OF HEADLINES, TENSE EDITORS AND MIXING-UP TENSES

Media coverage can revolve around current issues, past events or even future occurrences. The reader, viewer or listener would not find it hard to follow a story framed on whichever time frame, especially if the context is logical. This is achievable as long as editors don't get tense, to the point of mixing-up tenses.

A news story can begin with the anticipation of a future happening, dash to past events, before settling on present issues.

This would still make sense, if the reporting tenses don't imply an element of time travel is required.

The date of writing this post is June 28th 2019.

This newspaper article was published on 26th June.

The story states the winner of the contest to replace Theresa May as UK prime minister will be announced on July 23rd.

But the headline states:

'New British PM named on July 23'

A reader has every reason to get tense, with this lack of attention to tense matters.

Or is this a prime example of a future, past impossible tense?

Cue in the tension headache!

FRAUDULENT TV CONTENT AND ON AIR FRAUDSTERS

Kenyan television can be a fraud. If you tune in, you're not sure whether you are adding to your level of knowledge, or if what you have is being subtracted from. The broadcasts have many learning opportunities. But there's also a real danger of eroding one's intelligence. A viewer can feel defrauded, by on air fraudsters, under the guise of content editors, or disguised as program producers.

In the above screenshot, it's not clear what was the intention of using the 'word':

'FRAUDS'

- Is it a proper conjugation from the root word 'fraud'?

- Does it even correctly convey the sense of somebody doing something wrong?

- Is it a legitimate verb? Or an illegitimate noun?

So many pertinent questions...one obvious answer.

It's either there's a false self-confidence by media practitioners in their ability to make up words, or more accurately, perhaps, there's a need for more English lessons in that newsroom.

It's a fraud, I tell you... and I hope you don't trust these frauds!

OF STYLEBOOK AND LOGIC-DEFYING EDITORIAL GUIDELINES

A reputable media house has internal editorial guidelines, to achieving a standardised approach in gathering, processing and publishing or broadcasting content. Such a stylebook acts as a critical reference point. The rules can be borrowed from established journalistic enterprises, and customised to suit specific requirements. But some editorial decisions defy logic.

In the above live broadcast story tag, there's a rather strange looking word contraction.

There ought to be a sensible way of optimising the use of limited space, because the need to communicate should never-ever be sacrificed.

Shortening of words should thus be done in a way that the audience can still decipher what the full word is.

And, there are certain rules that still need to be observed.

An apostrophe, for example, indicates that letters are missing in between...but the last letter retains the logical sequence of the full word.

The word 'international' can be shortened to: INT'L.

But...what is one to make out of: NT'L?

FROM MEDIA MONOTONY TO MEDIA MORONITY

The content across Kenyan media outlets can be very monotonous. You tune in to one news channel, and most likely stay there, because if you see one, it's like you've seen all of them. But nothing shouts lazy journalism more than when one publisher regurgitates what another has already put out. That's when media monotony morphs to media moronity.

The story of how Kenyan cars are registered using differentiated number plates makes quite a fascinating reading.

But, does it mean other media outlets should just copy what has already been published?

New angles can be used to add value to the original content, and still make the replicated read relevant.

You get a sense that this was not the intention here, because someone even decided to use the same photograph to illustrate the lifted story.

The take home lesson?

The biggest fan of a Kenyan media house...is a rival media house!

BILLIONS, A SCREAMING HEADLINE & WHISPERING SUBSTANCE

The term 'billion' has been quoted frequently in reference to misappropriated public funds in Kenya. It's a huge figure that elicits shock, probably until the mentions became one too many. That a billion has now become a common-placed phrase, is, however, no reason for the press to casually bandy it about.

The headline of this article makes that 'magical' reference of billions, to perhaps immediately grab a reader's attention.

But, this reference becomes farcical after going through the content of the story and finding no supportive facts.

A mention is made of a somewhat vague figure of 'more than Sh1.3 billion', which hardly equates to billions.

Either some details were edited out from the original draft of the story, or, it's a classic case of a screaming headline and whispering substance!

LYING & MEDIA LAYING DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF SAME TRUTH

There ought to be a semblance of factual unity in the information a media outlet is pushing out. And if accounts of the 'truth' are in conflict, then a balance in coverage is essential. However, the media consumer should not be left with different versions of the same truth. Somewhere therein lays some lies.

In the above newspaper publication, the reader is confronted with contradicting interpretations of what is seemingly one policy from the Kenyan government.

One article in the newspaper states that the government will not relent on implementing a supposed ban on the importation of some used care spare parts.

Here, the relevant government agency is said to have started enforcing the ban.

A number of pages, later on in the same newspaper, the very same standards agency is quoted denying its enforcing a new directive seeking to ban importation of car spare parts.

Whether the two articles are differing on whether it's a new or old statute, is besides the point.

And neither is it of much significant consequence here, if the said ban targets all or some car spare parts imports.

The concern here is the failure by the newspaper publishers to provide a common context for these two related articles.

In a reader's mind, this media outlet could be laying different versions of the same truth.

Who do you think is lying?

EDITORIAL AGILITY, AMBIGUITY AND CONTRADICTING INFORMATION

That opposites attract is true for magnetic poles. But in communication, contradicting information is repulsive. The media risks confusing the audience, if news stories are two-faced in nature, or the meaning is delivered in a double edged manner that doesn't gel. Ambiguity is an enemy of editorial agility.

There ought to be a sense of unity in the message being conveyed, unlike in the opening paragraph of the article above, which seems to be pulling in different directions, sense-wise.

The story states that two international airports in Kenya:

'...have retained a new...'

Let's just pause right there.

Retaining conveys a sense of continuity, or keeping on with something already started.

So, how does one retain something new, after dropping something old?

According to the story, Total Kenya has been dropped from a list of suppliers, so it's incomprehensible to purport to say a new oil dealer has been retained.

Unless editorial rigour is totally dropped!