AJUOK: Media freedoms and why leaders must adjust to modern realities

Where I come from, there is a common saying that goes something like “when the entire village consistently brands you a witch, you must work on the habits that make them see you as such, rather than going door to door trying to prove innocence”.

Public perception, as it turns out, isn’t something one can beat out of people, without finding moments for introspection and self-assessment, so as to confront the difficult questions of character flaws and failures.

The media has never been a very good friend of political leadership, since time immemorial. It has to do with the fact that the media will tell the stories that the court jesters and palace sycophants who surround powerful leaders wouldn’t.

When the king is naked, trust the media to report it. It is not for nothing that celebrated British war-time leader, Winston Churchill, once remarked that “A free press is the unsleeping guardian of every other right that free men prize; it is the most dangerous foe of tyranny”.

Within the past two weeks, two incidents within the East African region have shone focus on the continued difficult relationship between political power and the press.

The first was a bizarre exchange between President William Ruto and one of the leading media houses in the region, the Standard Group.

Using his X handle, the President castigated the media house for constantly running sensational headlines against him and his administration, daring the group to “do its worst”.

As if to ensure he added a touch of politics to the matter, Ruto tagged former Baringo Senator Gideon Moi, the supposed majority shareholder of the Standard Group, to the controversial tweet, in which he asked the media house to go ahead and graduate from mentioning seven days a week to “eight days a week”.

The group promptly responded by taunting the head of state with an “eight days a week” headlines’ notice on their social media pages.

The head of state had obviously been stung by the Standard Group’s two-day documentary earlier in the week, in which it had exposed a long catalogue of Ruto’s undelivered promises over the period of his presidency.

As with that saying from my village about being branded a witch, I expected that the President and his communication team would pick each item from the documentary, proceed to explain to the public the genesis of each promise and give an overview of where each project mentioned was “at the time of going to press”.

Instead, Ruto reacted as if these accusations were not already within the realms of public discourse, or as if they would just go away on their own.

Before we could process that one fully, news broke that Uganda’s military chief, and President Museveni’s son, Muhoozi Kainerugaba, had sent a military detachment to shut down Nation Media Group’s Kampala operations.

I consider myself some sort of military historian, but I have never taken Gen Muhoozi seriously. Indeed, the mere fact that he attended Royal Military Academy, Sandhurst, which holds absolute place of pride for any officer who has had the privilege of being commissioned there, and is one of the finest officer cadet schools in the world, is a serious disconnect from the temperament and manners of the UPDF chief.

No military worth its salt targets civilians. It is universally acknowledged that the more any military delves into politics, or uses force on unarmed civilian populations, the more there is a psychological degradation of its moral and ethical standings, as well as its discipline.

In recent months, the UPDF, under the leadership of the “tweeting General”, has degenerated into a force whose special forces are seen chasing unarmed politicians and now, the press. It can only be downhill from here.

You would be forgiven if you expected President Museveni, an avowed revolutionary and typical military man, to do more to improve the image of his army as a professional outfit, among the community of nations.

There is growing evidence of discomfort, among the leaders of the East African Community, with the emerging generation of young, enlightened voters who do not easily bend to the whims of authority.

Recent electoral processes in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania, point to the rise of an axis of repression, which seeks to manipulate public view, limit freedoms and determine the destiny of the nations from within tiny rooms. And the press, since it is the watchman who never slumbers, isn’t a partner they fancy much.

Interestingly, there is not much that mainstream media says these days that you wouldn’t find already trending on social media.

Besides, liberalisation freed the people from the echo chambers created by state broadcasters, nearly a lifetime ago, when national media houses like the Kenya Broadcasting Corporation, would have their premises heavily guarded by elite police units, because they represented the only voice that the folks in power wanted all of us to hear.

To imagine that one can influence public perception by shutting down media houses or beating citizens into submission, in the year of our lord 2026, is rather naïve.

In June last year, the government of Kenya temporarily disabled the transmission signals of at least four independent media houses in the country, to prevent live coverage of anti-government protests marking the first anniversary of the June 2024 Gen Z riots.

Before that, in January 2018, the state had also moved to shut down the transmission signals of several media stations, to stop the live coverage of the “swearing-in” of then opposition leader, Raila Odinga, who had disputed the 2017 election and moved to swear himself in as the “people’s president”.

The idea behind shutting live transmission is based on a belief within government networks that the 2008 post-election violence, which ravaged the country following the disputed 2007 election, was inflamed in no small measure by live coverage of events across the nation.

However, the school of thought that relies on “not seeing” as perceived cover for citizens’ ignorance, doesn’t address the gap caused by information gaps that may unwisely be filled by large scale misinformation, creating the exact same scenario it intended to avoid in the first place.

The leadership in the region lives in the past. The days when freedoms were curtailed and press freedom a mere mirage are fast coming to an end. What the leadership needs to do is to be accountable over the accusations levelled against them in the press.

That shouldn’t be that hard. Repression of the press amounts to failure to acknowledge the democratic gains, however little, made in all the said countries.

Additionally, the young people who now protest on the streets are not beholden to our parents’ virtue of patience and will not necessarily be intimidated into silence.

As for President Ruto, I still hold the view that he makes it easy to be a target of media attacks by being everywhere all the time, making unending decrees and promises.

Any Kenyan with a smartphone can simply revisit any of his past functions and speeches and run into some random promise to the electorate, which remains unfulfilled.

Perhaps it is time State House itself compiled an entire list of all public promises of development made by the President and updated each, detailing the progress and completion status of each.

It would advance the regime’s course more than vicious exchanges with media houses or subtle threats.

The problem is not the media. The guys in power just need to invest in mirrors.