CBA LIVE IN NAIROBI: DIGITAL REVOLUTION WORKSHOP

MIRROR MIRROR ON THE WALL, ARE 15% OF KENYANS GAY AT ALL?

In one of those rare moments, Kenya gets to stand in front of a mirror. It's highly improbable that what is reflected back will be interpreted the same way by all citizens. So, when Nominated Member of Parliament Millie Odhiambo says 15% of Kenyans are either gays or lesbians, it's understandable that what this mirror reflects back will not be agreeable to all.

The fact that this assertion was made on the floor of the House and a direct reference was made about the possibility of 15% of MPs likewise being 'non-heterosexual,' almost stalled the debate on a matter of crucial national importance.

The furore generated in Parliament was equally witnessed in social media circles, as reflected below.

PREYING USING PRAYER: AWAY WITH QUESTIONABLE RELIGIOUS SHOWS ON TV

Who will save us from some of the dubious salvation being peddled on TV stations? Ironic, I think it is, for the Kenyan media to always be quick to expose fraudsters, tricksters or con artists and still accord a platform to religious shows that seem to perpetuate the very same sins.

It's really amazing just how much of what is screened borders on outright hoodwinking of the audience, especially the gullible type, who need no concrete proof to believe in make-believe miracles. 

Admittedly, it is hard to demand for evidence, when matters of faith are involved. But, and a big but, some performances in these spiritual extravaganzas come very close to stage-managed performances, even to the untrained eye.

It is more worrying that the media is being used by the televangelists, to coerce their congregation into parting with cash.

With the advent of mobile phone money transfer services, cell-phone numbers are some of the graphical details you are most likely going to see being prominently displayed in the church programmes, encouraging viewers to use them to help this or that religious cause.

And if the supposed shepherd is the usual eloquent master of the spoken word, then his or her word is inter-laced with anything from threats of fire and brimstone to promises of instant redemption from whatever is afflicting the flock, to achieve the financial agenda, never mind what the actual Word says.

Therein lies my problem with the trend taken by nearly all the local TV stations, of allocating morning hours air-time on Sundays, to programmes with questionable religious content. 

The way TV stations can refuse paid up advertisements from politicians spreading hatred or promoting hegemony, is the same way local channels should refuse to sell their airtime to creators of misleading religious programmes.

SEPARATING REAL FACTS FROM HOME-MADE TRUTHS: THE SAGA OF NIGERIA'S ENVOY TO KENYA

Once upon a time a picture not only used to be worth a thousand words, but its authenticity was seldom called into question. Along came the digital revolution and Photoshop inspired minds, and the credibility of pictures started to be contentious. But, if Nigeria's envoy to Kenya is to be believed, his wife needed no computer software to get images of her battered face.

Dr. Chijioke Wigwe has this amazing rebuttal that the injuries his wife claims were inflicted by him, during a domestic spat, were grossly exaggerated and that Mrs Tess Iyi Wigwe actually smeared blood across her face to make it look like she was brutally assaulted by her husband.

If the media gets caught up in such a fine mess, who is likely to be believed? And based on what evidence?

Facts are sacred in journalism, no doubt. But the catch is that, facts have a nasty habit of taking a different shade or shape, depending on who is being quoted in a story.

And that is why it is essential for the press to independently seek to establish the truth, by thoroughly interrogating all the versions being presented or misrepresented as truthful accounts.

And if this proves impossible to determine, then a news story is in the very least expected to be balanced, which means getting both sides of a dispute represented in a story and then allowing members of the audience to draw their own conclusion, as the relevant authorities conduct the more formal investigations.

But also, one must not lose sight of the fact that it is not always that the media has options in black and white. There are lots and lots of grey areas.

THE DON'TS AND DON'TS FOR FEMALE TELEVISION PRESENTERS

The physical appearance of a news anchor or TV show presenter can make all the difference between a viewer staying on a given channel or reaching for the remote. Importantly though, the viewer should not be distracted from what is being presented. 

It's good to try and be trendy and fashion conscious, but showing too much 'unnecessary skin' on national TV is to go overboard, in my considered opinion.

