MEDIA COMPETITION AND MEDIOCRE TACTICS

A creative TV commercial has a rather surprising ending. It captures all the leading football teams in the English Premier League, except one obvious one. This mirrors a past trend with Kenyan media outlets, that deliberately refrained from giving direct competitors any publicity. It seems we could be back in those dark ages of media competition and mediocre tactics.

The selection of a particularly awful picture of a popular news anchor appearing in a rival media platform is quite telling.

Is there an untold story behind the quality of the image, and the editorial decision to publish it?

It seems like a deliberate attempt to remove some of the shine from a representative of the competition.

And this is perhaps the reasoning behind the advert by a bank associated with the title sponsor of the EPL.

The decision to leave out any reference to the team currently leading the same football league, could be based on the fact that it happens to have a rival bank as a shirt sponsor.

If a picture is worth a thousand words...this one may need a thousand apologies!

FACTS, JOURNALISTS AND NURSERY RHYMES

Journalists can get facts wrong based on faulty interpretation of information. Some facts though require no additional processing. The've been the same for centuries, are still the same, and may remain the same for eons to come. To help remember them, maybe some nursery rhymes could be of assistance.

Indeed, by the time one gets into any professional career, one ought to be aware of certain stubborn facts...

...Like the number of days in every month of the year!

So repeat after me, dear sub-editor:

Thirty days have September, 

April, June and November.

All the rest have thirty-one,

Except for February alone.

But according to this newspaper article, in a far, far away land, filled with mystical and mythical creatures, which possess magical powers and frequently engage in time travel:

There exists a date like April 31.

And it lived unhappily ever after with the rest of the correct dates!

LIKE IT OR NOT, UNLIKE AS A LEAD IN A READ IS UNLIKABLE

Unlike, at the beginning of a story, I don't like. For the media, this amounts to making an untenable assumption about your audience. That their minds can supply the missing details they've been denied by the writer. Like it or not, unlike as a lead in a read is unlikable.

It's a bit taxing on the reader, if a newspaper article begins as if other critical details in understanding the story have already been furnished.

Yes, there is a not too bad possibility that this type of writing could be fresh and mercifully different from the 'tired', tried and tested formula of crafting story introductions.

However, any style of writing should not wander far off the known natural conversation patterns.

Imagine meeting a person you've not met for a long time...no...scratch that.

Imagine meeting a stranger and the first thing you say to them is, "Unlike...".

That's bound to cause some barely bearable confusion, as one desperately tries to hang on to every word that follows, in order to make sense of what is being communicated.

Terribly ingenious in a fabulously non-functional manner, I would say.

Unless...you are like...unlike...is like...a likely....likelihood!

Unlike...me!

SENSELESS NEWS NONSENSE: WHEN EDITORIAL AND PRODUCTION FALL APART

What makes sense to the media can be nonsense to the audience. And what amounts to nonsense in newsrooms can actually make a lot of sense to readers. But in a moment of extreme idiocy, that which is senseless, oozes lots of nonsense, for both the media outlet and its audience. It can happen, when a newspaper's editorial and production departments fall apart.

Indeed, there comes a time when minimum editorial judgement and maximum production senselessness are perfectly aligned, to publish, well...NONSENSE!

Grabbed from the flagship news product of the largest, (and 'misleading') media house in the region, the picture above, and its horrifying caption, astounded many a Kenyan reader.

It is not right on many wrong levels, rendered (using a presumably dead Latin language) in unintelligible morphemes like: "Quod mo intro utum at, egertum..." etcetera ad nauseam.

The central figure in the chaotic presidential campaign launch, is given the name of a vocal agitator of the rights of teachers, in a union with a prolific affinity to national strikes.

Here, at least the newspaper can be sued for wrongful representation of a highly recognisable political figure.

The custodian of teachers' welfare can likewise claim damages for being dragged into the murky world of politics.

Possible compensation models for aggrieved readers

Of greater concern to me is how the readers, (especially those who have invested their money in a news product, expecting to be better off, after consuming its content), should be compensated.

- Should they be allowed to return the 'faulty' newspaper to the news-stand, and ask for a refund?

- Should the paper's proprietors be compelled to provide a subsequent product for free, just like they do to advertisers, whose paid for commercial do not go out as scheduled?

