verify and deepen the quantitative findings. Face to face interviews were held with listeners identified as loyal to their specific radio station, guided by a set of semi-structured questions. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and summarize. This method of data collection was crucial in evaluating the citizens’ responses to specific broadcasts.

The FGDs were designed to establish citizens’ attitudes, perceptions and opinions on media content and conduct, based on discussions with the citizen watchdog monitors on their findings, at the end of each month. The discussions were done conducted in English and lasted approximately two hours each. The CW Coordinator developed an English Language Discussion Guide with a set of questions that addressed the research objectives. The questions were then reviewed by the moderator for conformity with focus group settings and dynamics. At the end of each FGD, interviewees gave recommendations regarding the effective and successful execution of the project. Questions asked during the focus group discussions can be found in Appendix 2.

12


CW monitored 6,695 news reports and political talk shows from November 2012 to April 2013.

The radio stations ran hourly news briefs and major news bulletins at 7.00 a.m., 9.00a.m., 1.00 p.m., 4.00 p.m., 7.00 p.m. and 9.00 p.m. The news bul-letins comprised national, regional, international and local news items. The main news bulletins were 10-15 minutes long. In some instances, the radio stations allowed their programming to be interrupted by coverage of live events. Ramogi FM for instance rearranged the day’s programming sched-ule whenever the Gor Mahia football club had a match, to broadcast the match live. At KBC Radio Taifa, live parliamentary proceedings interrupted normal programming.

1) Findings on dangerous speech

The survey established that most of the dangerous speech at vernacular radio stations is perpetrated by the callers and the guests invited to the studio.

Jane Otieno, presenter with Ramogi FM, concurred with the findings. She noted that dealing with “offensive callers” was the biggest challenge: “It is very difficult to anticipate what a caller or guest is going to say. By the time you cut off an offensive caller, sometimes, the damage is already done,” Otieno commented.

FINDINGS

FIGURE 3: Presence Of Dangerous Speech

13


The monitors remarked that most of these “offensive callers” seek a platform to express grievances, and do not call to contribute constructively to the discussion.

Overall, there was a decline in dangerous speech, down from 20 cases in November 2012 to zero cases in April 2013 (see Figure 3 and Figure 4).

Kameme FM recorded the most instances of dangerous speech: 10 cases (representing 33% of the total cases) recorded during the monitoring period. Radio Salaam had 9 cases (27% of the total), Ramogi FM had 7 cases (21% of the total) and Kass FM had 6 cases (18%of the total). KBC Radio Taifa had 1 case (3% of the total). See figure 4.

The monitors attributed the decline to:

• The training of journalists in Conflict Sensitive Journalism. • Civic education on national cohesion and integration.• Continued media monitoring by various stakeholders.• The ICC fear factor.• End of political campaigns and the conclusion of elections.• Fewer or no controversial programmes after the election.

The monitor’s sentiments were echoed by various people in the media industry and the media monitoring fraternity. Elizabeth Omollo, who is the head of Ramogi Radio, said that after the station learnt that they were being monitored by several organizations, they held several internal meetings to instruct editors and presenters on the pitfalls of reckless and biased election coverage.

Stephaney Muchai, Senior Programme Officer with the NGO, Article 19, noted that most journal-ists took it upon themselves to guard the airwaves against hate speech. “There was a shift from media to personal liability. The journalists were careful not to engage in hate messaging because they knew that they will face the law as an indi-vidual,” explained Muchai.

“I reminded (editors and presenters) about the International Criminal Court. I told them that whoever engaged in dangerous speech would carry his or her cross. We were very careful not to polarize the already divided Kenya. I was given powers to switch off air any presenter I felt was treading on dangerous ground.”

- Elizabeth Omollo, head of Ramogi Radio

14


Mr. Timothy Kirui, Kass FM editor, acknowledged the training efforts by Internews in Kenya to ensure responsible coverage of the 2013 general elections. He said that the roundtables and mentoring were of great help to Kass FM’s journalists. “There was a big difference between the journalists who attended the Internews roundtables and those who did not.”

KAMEME FM

KASS FM KBC-RT Radio Salaam

Ramogi FM

TOTAL

November 3 4 1 8 4 20

December 3 2 0 1 1 7

January 1 0 0 0 1 2

February 3 0 0 0 1 4

March 0 0 0 0 0 0

April 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 10 6 1 9 7 33

FIGURE 4: Incidents of dangerous speech measured across five radio stations

2) Cases of dangerous speech

Case 1: Kameme FM: Thursday 22 November 2012-ArahukaNjogu, a presenter with Kameme FM, played a song with the lyrics directed at envoys representing various countries. It stated that their faces would be disfigured, pulled out and flashed down the toilet. Their faces, the song said, would be like fertilizer (‘Uthio utwike fertilizers’).

