DIVORCE COURT AND MEDIA COURTING TROUBLE

It's not very often that the Kenyan media dedicates ample time and resources to bring a private court hearing into the public sphere. The coverage of legal matters should be restricted to the issues as they arise, taking care not to violate the rule of sub-judice. In a divorce court, a media house could be courting trouble, if it suggests its perceived stance on the matter.

That appears to be the case here, given the way this TV news channel identified one of the litigants.

If party A says there was a marriage contract with party B, but party B disputes this and the matter ends up up in court, (never mind if party A wants to part ways with part B), why should a media outlet identify party A as being married to party B?

In the public eye, a position on the matter is already being strongly projected.

But on such legal matters, it's 'dangerous' and unethical to even appear to have an interest in the outcome of such a case, by deviating from the confines of neutrality and objective reporting.

The judicial system frowns upon acts that can jeopardise the fair determination of matters before it, even if they play out in the court of public opinion.

In the coverage of this divorce court, this media house could be courting trouble!

MEDIA DISSERVICE AND BASIC TERMS OF SERVICE

The terms of service for media operators should include a clause on familiarity with common-place terminologies. That aim should be a mere minimum, in the noble task of serving the public's interest. And an African media house at least ought to know African nationalities and how to describe people from various countries on the continent.

The article above makes reference to the nationality of a west African country.

The country is Ghana. The citizens are...Ghanians?

Given the available resources, and real time research platforms available in an established newsroom, what would lead to such an editorial oversight?

There's likely to be historical evidence to show the word 'Ghanaian' has previously been used to describe the people of Ghana, by this same newspaper publisher.

That's perhaps why this qualifies to be a media misinformation and a disservice.

KENYAN ROOTS, JAMAICAN SINGER, AND A NON-EXISTENT SONG

Doing a background check before writing a news story, should be an easy task. Supporting facts can now be sourced conveniently in this digital age, where the Internet is a living and ever-growing library. That's why it's hardly believable that a Kenyan newspaper can't distinguish between a song, and a son of a famous Jamaican singer.

In the article above, the writer tries to enrich and provide a wider context in the recent visit to Jamaica by the Kenyan president.

The coverage is woven around the historical struggle for freedom from colonialism by the East African nation, and the influence of independence proponents from the Caribbean island.

And no reference to Jamaica is complete without mentioning its pulsating reggae industry, which is relevantly captured in this article, given how its global music icons have been committed to the struggle against social, economic and political injustices.

Evidently, a lot of research went into piecing together this newspaper story, so it's a bit mind-boggling why the writer and sub-editor would mess up on the details around the life and music of such a recognised music legend like Bob Marley.

I'm not entirely sure if there's a linguistic connection between the name, 'Kimani' from Central Kenya, and the 'Kymani' with Jamaican roots.

But what I know, and what the writer and editor of the article ought to be aware of, is that Ky-mani is Bob Marley's son, not one of the songs from his impressive repertoire.

Please beware, an enlightened reader is not ready to sell their intelligence for a song!

OF HEADLINES AND HEAD SPIN-INDUCING CONTENT

The language used by the press should communicate or convey information in a very direct and comprehensible manner. This means editors, reporters and writers must deliberately align their choice of words with the main aim of making it easy for the reader to understand a story. Sometimes though, one encounters headlines with head spin-inducing content. 

In the front-page teaser of a main article above, the paper deploys a rather confusing or, shall we say, unusual sentence construction.

It starts with:

'How fatally ill patients...'

That means patients who have already succumbed to their illness, no?

And if that be the case, then the second part of this headline gets eerily weird.

'....get set for death'.

Cue the head spin!

Fatal conveys a sense of finality or culminating in demise, or a not so pleasant fate.

So fatally ill patients, one would expect, are not in a position to do pretty much anything, because the illness has already resulted in fatality.

There are those on the verge of dying, that this newspaper story seeks to highlight their final moments and decisions.

This time around, the headline of the main article makes reference to, 'terminally ill patients', which gives room to suggest they can still do something, ahead of their sunset moment.

HEALTH MEDIA COVERAGE AND THE MEDICAL DOCTOR PRESCRIPTION

Health matters have been getting massive attention in Kenyan media outlets. Many lives are being lost to major ailments, and even minor diseases. It's hardly debatable that health issues may not be a beat for any reporter. Specialised knowledge is key, but should it come from a journalism or medical school? And is a medical doctor the right prescription for newsrooms?

One channel has taken this bold step of engaging a qualified and experienced doctor, to spearhead its coverage of health-related news and programming.

Indeed, this needs to be acclaimed as a masterstroke, because the newsroom stands to benefit a great deal, by counting among its ranks, a doctor-cum media practitioner.

Similarly, the coverage of legal matters and court proceedings has arguably been improved by enlisting the services of lawyers, who are also keen on making a mark in the world of journalism.

But having a doctor, who comes highly qualified as a communicator as well, presents an interesting scenario.

- Can the good doctor be trusted to be neutral or balanced, when doing stories involving medical practitioners, like an industrial dispute?

- Will the public's interest be upheld, or will a 'Hippocratic' bias carry the day?

- And if the doctor is being interviewed, either as a panelist or a 'presenter's friend', should she be referred to as an 'Analyst' or 'Reporter'?

Probably the most significant issue, in my opinion, is the perception of the viewer.

Picture this:

A TV news story is about the shortage of doctors in Kenya, and how millions of lives could be in jeopardy, if the government does not address this lack of qualified medical personnel. 

Then the story ends with: Dr........reporting for........

Her journalism passion and reporting excellence notwithstanding, is the country being deprived of critical services of a very capable health professional?

Anybody can be a journalist, they've been saying.

It remains a calling, though.

And a doctor on call, might just be the right newsroom prescription.