On August 10, the Daily Nation published a rather curious opinion article titled “Why Some Ethnic Groups Become the Subject of Hate without Even Trying.”
Pegged on the terrible Mpeketoni terror attacks and pretending to take a scholarly approach by quoting renowned scholars to give it a veneer of credibility, it claimed that other Kenyan communities hate the Kikuyu because of the ability of members of that ethnic group to become merchants or “middlemen minorities” whenever they settle in other parts of Kenya.
In fact, it compared the plight of migrant Kikuyu to that suffered by Jews, who have agonized injustices in the past apparently because of their enterprising spirit, and gave the impression that only ethnic Kikuyu were victims in the Mpeketoni mayhem.
Authored by Kirori Wa Ngugi, the article labored to juxtapose the local case with the international experiences where members of migrant racial groups – Jews, Lebanese, Chinese, etc – work hard to become wealthier than indigenous populations, in the process attracting hatred – which sometimes results in violence such as Mpeketoni.
The article must have caused hue and cry among readers. That is why the author was forced to revisit the subject a week later on August 16, this time –perhaps because of quality consciousness – widening the scope to include Kenyan
Asians (he left out the Somali, for some reason, yet they would fit perfectly in his argument).
However, his theses remained unchanged, only that this second time, he extended the argument and concluded that whenever the ‘middlemen minorities” engage in local politics, the end is always disastrous.
No doubt, these were mischievous articles that cleverly used outlandish illustrations to buttress and justify long-held stereotypes and sterile beliefs. Build entirely on false premises; one needed not be a logician to decipher the false conclusions.
This is not, however, a critique of Kirori’s articles, suffice to say that the Kikuyu can never be a minority anywhere in Kenya, whichever direction you try to stretch the meaning of that word. Actually in the modern sense, the term “minority” does not refer to numbers but rather talks about categories of persons who do not hold positions of social power.
My concern is about the standards of gate keeping in our local newspapers. Now, Daily Nation is no doubt the leading newspaper not only in Kenya, but also in the Eastern Africa region. It has established itself among the few that make a credible pretense to the principles of objectivity and good taste. And it is not for nothing that it is called Nation; it is called so because its founders aspired to help build the Kenyan nation, having been born on the eve of Kenya’s independence.
So why would a paper with such credentials publish articles that border on the parochial? Why would the Daily Nation help to divide Kenyans by publishing material that emphasizes “otherness” instead of fostering togetherness, especially in this season of snowballing negative ethnicity?
Surely, the editors of the Nation should know better than to publish opinion that bolsters the false “siege mentality” among the Kikuyu, or opinion that might provoke hatred of Kirori’s “middlemen minorities.” Certainly, the newspaper’s editors know that the violence at the Coast has affected members of the numerous ethnic communities resident there, not just one.
One is forced to make two conclusions; either the newspaper has run short of conscientious gatekeepers, or someone is trying to use its hallowed pages to drive an agenda, or force a perspective.
Well, one may argue that Kirori’s were just opinions. That opinion need not always be unbiased as factual reporting. However; the touchy nature of the subject
the author broached should have been approached with more caution by a self-respecting opinion editor.
As one who has read several opinions articles by the same author, I noticed that the two mentioned above were quite out of character. Was he commissioned by the editor? What are the newspaper editorial board’s views on issues the issues he raised?
It is difficult to figure out what the opinion writer aimed to achieve. The way he drew parallels between current events in Kenya and historical events elsewhere was rather perplexing. Were these opinion pieces designed to sway people to the author’s partisan point of view or were they written primarily for people who already agree with him? (Remember, it was President Uhuru Kenyatta who first claimed that the Mpeketoni attackers targeted members of the Kikuyu community)
Standard practice requires that whenever such controversial opinion pieces are published, the same newspaper must also publish the opinion of someone who completely disagrees as a way of either refuting or providing an alternative view.
It is possible that somebody p r e s e n t e d evidence to support an opposite point of view? But instead of publishing such views, the editor decided to award the author of the controversial opinion pieces extra space the following week to extend his argument. At least by the time of writing this article, the Daily Nation had not published any opinion pieces presenting different viewpoints.
Considering our ethnic approach to almost all public debates, an editor of a renowned newspaper must be careful about how his publication might be judged whenever it publishes such controversial material.
It is true that elsewhere in the world, particularly in places where democracy has matured, some newspapers take particular editorial bent. But such bents are always in support of one political direction or another, not tribe or race.
I have always insisted in these columns that media are powerful tools, and unless they use their power wisely, they can affect society negatively. Before any editor decides to publish material of an emotive nature, he must engage his intellect.
Whether in the news of opinion columns, newspapers have a duty to tell the public the truth and must always strive for objective opinion. If biased opinion is left to dominate public discussion, resentments are likely to arise.
Of course, newspapers must give enough room for varied opinion because this is the very basis of democracy. Societies are enriched when there are vigorous debates on the big questions of the day. This does not, however, allow editors to a lot space to dangerous, if tepid, arguments.
It is the responsibility of the editor to ensure that contributions adhere not only to the editorial policy of his newspaper, but also to the basic principles of newspaper writing.
An editor who publishes opinions that are not based on facts or opinions that manipulate facts to fit already formed conclusions is sleeping on a very sensitive job.
Equally a dangerous is one without a proper sense of what constitutes public good, because newspapers have an obligation to promote what is best for society.
To allow writers to tell lies or hide inconvenient facts or manipulate facts with the aim of serving a certain goal is dereliction of professional duty. To allow them to spin yarns based on far-fetched evidence is to be reckless.
“Why Some Ethnic Groups Become the Subject of Hate without Even Trying” and its sequel should not never have been published in the Daily Nation. ^
Email your news TIPS to Editor@nairobilawmonthly.com, and to advertise with us, call +254715061658 anytime of the day