Envoys from the European Union had stated that since Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto were facing charges of crimes against humanity at the ICC, they should not run for the presidency. The lyrics qualified as dangerous speech. According to the Citizen Watchdogs, they were deemed offensive, and were an attempt to harm relationships between Kenya and foreigners.

The lyrics were also in violation of the NCI Act 2008 Article 13(1) (d): 13 (1) “A person who distributes, shows or plays, a recording of visual images; or which is threatening, abusive or insulting or involves the use of threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour commits an offence if such person intends thereby to stir up ethnic hatred, or having regard to all the circum-stances, ethnic hatred is likely to be stirred up”.

15


Case 2: KASS FM, Sunday November 4, 2012- Kass KwanetThe station’s Dr. Richard Keitany said: “Kibaishe the government billions kwal mbarenik agokaji bik kwai ama mi mbaret nekikikaji bik chok ago chang chechok che squatters.” (The government used millions to buy land for their people [Kikuyu] while many of our people are squatters).

Such comments could easily have opened old wounds between the Kikuyu and Kalenjin communities, which have for years been involved in altercations and violent confrontations mainly due to historical injustices.

The statement violated the NCI Act Article 13(1) (a) (1):“A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any writ-ten material which is threatening, abusive or insulting or involves the use of threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour commits an offence if such person intends thereby to stir up ethnic hatred, or having regard to all the circumstances, ethnic hatred is likely to be stirred up.”

Case 3: Kameme FM: Saturday, November 24, 2012Presidential candidate Peter Kenneth called Uhuru Kenyatta and Raila Odinga monkeys. He said: “The monkeys are the same like the ones in the 70s only the forest is different. This means that they are no different from their fathers.”

Peter Kenneth’s statement could be categorized as “dangerous speech”. It was made by a speaker who wields considerable power. With the highly charged and ethnicized political atmosphere present in the country at the time, such speech could easily have incited violence. The radio station should not have allowed itself to be used as a platform to make political animosity any bigger.

Peter Kenneth’s statement was in breach of the NCI Act 13(1) (a). (See defi-nition above.)

Case 4: Radio Salaam, Wednesday, November 28, 2012Speaking at a public rally in Mombasa, presidential aspirant Martha Karua asked residents to vet politicians before electing them. She said: “You can’t elect hyenas who are filled with greed and looking for opportunity.”

In African folklore, hyenas are the most disdained of animals. To be referred to as a hyena is to receive the worst form of insult. Just like Peter Kenneth’s use of monkeys, Martha Karua’s remarks were dangerous and could easily have sparked negative reactions from the supporters of her rivals. Martha Karua’s comments, as Peter Kenneth’s, were in breach of NCI Act 13(1) (a).

16


Case 5: Kass FM: Thursday November 1, 2012Coded expression used: “Murkelda”, which means “brown teeth”. The coded expression, “Murkelda” is a Kalenjin code word referring to members of the Kikuyu community. Historically, such stereotypes have been used to demean and ridicule members of certain communities.

Kass FM, by broadcasting this coded reference uses language understood by the “in group” (Kalenjin speakers) to refer negatively to Kikuyu people, therefore acting in breach of the NCI Act 13(1) (a). The station used threaten-ing, abusive or insulting words, which could have incited ethnic animosity.

Case 6: Radio Salaam, Friday November 2, 2012A caller said on air that “fat people are slow in thinking and action.” Although the statement is insulting, it is not legally in breach of the NCI Act. However, it is in bad taste and talk show hosts should immediately counter such use of language.

Case7: Radio Salaam, Saturday November 10, 2012A caller said on air: “Uhuru ni mungiki, Raila Odinga ni shetani, mchochezi na hafai kuwa president, Raila was involved in the 1982 coup.” (“Uhuru is a Mungiki member, Odinga is Satan ...”)

Background: President Uhuru Kenyatta has been indicted by the ICC, whose prosecutor has attempted to prove a linkage between him and the outlawed militia group, the Mungiki. Nevertheless, the caller’s inflammatory remarks about then Presidential candidate Kenyatta, as well as for the cultural insult of referring to Raila Odinga (also a Presidential candidate at the time) as Satan, should have been countered, given how high tensions were in the run-up to the election. The monitors therefore regarded this statement as being in violation of the NCI Act – and urged talk show hosts to better man-age such remarks.