- Should offended readers sue the paper for professional negligence, causing mental anguish and intellectual distress to law abiding citizens?

- Should the newspaper's publishers be penalised for violating their contractual obligation to take every care not to put out an erroneous product in the market, so as to uphold the sanctity of the buyer-seller covenant?

Too many unanswered questions...hopefully making sense.

Somebody ought to take responsibility for publishing the senseless news nonsense.

MEDIA, ADVERTISEMENTS AND CONSPIRACY AGAINST CONSUMERS

It's the festive season again. When the pure Christmas spirit chokes under commercial impurities. The ingenuity of sellers goes into overdrive. As the vulnerability of buyers soars. Advertisements may not be innocent attempts to drive sales. And the media must strive not to facilitate the duping of consumers.

The advertisement above, appearing in Kenya's leading Sunday paper, looks legitimate from a casual glance.

Nearly all sales are often branded 'biggest' so that lie is harmless for now.

But one would expect some other 'falsehoods' to be at least cleverly disguised.

If you can't see what I'm talking about, look closely at all the products being advertised above. They are from one brand or manufacturer, right?

Wrong! The logo on one of the product is for a well known brand. But the description with the 20% price reduction alludes to a product of a different brand.

It's hard to believe this is an innocent mistake.

Actually, it's perhaps easier to be convinced this was an act of industrial sabotage, where one manufacturer intercepts a rival client's brief, and using its mole in the ad-agency, commits a nefarious product placement.

Quite a yarn admittedly.

The media then, ought to be more careful not to unwittingly propagate misleading information, embedded in published advertisements.

Unless...the media is part of a conspiracy against consumers.

OF EDITORIAL HOUSE STYLE, A PRISON WARDER AND WARDEN

A media house should develop its own editorial house style. This subsequently informs how its products will be consistently expressed. In its absence, you are likely to end up with a patch work of different styles. So a story about life in prison, comfortably uses warder and warden interchangeably, which to the not so erudite, might appear to be erroneous.

The main article was a brilliant and if credible, a chilling account of how certain levels of comfort are financially inducible in Kenyan prison.

But a side bar story almost 'ruined the impact' of the supposed expose.

The headline alludes to prison wardens. But further down the body of the story, reference is made to prison warders.

My immediate reaction was that there was a linguistic mix-up.

(Yes, I am one of those not so erudite).

A warder is more likely to be found in a prison, while a warden should be spoken of in the context of wildlife or forest rangers, so I thought.

It turns out that:

- A warder is a guard in prison, in British English.

- A warden is the head official in charge of a prison, in American English.

So now you can appreciate my British-American headache.

The cure of this malady is for media outlets to adhere to a defined editorial house style.

BYLINES, NON-NAMES AND NEWSPAPER GHOST WRITERS

Writers of articles in a newspaper can be credited directly by having their names published, usually at the beginning or the end of the piece. Bylines are a much coveted element in print journalism. The publisher after all, can decide to use non-specific labels to indicate the writers of stories. But even these 'non-names' ought to be linked to the media organisation.

And if not, the use of such orphaned or ghost writers can be indicative of, but not limited to:

- The publisher not being comfortable with being associated with the content of the article.

- The publisher not ready or willing to take ownership/stand by the substance of the article, (legal suit evasion?).

- The writer not having contributed sufficiently in crafting the article, to deserve either a direct credit, or 'privilege' of being associated with the publisher.

- The subject matter of the article being too hot or potentially explosive, to warrant such distancing between the 'anonymous' writer and publisher

- The article being malicious or not having been published in good faith.

- An honest omission or dishonest commission.

In other words, there would be no need for such 'wide and wild' speculation, if there was the familiar pattern of using either a byline, Reporter or Correspondent of this or that media organisation, or even an external source providing the story

Not unless a general Reporter, with a visible general email address, adds hidden general news value.

OF SOURCING RESOURCES AND SOURCES OF SAUCY STORIES

Sources can either be direct providers of news, or indirect providers of information that can lead to big news, or even misleading news. And yet this is a gamble, almost all news organisations have to continue taking. The end result can be embarrassment, or even legal suits, arising out of publishing inaccurate information. So, sourcing resources, should not just lead to saucy stories.