Whereas there's nothing a presenter can do about biological features, save for going for cosmetic surgery, the mode of dressing is one element that can be used to either augment or diminish the visual appeal.

The killer looks might keep those with perverted inclinations, especially men, glued to the screen, but I can almost guarantee it that an overwhelming majority will not be concentrating on what the presenter is saying.

Granted, sex appeal sells. But to what extent should this be used to drive up ratings? Isn't there a safe middle-ground, where decency is not sacrificed at the alter of driving up viewership numbers?

But there is a catch. As a TV presenter or news anchor, you can hardly ever hope to please everyone. As brilliantly reflected in the online discussion wall of the BBC:

...there is no form of dress or level of personal grooming that a presenter can follow that won't meet with criticism. If they dress nicely, they get criticized, if they dress casually they get criticized. If they comb and style their hair they get criticized, if they don't they get criticized...

It nevertheless does not mean the presenters can get away with anything, especially in an African setting, where many cultures frown upon too liberal a public dressing code. Conformity or minimal deviations from existing societal standards in this case is desirable.

There are instances, where a media organization imposes restrictions on what is an acceptable dressing code. This strictness at times becomes too much a burden for the presenters to bear, like it happened with Al Jazeera, where five female presenters quit their jobs, after being pressed to tone down their mode of dressing.

The bottom line then, I think, is to avoid extremes, when it comes to dressing for television. Much as a female presenter might want to reflect the very latest trends, what needs to be covered up, should remain covered up, to avoid looking trashy.

THE CJ NOMINEE AND HIS CHERISHED STUD: PRIVATE LIFESTYLE VS PUBLIC PERCEPTION

Dr. Willy Mutunga, courtesy of Daily Nation

Once again the local media has found itself in an awkward position. A seemingly innocuous earring that adorns the left earlobe of the man nominated to be Kenya's next Chief Justice, is causing all the rage in public debate.

Ignoring this issue on the grounds that it's trivial might seem a sensible thing for the media to do. But given the public interest generated, whether misguided or inconsequential, failing to highlight the matter, it appears, would be tantamount to taking sides and failing the neutrality or objectivity test.

Below is a sample of how this debate has been shaping up.

COVERAGE OF THE BRITISH ROYAL WEDDING: COLONIALISM VS GLOBALIZATION

For how much longer will the term colonialism be thrust upon latter-day generations of Kenyans?  According to one critic, the coverage of the recent British Royal wedding by the Kenyan media, is a reflection of our continued state of colonization. Please, replace colonialism with globalization.

Britain's Prince William and Kate Duchess of Cambridge

Despite the global fascination with the nuptials, Evan Mwangi deliberately set out to paint a black and white picture, where black represents Africa and white its past colonial masters, thereby misrepresenting the colourful regal tradition of the entire ceremony.

Visuals are a key element in television broadcasting and that partly explains why the wedding was being beamed live by all the major local channels, because the images from weddings to many people, fit the description of 'eye candy.'

As captured in an article in the online version of the Christian Science Monitor,  it is a bit ironic that Kenyans would be so interested in the wedding of a major figurehead of the very people whom they fought hard to free themselves from the yolk of colonialism.

But to consciously set out to establish how many black people were captured on television screens or how many children in the choir were black, is to say the least being narrow-minded, which perhaps even betrays just how much one is suffering from colonial hang-ups.

An estimated 2 billion people watched Prince William and Catherine Middleton tie the royal knot so what difference would it have made even if the Kenyan media boycotted covering the event as a protest to colonial injustices?

If anything, as argued by Rasna Warah, it was more of about missed opportunities to weave in the Kenyan connection to the wedding, by marketing the country as a romantic tourist destination, buoyed by the fact that it provided the setting for Prince William's proposal.

And it is a tad unconvincing for somebody earning a livelihood in a 'white man's country,' to purport to lecture his fellow Kenyans at home about how much colonized they still are.

So Prof. Mwangi's argument that the local media's fascination with the British royal wedding amounts to perpetuating colonialism is to say the least plain hot air. Regardless of our history, we are now global citizens.