Case 8: Radio Salaam, Saturday November 10, 2012A caller said on air: “Eti Mombasa hakuna viongozi bali vioozi.” (“In Mombasa, there are no leaders but only rotten people.”)

Though not in breach of any laws, the statement could be categorized as contemptuous and belittling, potentially to all communities in Mombasa. Therefore, on air hosts should indicate on air that it discourages such state-ments.

17


Case 9: Kameme FM, Saturday, December 8, 2012A political aspirant referred to his political opponents as children of Goliath and anti-reformists, thus, they cannot be trusted to bring about change.

Biblically, despite Goliath being almost four times bigger and stronger, he was felled by David, a sheppard who was small in stature. To be called children of Goliath is demeaning; something which talk show hosts should discourage.

Case 10: Ramogi, Friday December 14, 2012A caller said: “Jaluo gin useless.” (“The Luo people are useless.”)

Radio presenters and talk show hosts should insist on respect for all people on their programmes. The NCI Act 13(1) (a) was breached and both the caller and the radio station should have been held responsible.

Although not threatening, the caller’s words were abusive and insulting to an entire ethnic group. In an emotionally charged political environment, the monitors found that comments such as this one could inflame ethnic hatred.

3) Cases of moderately dangerous speech

Case 1: Kameme FM: Friday, November 23, 2012, ArahukaThe presenter referred to the (then) Prime Minister Raila Odinga contemptu-ously: “Rekei ndi mwiri Raila Odinga ati Kibaki akiniiuka nake ainuke.” (Let me tell Raila Odinga that when Kibaki is going home he should go home too.)

The statement breached the Code of Conduct and Practice of Journalism in Kenya which states:

(4) Journalists and all media practitioners should recognize that they are accountable for their actions to the public, the profession and them-selves. They should:

- Actively encourage adherence to these standards by all jour-nalists and media practitioners.

- Recognize that they are duty bound to conduct themselves in ways that are ethically determined.

Since Raila was a Presidential candidate (and Kibaki not), the remark was inappropriate and the presenter was assuming the role of Raila’s political opponent, which is contrary to the neutrality expected of journalists.

18


Case 2: Ramogi, Friday, November 30, 2012 (Ramogi Barasa Show)A guest and opinion leader in the “Raila for President” lobby group said on a current affairs discussion show on Ramogi FM that: “Wangni to nguono onge” and “tuko tayari.” (‘There is no forgiveness this time round’, and ‘we are ready’ - respectively). The presenter did nothing to stop the guest. Neither did he ask the guest to apologise for the inflammatory statement.

These statements, being broadcast to the people of Luo Nyanza, were inflammatory, considering Raila Odinga and his followers believed that he was robbed of the presidency in 2007. In addition, those still smarting from the 2007/2008 post-election violence would find the statement hurtful. The speaker was in breach of the NCI Act 2008 Article (13) (1) (a) – it was irre-sponsible of the radio station not to have challenged these statements.

Case 3: Ramogi FM, Thursday November 8, 2012A Member of Parliament for Nyatike, Edick Anyaga, spoke on Ramogi FM about attacks on him in his constituency. He alleged that the stoning of his car was organized by his opponent.

Monitor 33 felt that a presenter should challenge such allegations, when made live on air, as unsubstantiated, the statement could lead to animosity or retaliatory thoughts.

The statements however did not breach the NCI Act since no particular opponent was named or identified, although the opposition party was not given the right to reply – meaning political content on the station was not balanced. The show host and the radio station were therefore in breach of the Media Code of Conduct, Article (1) (a) the fundamental objective of a journalist is to write a fair, accurate and unbiased story on matters of public interest. All sides of the story shall be reported, wherever possible. Comments should be obtained from anyone who is mentioned in unfavour-able context.

Case 4: Ramogi, Thursday November 8, 2012 – Ramogi Barasa Show“Jokuria nyaka duogi e ODM nikech Migori en ODM one.” (Members of the Kuria community must join the party because Migori is an ODM zone.) The speaker was the same politician and Nyatike Member of Parliament as above: Edick Anyanga. He spoke these words on Ramogi FM’s current affairs show.

