Archive

Tag Archives: transparency

If you ask Kenyan journalists what is taking place at the editorial level, they will unanimously respond: “Media ownership.” An editor from Eldoret, Rift Valley highlights the difficult position that editorial staff are in: “I am an editor of an enterprise where the owner at times intercepts my reporters in a bid to alter our editorial perspectives. He actually changes content to suit his desires and those of his political friends. I have threatened to resign if he continues.”
[…]
The report finds that while media ownership is sometimes obvious, media owners often use their spouse, parents or trusted friends to register their media outlets, making it difficult to obtain clear data on media ownership. For instance, the researcher notes that the connection of presidential candidate Uhuru Kenyatta with MediaMax (owner of Kameme FM, Milele FM, The People and K24 among others) is factually true but legally untrue because the name of Uhuru Kenyatta does not appear in any legal document.

If you ask Kenyan journalists what is taking place at the editorial level, they will unanimously respond: “Media ownership.” An editor from Eldoret, Rift Valley highlights the difficult position that editorial staff are in: “I am an editor of an enterprise where the owner at times intercepts my reporters in a bid to alter our editorial perspectives. He actually changes content to suit his desires and those of his political friends. I have threatened to resign if he continues.”
[…]
The report finds that while media ownership is sometimes obvious, media owners often use their spouse, parents or trusted friends to register their media outlets, making it difficult to obtain clear data on media ownership. For instance, the researcher notes that the connection of presidential candidate Uhuru Kenyatta with MediaMax (owner of Kameme FM, Milele FM, The People and K24 among others) is factually true but legally untrue because the name of Uhuru Kenyatta does not appear in any legal document.

There is no question that public awareness of—that is, disgust with—corruption has grown. In the last year, quarterly polls conducted by the Center for Sociological Investigations saw Spaniards rank it as the country’s fourth gravest problem, surpassed only by unemployment and other economic issues. Yet, the Bárcenas revelations brought only an estimated 1,000 people to an impromptu demonstration held in front of Popular Party headquarters in Madrid. “The idea that politicians are getting envelopes stuffed with cash during these moments of crisis has certainly generated a sense of indignation,” says Villoria. “But there’s also a sense of what can you do besides answer a poll?” While those polls show overwhelming support for toughening sanctions against corruption, little government action has yet been taken. In the wake of the latest scandals, the Popular Party has promised to conduct a thorough internal investigation and prime minister Rajoy said that “his hand would not tremble” to punish anyone found guilty of misconduct. It has also promised greater accountability and oversight in the form of a Transparency Law, proposed last March but still not yet approved, that would require governments at all levels to make their accounts available to the public. But already there are caveats. On Friday, it was announced, that the royal family would be exempt from the law. And thanks to opposition from both the PP and the PSOE so too, most likely, will political parties. Over 75,000 citizens have signed an online petition asking that the parties be included in the legislation. But for that to happen, something would have to change.

How the media should cover media policy related stories is always a difficult issue. Newspapers, of course, have their own interests to consider as well as those of their readers. Is it acceptable that they should use their influence to protect their own interests, or should they always give a balanced view of the issues?
The coverage of the Savile scandal and McAlpine by the BBC had serious flaws. But the BBC did eventually show that it was capable of setting its own journalistic watchdogs to work on itself, putting public interest journalism before any narrowly defined corporate interest.
Now it is the turn of the Press. Over the coming days, we will see the extent to which newspapers can bracket off their own interests and give a balanced view of the Leveson Report, including the criticisms he is likely to make of the press.
For media researchers it is an interesting laboratory in which to study the press. Will they report Leveson in a balanced way, or will they will use their power to turn public opinion against the report or its author? Will they skate over what is likely to be excoriating critique of newspapers, and try to rubbish the recommendations? Or will they give some space to criticism?
After all, one of the key issues Leveson himself has been pondering is whether, because of their ability to shape public opinion, the press, or elements

How the media should cover media policy related stories is always a difficult issue. Newspapers, of course, have their own interests to consider as well as those of their readers. Is it acceptable that they should use their influence to protect their own interests, or should they always give a balanced view of the issues?
The coverage of the Savile scandal and McAlpine by the BBC had serious flaws. But the BBC did eventually show that it was capable of setting its own journalistic watchdogs to work on itself, putting public interest journalism before any narrowly defined corporate interest.
Now it is the turn of the Press. Over the coming days, we will see the extent to which newspapers can bracket off their own interests and give a balanced view of the Leveson Report, including the criticisms he is likely to make of the press.
For media researchers it is an interesting laboratory in which to study the press. Will they report Leveson in a balanced way, or will they will use their power to turn public opinion against the report or its author? Will they skate over what is likely to be excoriating critique of newspapers, and try to rubbish the recommendations? Or will they give some space to criticism?
After all, one of the key issues Leveson himself has been pondering is whether, because of their ability to shape public opinion, the press, or elements