The reporter did well in capturing nearly all the possible angles, and incorporating a multiplicity of views. This element was so exhaustive factored in that the feature ran the risk of losing focus on what it intended to highlight as the key concerns.
But for me, what one interviewee said stood out. He was convinced that it was perfectly in order for members of his community, (read tribe), to lay claim to swathes of the crucial Mau water catchment, given that other communities (tribes) were being 'allowed' by the state to plunder the forest.
The Mau Tragedy can't get more tragic!
If the water tower is destroyed, the serious consequences will not only affect particular communities/tribes. The impact of such a catastrophe will even cross the country's boundaries, and be felt by millions regionally.
And this is why the media needs to be cautious. This issue has already been heavily politicised. It should not be further trivialised by whipping up ethnic undertones.
My observations may be far-fetched. But I got the feeling that the TV station inadvertently perhaps, ended up giving prominence to partisan sentiments, with subtle hints of the editorial slant.
Yes. The media mirrors evils obtaining in the society.
No. The media must not always reflect the rot back to the society and deepen schisms.
No comments:
Post a Comment