19


According to Monitor 38, the intention was to belittle and intimidate mem-bers of the Kuria Community in Migori. Since the Kuria are fewer than their Luo neighbours, such a statement could have been misinterpreted as a campaign to enhance and entrench political and ethnic hegemony.

While the MP was not in breach of the NCI Act 2008, this would count as dangerous speech based on Susan Benesch’s definition. It was made by a powerful speaker with influence over his audience. It aimed at creating an ethnic identity and manipulating it.

Case 5: KASS FM: Saturday November 3, 2012Kalonzo Musyoka, during a rally commented that this time round everyone will vote: “na watu wote waliokuwa wamekufa hawatafufuka.” (The dead will this time not be able to vote.)

This statement was neither hateful nor dangerous, but a sarcastic refer-ence to what happened in the 2007 general elections. The then Electoral Commission of Kenya (ECK) was accused of bungling the election results and allowing already deceased people to vote – a reference to the ability to trick the system with ghost voters – something which should not happen with the biometric voter register that had been , introduced for these elec-tions. For the purpose of this report, the statement is considered moderately dangerous.

Case 6: Kass FM Sunday November 4, 2012The station’s Dr. Richard Keitany said (on air) that he was against the Ruto-Uhuru alliance and that he did not have confidence in Uhuru Kenyatta. He argued that Uhuru would use his power in office to settle only Kikuyu Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs).

Such allegations made against a presidential candidate should be proven, verified, challenged or ignored, the monitors argued. While the statement was not dangerous, it was careless and reckless and not in keeping with the journalistic code of conduct.

Case 7: KBC, Thursday November 15th 2012-Swala IbukaA caller said: “All the bandits and cattle rustlers in Baragoi should be killed.”

The caller was referring to the killing of police officers in Baragoi. Presenters should have countered and tempered such statements by asserting that the Constitution protects all Kenyans. They should also have affirmed that it is left to legal instruments, such as the court, to determine the fate of criminals. The statement breached the Kenya Constitution, Bill of Rights

20


and Fundamental Freedoms, Article 26(1) and (3) as well as Article 50(2). No caller or media house should promote street or vigilante justice.

4) Findings on Issues Covered and Fairness

Issues covered

From the findings, it is evident that more focus was given on election cam-paigns and election-related issues during the election period (see figure 5 below). This was followed by security, political administration and proc-esses, constitution implementation and national cohesion respectively. The coverage increased as the election date approached.

In March 2013, media coverage shifted to post-election issues: the tallying of results; the failure of the IEBC electronic system; the CORD petition; the AFRICOG petition; and the Supreme Court ruling on the presidential elec-tion petition. From April, the media largely shifted its focus to the matter of devolution. It emerged from the focus group discussions with the monitors that they thought that the media did a commendable job in promoting peace during the 2013 electioneering period. However, some of the monitors felt that the media became peace ambassadors at the expense of asking tough questions: “The media was too cautious not to discuss contentious issues that may spark violence in the country,” said monitor 38.

During the election, the radio stations mobilized citizens to exercise their democratic right by voting. While educating people on the voting process,

21


they also encouraged people to go home after voting and to follow the elec-tion proceedings via the media outlets. In addition, the radio stations advised people to stay calm and wait for the Supreme Court ruling on the CORD petition. They also explored the process of devolution, inviting the experts to discuss the topic.

Balance

The results of the CW monitoring indicated that most vernacular radio station journalists were fair and balanced in their political coverage. As indicated in Figure 6, there were only a few cases of reporter bias, alternating between 1% and 2% for the entire monitoring period. In the few cases of bias, the reporter gave more coverage to one political party than others. “Kameme FM mostly covered Jubilee and a few instances CORD. Other parties were ignored,” commented a Ramogi FM listener. In some instances, some presenters referred to certain political parties as “us”.The monitors contended that the use of “us” connoted partisanship. “Journalists are supposed to be neutral, fair and balanced in their coverage. They are not supposed to take political sides,” noted another listener.

Of the five radio stations monitored Kameme FM was the most biased with 61 cases of reporter bias documented, representing 65% of the total number of cases (see figure 7). Ramogi was second, 18 cases (19% of the total); Radio Salaam had 9 cases (10% of the total); Kass FM had 4 cases (5% of the total); and KBC Radio Taifa had 1 case (1% of the total). “KBC Radio Taifa did a commendable job. As a national broadcaster it set a high meas-ure of standards for the rest of the radio stations,” commented Monitor 7.It appeared that when journalists realized that they were being monitored they became cautious of what they broadcast. Management at media houses were also watchful and would quickly reprimand any reporter who did not abide by the journalists’ code of conduct. “At Ramogi we did our utmost best to abide by the Journalist Code of Conduct. We had learnt from the events of 2007/2008 when the media took sides in the political competi-tion. The media prejudice nearly threw our country into the worst annals of history,” said Elizabeth Omollo, head of Ramogi Radio.

