I am currently taking A Media Ethics course and some things that I have seen in the media recently are disturbing, as far as media ethics are concerned.
The media has been awash the last two weeks with stories about the mortuary land saga in Athi River, where some government officials are alleged to have swindled money out of public coffers.
The media mentioned names of prominent people and even went ahead to quote the amounts they had received. All this was purportedly from a report that was leaked to media from Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission or from some other mysterious quarters.
The reputations of the people named in that report, which was just a preliminary report, have been damaged beyond control. In the eyes of the public, they are guilty as charged, based on what the media has been reporting.
But wait a minute. What are the facts of the case? The most pertinent fact is that the people were only mentioned adversely, and there is no evidence to show that they committed what is alleged they committed.
Instead of the media being a critical and objective observer of the events, the media allowed itself to be used as a tool for judgment of people in the market place! What should have happened is that whoever came up with the report should have taken his/her case to a court of law, where he/she would be called upon to prove the allegations. The details that were leaked to the media were supposed to be presented before a competent officer of the court, and not the public that has no ability to make the right judgement (of course because a majority have no legal training). The sad thing is that the allegations were being made in the wrong place and the media agreed to be a player in this. This is sad and eve unethical.
Does it mean that we no longer have people in the media with critical minds that can discern right from wrong? Does it mean that as a journalist, once I receive a document from any quarter making allegations about others, I just run to the printing press without even questioning the intergrity of the process used to prepare the document?
Does it mean that we are just a helpless profession that cannot do what is expected of us by right thinking members of the society. Why should the media allow itself to be used to slander and libel other people? A reputation will take many years to build but the media is capable of destroying it with only one article. That is how critical the media is and that is why the media has a greater responsibility of protecting the interests of the public and individuals. A journalist isn’t supposed to be lapdog that will just swallow all that he/she is told without chewing and regurgitating over that information.
One Frank Whalley, one of the people who trained me in journalism, told me that as a journalist, the first question you ask yourself when someone comes to you with some information is, “why is this bastard lying to me?” Try to dig out the truth by assuming that what you have been told is a lie.
In other words, don’t just believe what you are told. Take time to analyse and think through issues. Ask yourself, what is the interest of the person in the issue and what does he hope to achieve? Is it for the public good that he is doing what he is doing, or is it for private gain? If the media had taken time to ask these questions, I don’t think they would have made the ethical mistakes that I feel they made in this case. Their cardinal sin is prosecuting people in the media without giving them the right of reply.
I don’t condone corruption but at the same time, I believe in the rule of law and in justice for all. It does not matter how eager the public is for some blood to be spilt in the war against corruption. Ethical rules must be maintained at all times.
Comments