Confirmation of key facts has never stopped being an important pillar of journalism.

However, the decision to publish or broadcast a story is often not determined by the availability of conclusive facts.

The juicy details of a story, (well aligned with driving up newspaper sales perhaps?), at times can't wait for comprehensive due diligence, given the fickle nature of news.

That's why a right of reply must always be accorded to those adversely mentioned.

But one could rightly expect that a person mentioned in a story, should be contacted, before the story is published, to either confirm the details or give their own side.

The only problem then is that, a whole complement of obstacles could arise, ranging from court injunctions, non-cooperative news sources, decoys, to even the killing of stories.

This is often after the intervention of internal higher forces in the managerial or editorial chain of command, acting on pressure/inducement from external 'sources' with vested interests

So you either choose to publish and be damned, or hold the damnation and have no news for your target audience.

There is though, a small time-tested principle advocating for the use of multiple sources, to corroborate details of a story, before going to press.

To go ahead and publish the fact that a story was based on a single 'reliable' source... is self-incriminating, and counter-indicative of the credibility of a news organisation.

Now that is a 'source' of concern!.

URGENT MEDIA AUDIT REQUIRED AFTER WESTGATE COVERAGE

Kenyan media, undoubtedly, went above the call of duty, to relay information (some misinformation too), regarding developments around the deadly Westgate Mall siege. But the coverage did expose serious gaps in both sensible and sensitive reporting. Hence the need for an urgent media audit, in tandem with probing the country's intelligence and security apparatus.

For starters, some media houses elected to do phoners with some of those trapped or hiding, after the gunmen struck. The outrage directed at the news anchors (see below) is evidence of this journalism faux pas.

It is now only human and professional, to also call the same people to establish if they made it out successfully.

If so, then they should be recipients of an apology from the reckless media houses, who put their lives at grave risk, while pursuing 'their' story.

If, unfortunately, the people called died during the siege, then the media houses should take responsibility for compromising the safety of those they called, in spite of the unfolding hostage situation.

A boot camp should also be organised for local journalists, to instill in them the necessary skills of effectively covering war, conflict or serious crimes, to be infused with a heavy dosage of attendant media ethics and security concerns.

The English language skills exhibited during live reporting, have also been measured and found to be wanting. It might not be one's first language, but that's no licence to kill its grammar and semantics.

And this, in my opinion, is exacerbated by the 'needless' need to have reporters on location and anchors in studio continue talking, long after they have made their points, and recycled them in numerous repetitions.

The good thing to note is that the audience is ever vigilante and alive to the erring ways of the media. This remarkably forced the CEO of the largest media house in the region to issue a public apology, after a horrendous and distressful choice of their newspaper's front page picture.

As depicted below, nowhere was the criticism more scathing than in social media circles.

THE ART OF REGURGITATING NEWS: WHEN ELECTRONIC MEDIA LAG BEHIND NEWSPAPERS

"Dear TV editors, repeating a story that I read in the Sunday Nation is not news." A terse and sharp rebuke from a fellow Kenyan journalist, which perhaps indicates how regurgitating news, often times, has become an art perfected. 

The Sunday Nation newspaper story in focus, was a damning indictment of the country's embattled Water minister, bordering on outright nepotism, when it came to awarding her ministry's lucrative tenders.

Electronic media outlets were beaten to that story by the newspaper and probably not unexpectedly, they immediately jumped on it, hoping to not only make up ground, but also take it forward and break any new angles that day, before the papers take their publications to bed.

Unfortunately, that was not to be, mainly because no media outlet succeeded in getting a response from the minister in question, it being a Sunday, among other reasons.

So anyone tuning in to catch the news that evening and who also had read the day's Sunday Nation, would have rightly wondered why TV stations were screening stale information packaged as news.

As pointed out by the observant journalist, it is even more shameful that the newspaper story was being reproduced word for word, in some instances, for the evening bulletin story.

It however goes to show that the prophets of doom, as far as the future of newspapers is concerned, ought to be a bit more optimistic. I mean, just look at how the Vatican newspaper's story of Pope Benedict's views on using condoms, sent the entire global media into a spin, print, electronic, online, mobile et al.