“Some of our reporters were biased. There was one who kept sneaking sto-ries on the CORD Alliance. When I realized what he was doing, I immediately transferred him from the news desk to the business desk,” noted Timothy Kirui, Kass FM editor. This was an example of how in this instance Kass FM dealt with reporter bias.

22


KAMEME FM

KASS FM KBC-RT Radio Salaam

Ramogi FM

TOTAL

November 21 2 1 1 5 30

December 13 1 0 0 1 15

January 14 0 0 0 6 20

February 6 1 0 1 3 11

March 5 0 0 5 3 13

April 2 0 0 2 0 4

TOTAL 61 4 1 9 18 93

Figure 7: Reporter bias across the radio stations (Number of cases)

CITIZEN WATCHDOG REPORT: NOVEMBER 2012‐APRIL 2013 | INTERNEWS IN KENYA 18

“Kameme FM mostly covered Jubilee and a few instances CORD. Other parties were ignored,”

commented a Ramogi FM listener.

In some instances, some presenters referred to certain political parties as “us”.

The monitors contended that the use of “us” connoted partisanship. “Journalists are supposed to be

neutral, fair and balanced in their coverage. They are not supposed to take political sides,” noted

another listener.

Of the five radio stations monitored Kameme FM was the most biased with 61 cases of reporter bias

documented, representing 65% of the total number of cases (see figure 7). Ramogi was second, 18 cases

(19% of the total); Radio Salaam had 9 cases (10% of the total); Kass FM had 4 cases (5% of the total);

and KBC Radio Taifa had 1 case (1% of the total). “KBC Radio Taifa did a commendable job. As a national

broadcaster it set a high measure of standards for the rest of the radio stations,” commented Monitor 7.

It appeared that when journalists realized that they were being monitored they became cautious of

what they broadcast. Management at media houses were also watchful and would quickly reprimand

any reporter who did not abide by the journalists’ code of conduct. “At Ramogi we did our utmost best

to abide by the Journalist Code of Conduct. We had learnt from the events of 2007/2008 when the media

took sides in the political competition. The media prejudice nearly threw our country into the worst

annals of history,” said Elizabeth Omollo, head of Ramogi Radio.

“Some of our reporters were biased. There was one who kept sneaking stories on the CORD Alliance.

When I realized what he was doing, I immediately transferred him from the news desk to the business

desk,” noted Timothy Kirui, Kass FM

editor. This was an example of how

in this instance Kass FM dealt with

reporter bias.

FIGURE 6: REPORTER BIAS IN POLITICAL COVERAGE

FIGURE 6: Reporter Bias In Political Coverage %

23


Political coverage

Results from the CW monitoring established that radio stations gave signifi-cantly more coverage to the prominent parties (see figure 8). Therefore most of the coverage was about the Jubilee and CORD Alliance activities.

Some radio stations were obviously biased towards certain political parties. For instance, Kameme FM was biased towards the Jubilee Alliance, while Ramogi FM was biased towards the CORD Alliance. It is important to note that the results in no way indicate whether the stations adopted a deliberate bias.

Other radio stations however gave relatively balanced coverage to the Jubilee and CORD Alliances.Some journalist like Shadrack Mutai of Kass FM and Njogu wa Njoroge of Kameme FM were openly biased. Mutai was in support of the CORD alli-ance, while Njoroge supported the Jubilee Alliance. However, as the moni-toring continued, the two journalists’ coverage became more balanced.

JUBILEE ALLIANCE

CORD AMANI ALLIANCE

EAGLE ALLIANCE

NARC-K RBK SAFINA ARK

December 51 39 9 5 4 1 - -

January 47 38 7 3 3 2 - -

February 47 38 7 3 2 1 1 1

March 50 40 5 2 1 1 - 1

April 49 49 1 - 1 - - -

Figure 8: Coverage of political parties and alliances (%)

Sample case of bias 1: Kameme FM, Friday December 7, 2012 - ArahukaMonitor 28 observed that the presenter in his discussion kept referring to TNA as ‘us’. By doing this, the presenter implied that he is a part of the TNA party. Such implicit references sent signals of bias to the listeners of the programme.

