UHURU KENYATTA'S UTTERANCES: USING STORIFY TO AGGREGATE FEEDBACK

Kenya's Finance minister Uhuru Kenyatta has come under sharp criticism for what many people think are unsavoury public outbursts that are unbecoming, for a person aspiring to be a national leader. And to help in aggregating feedback on this issue, I've had the privilege of using Storify.

Simply put, the Storify application takes the social media experience to the next level, especially for a journalist or news organization. The functionalities are amazing, when it comes to covering an on-going story or aggregating feedback or reactions to a particular news story.

Getting the official invite and accompanying unlocking key could turn out to be a major turning point in my online journalism experience. And the Uhuru Kenyatta story provides an excellent way to showcase the power of Storify.

LIVE BLOGGING: KENYA'S HOUSE SPEAKER'S RULING ON JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS

TV NEWS PLAGIARISM: ACKNOWLEDGING THE SOURCE OF ORIGINAL IDEAS

It was a moving story on the plight of female casual laborers, contracted  to wash clothes in Nairobi households. These women are exposed to risks ranging from sexual assault, battery and the possibility doing harrowing tasks like washing dead bodies. But the same story was the subject of an apparent TV news plagiarism.

The first station to succinctly capture the emotional, physical and psychological trauma of these women, was K24, in its flagship human interest and investigative segment, 'Untold Story,' titled, 'Washed Away.'



The series, in my estimation, has all the hallmarks of a potentially award winning television story, even in international competitions. Why? Because of the simple fact that it is about real people facing real problems and having to deal with real consequences of their poverty-driven vulnerability.

However, the audience rating of K24 is nothing to right home about and chances are, this brilliant story perhaps never got to be viewed by a critical mass. And this is probably what another station, with a better viewership was banking on.

So, after seeing K24 story and being so moved especially by the episodes that had a woman, who was raped and infected with HIV and another, who was forced to wash a corpse, I see a very similar storyline, on this other channel, a couple of days later.



As a rule, a viewer wouldn't be interested in wanting to know details of who had the story first or whether many media houses were chasing the same story. But having already seen the story aired by another channel only makes one to be quick to conclude there is either a lack of originality or a blatant aping of story ideas, when the same story is belatedly aired elsewhere.

To me, this borders on plagiarism and as is the practice in academic circles, the noble thing to do would be to properly cite or professionally acknowledge the original source of a news or feature story. No one after all, has or should have a monopoly of ideas, especially in a news setting.

This way, the second station to pick up a story that has already aired, could find itself compelled not to repeat what is already in the public domain and instead strive to add fresh angles that drive the story forward and meaningfully add to the existing body of knowledge.



It does not matter, like in this case, if the same story of the woman washing a cadaver is picked up by a radio station. A way should still be found to make the necessary attributions. Newspapers after all, regularly cite specific television stations, if an article is based on something that has already aired.

LIVE BLOGGING: WHICH WAY JUDICIARY APPOINTMENTS?

MINISTERIAL INSENSITIVITY: ESTHER MURUGI TOYING WITH IDEA OF 'ISOLATING' THE HIV INFECTED.

Kenya's Special Programmes minister Esther Murugi insists the media misrepresented her remarks about how Cuba went about locking up those who have contracted HIV. But the seeds of stigmatization have been re-planted, whether or not she appeared to have advocated for an isolation policy.

Her past instances of what some say amounts to reckless utterances notwithstanding, I'm still convinced Kenyan media did not quote Madam Murugi out of context.

She indeed went about talking about how Cuba's HIV/Aids policy entailed removing those infected with HIV from mainstream society and supposedly how this had kept infection rates at bay. Yes, it is true she said, 'I don't know whether we should be that drastic...'

But on being booed by fellow parliamentarians she was addressing, her seemingly cheeky and annoying refrain: '...but sometimes I think that is what we should do...,' is what nails her. The accompanying giggling is especially distasteful and clearly insensitive to the plight of those living with HIV.

I therefore find Madam Murugi's claims of being misquoted un-amusing and an insult to the intelligence of those who happened to have heard her or those with access to her disturbing remarks.

Unlike in the written word of the print media, where arguments of being quoted out of context can thrive, what is naturally captured audio/visually speaks for itself, unless the sequence is altered digitally.

So when Madam Murugi in the same speech continues to say that, '...Men should not have sex with men and... women I don't know about that....,' one can hardly be blamed for concluding she believes lesbianism is fine but homosexuality should not be tolerated.

Give us a break Special Programmes minister and for your so-called apology to resonate with Kenyans, especially those living with HIV, sincerity and remorse should be the key ingredients, not whether or not you were misquoted because either way, the great damage caused needs to be undone.

ALL HAIL THE EGYPTIAN UPRISING

Subduing a people's collective will, can only lead to one eventual conclusion. The triumph of the people's will, no matter the price of sacrifice that must be paid, even if this is measured in terms of human lives lost. That's why the victors in the Egyptian uprising can only be the Egyptian people.

Weary of the impact of social media, the Egyptian authorities have resorted to clamping down Internet connections. But stopping an idea, whose time has come can hardly be achieved this or any other way.

Thanks to the likes of Al Jazeera and the BBC, a minute by minute account of what is going on in Egypt is still being beamed across the world.

And political analysts are already starting to deconstruct the complex and more all less covert interests of the US and Israel governments, and their dwindling hopes of a continuation of a Mubarak-led regime.

The Arab World, some say, will never be the same again, thanks to the extra-ordinary courage of that frustrated Tunisian man, whose self-immolation set off the chain reaction that is now reverberating in neighbouring Algeria, Egypt and as far as Yemen and Jordan.

Hooray to the spirit of self-determination. Hooray to the people's will. Hooray to the dismantling of despotic regimes.

POLICE EXECUTION OR CRIME ELIMINATION?

It's a shocking case of police officers killing 3 suspected criminals in broad daylight. Not unusual in Kenya, unless you consider the execution was in full glare of members of the public. Any responsible media outlet should condemn such brazen  killings. But, don't criminals mercilessly kill the same way?

                                          One of the suspects being executed, courtesy Daily Nation

It was Mahatma Gandhi who said, 'an eye for an eye makes the whole world  blind.' But, 'an eye for a smile,' I hasten to add, 'would make the whole world smileless.'

It is understandably quite easy to condemn the killing of suspected criminals, without recourse to the due process of the law. After all, law enforcers are not above the same law they seek to enforce.

But spare a thought for those, who have had the misfortune of being terrorised by these so-called suspects. The trauma generated is almost impossible to erase, whether the 'suspects' kill their victims or spare their lives.

And when police officers are killed in the line of duty, not much protestation is elicited, at least not one bordering a national outcry.
                  


The recent case of a traffic policeman being engaged in a very physical confrontation with a 'suspected,' offender, is a case in point. It was to an extent, reduced to an 'enjoyable' spectacle, with some even siding with the person resisting arrest.

So yes. In a just society, there is no place for killing 'suspects' but the operative word is 'just.' In that ideal world, criminals would not abound in the first place and it's just unfair to always be eager to turn against the very people trying to protect lives and property.