Sample case of bias 2: Kameme FM, Tuesday, December 18, 2012 - ArahukaMonitors 23 and 29 noted that one of the presenters attacked presidential aspirant Musalia Mudavadi with regard to his bid to seek the presiden-tial seat on the Jubilee Alliance ticket. The presenter compared Musalia Mudavadi to: “A child who has been denied bread by his father.” This came

24


after allegations that Uhuru Kenyatta had agreed to step down from the presidential race in favour of Musalia Mudavadi. Uhuru Kenyatta later assert-ed that although he had initially agreed, he did so under pressure from ‘evil forces’ that pushed him into signing the Memorandum of Understanding between him and Musalia. The presenter took sides with Uhuru and the Jubilee Alliance.

Kameme FM was not the only radio station with stories biased in favour of one political party. The monitors observed that Ramogi FM was biased towards ODM. Most of the political news stories were about party leader Raila Odinga and the ODM party activities. For instance Monitor 38 observed that on Monday, November 5, 2012, “The presenter only gave a chance for callers from one party, ODM.” It was not clear whether or not only callers in support of the ODM made the calls. It would have helped if the presenter also encouraged supporters of other parties to contribute to the debate. This would have helped by showing fairness and encouraging a balance of voices.

Monitor 13 noted that on Radio Salaam, on Saturday, November 10, in the program titled: ‘Kauli Yako’, the journalists talked extensively in favour of the then Mvita Member of Parliament Najib Balala, who was vying for the seat of Senator for Mombasa. “It would have helped if the presenter also encour-aged supporters of other parties to contribute to the debate. This would help not only in showing fairness, but also in encouraging balance of voices.”

5) Countering Offensive Speech

The number of offensive callers declined from November 2012 to April 2013. To control offensive callers, most of the radio stations used the following mechanisms:

• Cutting off air callers using offensive language.• Advising callers not to use offensive language before and during

the program.• Encouraging the audience to stick to the topic of discussion.• Using fear to control the callers; for instance stating that the gov-

ernment is listening.• Pre-recording calls.• Reading only text messages and Facebook messages.

Radio Salaam ran an infomercial to inform all callers that the station does not and will not accept any sentiments that suggest dangerous speech or political affiliation.

25


Kass FM and Ramogi FM apologized to their audiences when there was an offensive caller or guest.”In Radio Salaam, presenters used fear to control offensive callers. They kept telling the listeners not to use offensive language because the “govern-ment was listening,” a Citizen Watchdog noted. Monitor 14 observed that, Ahmed Bashir, Radio Salaam presenter began his discussions by saying: “Ukitumia lugha isiyo mzuri nitakupiga ngwala.” (English translation: “If you use offensive language I will put you off air.”)

Nevertheless, despite efforts to warn and cut off offensive callers, Radio Salaam made the least attempts to counter dangerous speech. The moni-tors attributed this to the absence of a censoring mechanism. The monitors agreed that presenters cannot anticipate what a caller is going to say. The caller may begin the conversation well then drift into offensive language.

With regard to Kass FM, one of their listeners remarked: “I was very amused with Kass FM. They did apologize to the audience once there was an offen-sive call. On some occasions, the station asked offensive callers to apolo-gize.”

6) Findings on Programme Coverage It emerged from the focus group discussions that in the month of November 2012, many aspiring politicians had just launched their political campaigns and were all seeking publicity in the media. By December 2012, the political talk shows decreased because of the festive season, while many politicians took a break over the holiday season. In January 2013, the politicians were back, campaigning for nominations and political realignment. They seemed to have little time to engage the media during the first month. However, in February 2013, those politicians who received various political party nomi-nations embarked on intense campaigns. During this period, political talk shows increased. Radio stations invited politicians to explain their manifes-toes and asked political experts to educate listeners on devolution. After the 4 March election, political activities reduced and so did the political talk shows.

7) Gender balance in the programmes

Figure 9 represents the finding related to gender presence, which indicated that women received minimal coverage during the election period. Their coverage ranged from 2% -5% in the entire monitoring period.

26


During the focus group discussions the monitors posited that the patriar-chal nature of the society was to be blamed for the under-representation of women in the political discourse. Women are traditionally, culturally and politically perceived as less informed and inarticulate on political issues. In addition, according to the CW monitors, a woman’s place is culturally perceived to be the home. Few women therefore have the confidence to publicly express their views. The monitors noted that they believed that there was a need for gender mainstreaming in the media to achieve equal representation and inclusive coverage of issues in society.

FIGURE 9: Gender presence in the programmes covered

27


The CW monitors lauded the effort by all the actors who ensured that the Kenyan media industry was held to account during the run-up to the elec-tion, during the election, and afterwards. However, they were unanimous in their opinion that media and hate speech monitoring should be a continuous process to ensure that both media practitioners and listeners understand and internalize fully what hate crimes mean and their implications.

Recommendations

1) Definition of Hate Speech

The NCIC and other stakeholders need to seek a clearer and legally binding definition of hate speech to aid prosecutorial processes, as well as aid citi-zens’ understanding of the NCI Act 2008. The findings of the monitoring of the five radio stations indicated a general lack of understanding among the callers (audience) of the full scope of hate speech.

2) Training

The Media Council of Kenya (MCK) and other stakeholders need to train presenters and moderators of talk shows in interviewing techniques to help them fully and more effectively control studio interviews and talk shows. The project’s findings over several months indicated that in some instances talk show hosts possess little knowledge of current and past political affairs. The monitors suggested that a lack of proper research created opportunities to mislead audiences; this should be addressed within newsrooms.

3) Call-in programmes

As most cases of dangerous speech were documented as coming from call-in shows. Media houses need to be in control of these kinds of programs, with mechanisms in place to deal with offensive callers. There are many ways to do this, with the aim that they do not slip and broadcast dangerous or hate speech without effective counter measures. The monitors recom-mended that Internews expand its training of presenters and talk show hosts. 4) Studio Guests

Programme managers and hosts of radio stations and programs need to be in control of their guests and there needs to be a set of rules and regulations that guests and callers-in can abide by. In particular, given the emotional

CONCLUSIONS and RECOMMENDATIONS

28


context of some of the debates, the Monitors urged the stations to invite people who are capable of self-restraint when debates get fiery. In this regard, Internews in Kenya needs to spend more time training presenters and talk show hosts in on-air mediation, and how to effectively and appro-priately counter offensive callers.

5) Editing

News editors should filter content that may be construed as hate speech. They should only allow relevant material on air and promote issue-based editing. The Media Council of Kenya should play a role in training news editors in the industry, with a focus on vernacular stations to build their skills in screening and pre-recording broadcast material, understanding that live coverage of events and live shows fall under a different ambit of skills needed.

6) Civic education

The project’s finding indicated that there is a lack of understanding of dan-gerous speech and a lack of appreciation for its ramifications and impact among the general populace. Civic education needs to be carried out coun-trywide, to educate citizens on dangerous speech and its repercussions. The monitors argued that civic education should be a continuous process and should not be conducted only when there are elections: “People under-stand most when they are at peace and NOT under pressure,” remarked Monitor 38.

7) Gender presence

Media houses need to embrace the 2/3 gender rule. According to the CW monitoring findings, women are under-represented on radio programmes. Media houses should have mechanisms in place to ensure that women’s issues are highlighted. Media houses need to review their recruitment poli-cies to ensure a balance of both genders in terms of employment opportuni-ties.

8) Continued monitoring

While the monitors expressed satisfaction in the way the CW programme was formulated and implemented, they observed that it should be a continu-ous project and not just executed during elections.

29


Appendix 1 – Questionnaire / Code Sheet

Election Coverage

Variable Description

NAME OF THE MONITOR

NAME OF THE RADIO STATION

DATE THE STORY WAS AIRED.

TIME OF THE DAY

NAME OF THE PROGRAMME

Presenter(s) Name

PRESENTER GENDER- Both- Female - Male

PROGRAMME- News bulletin- Political Talk Shows

GEOGRAPHICAL SCOPE- Local- Regional- National- African- International

Area the programme refers to-(code the widest geographical scope that applies and give the name)

30


Main Issues Discussed- Constitution Implementation- IDPs- Security- Election campaigns and

rallies- The Somali question- Food security- Employment- Reclamation of arid and

semi arid land- Education- Agriculture- Elections- Ethnic Conflicts- Corruption- National cohesion- Law and order- Health- Infrastructure- ICC- Environment- Religion- Economy- Accidents/Disaster- Culture- Legislation- Media- Political Process and

Administration- Sports- Other

Law and Order: All stories about crime and the handling/prosecution of (alleged) crime by police and court system / judici-aryLegislation: All processes connected to the enactment/implementation of laws

Political Process and Administration: Parliament/Government/Party business, management of public administration

Dominant actor in the article- Academician/researchers- Politician- Civil rights activists- State official- NGO’s- Diplomat- Business man/woman- Trade union- Religious leader- Professional association- Woman/man on the street- Sports man/woman- Journalist/media house- Artist/celebrity

Other

Specify the name of the person, institution or organization from which the person is from.

31


Gender Presence in The Discussion- Both women and men cen-

tral to the story- Men central- Women central

Who is covered as the main subject of the story, men or women? Who are the sources, men or women

Sources Identification- Sources explicitly identified- Sources identified as anony-

mous- Sources not identified

Chance to Comment- Chance given- No chance given- NA

Are people mentioned in an unfavour-able context in the article given a chance to comment?If nobody is mentioned in an unfa-vourable context, choose NA

Comment Fact- No journalistic opinion.

- 20% journalistic opinion-Small portion

- 20% journalistic opinion-contains substantial portion

Is the presenter able to counter offen-sive callers? Yes(Explain how)No (explain why)

Is the reporter politically biased:Yes (Explain)No

32


Obscenity- Obscenity- No obscenity

Obscenities are words or phrases that usually refer to sexual parts or func-tions in an offensive way. Note: There are legitimate reasons for using sex-related terms e.g. in health or crime stories

.

Hate Speech- No hate speech- Negative stereotypes or

insults- Dehumanizes a group of

people- Threats or alarming state-

ments- Ridicule or sarcasm- Coded expressions for

ethnic groups or activities related to ethnic groups

- Statements inciting to vio-lence

- Other

Hate Speech Details-List all characteristics of hate speech that apply, transcribe the hate speech quote word by word and describe the following context very detailed:Who is speaking (e.g. politician, man/woman from the street, caller, journal-ist, radio presenter)?Where is the person speaking? What is his intention? What is the political and social context? Who is the audi-ence? What are they likely to perceive as the meaning of message? How well informed are they? What other information sources are available to the audience?

33


Variables related to Politicians / Parties

Variable Description

Political Party:

Leaders Quoted in the programme:

Profile Percentage coverage:- 5 (%)- 33 (%)- 66 (%)- 100 (%)

Only fill in this field for politicians and parties, not for top-ics.

- 5%: Only one mention in the article- 33%: article covers politician / party substantially,

besides other persons / issues- 66%: article predominantly covers this party /

politician- 100%: article covers only this party/politician

Tonality- +1 (Positive)- 0 (Neutral)- -1 (Negative)

Only fill in this field for politicians and parties, not for top-ics.Positive: where the media company/journalist is clearly biased in favour of the candidate/party; where the candi-date/party is praised.Neutral: where information is presented in an unbiased way; there is no discernible tone.

Negative: where the media company/journalist is clearly biased against the candidate/party; where the candidate/party is criticized.

34


The Topic of discussion:- Economy/Employment- Constitution Implementation- Election campaigns and rallies- Education- Ethnicity/Cohesion- Food Security- Agriculture- Family Values- Gender- General Election Issues- General National Politics- Health- ICC- Infrastructure- Internal Party Issues- Land Issues/IDP- Security- Youth- NA

Kind of event the party /politician is covered in- Institutional- Campaign rally- Institutional / Campaign- Corporate event- Funeral- Religious gathering- Not determinable- Other

35


Appendix 2 – Focus Group Discussion Questions

1: From your experience as monitors, what improvements have you noticed in the radio stations you are monitoring in the last three months?

2: What changes should be effected?

3: In your opinion, has the media handled post-election issues objectively and comprehensively? Give examples.

4. Explain the trend in the political coverage.

5. Account for presenter gender/Gender presence disparities in the program coverage.

6. Give reason for the reduction of reporter bias.

7. Account for decline of hate speech cases from 20 in November to zero in April?

8. In terms of civic awareness, how do you rate the level of awareness of ordinary citizens regarding Hate Speech and NCIC Act 2008? Has the media and stakeholders done enough?

9. If elections were held today what would you want the media to do dif-ferently?

10. As monitors who have participated in Citizen Watchdog Programme, how to you view the project?

CITIZEN WATCHDOG REPORT - Information changes … CITIZEN WATCHDOG REPORT NOVEMBER 2012-APRIL 2013...

Documents

Transcript of CITIZEN WATCHDOG REPORT - Information changes … CITIZEN WATCHDOG REPORT NOVEMBER 2012-APRIL 2013...