Quality journalism best defence against critics

For years, Kenyan media has faced scrutiny and pressure from people in power, particularly those unhappy with critical coverage. Yet, these same figures readily embrace positive portrayals. In this environment where allegiances can shift quickly, with threats emerging against journalists and media outlets, journalistic excellence becomes the ultimate defense mechanism.

This principle was powerfully illustrated during this year’s World Press Freedom Day celebrations, the global acknowledgement of the indispensable role journalists play in society. It serves as a reminder of the importance of press freedom in a democratic world and the need to protect journalists from violence, intimidation, censorship and restrictions on freedom of expression.

The highlight of the event was the Media Council of Kenya’s (MCK) Annual Journalism Excellence Awards (AJEA), which recognise outstanding and impactful journalism. The awards celebrate reporting that fosters development, peace and accountability, and influences policy, reinforcing the media’s vital role in society. They serve as a crucial reminder of the need to support and recognise the courage, sacrifice, and dedication of media professionals.

This year saw a record-breaking 1,080 entries, the highest participation in the award’s 12-year history since its inception in 2012. Judges of the 2024 AJEA commended the exceptional talent and dedication showcased across various media platforms. Notably, entries exhibited a marked improvement in quality compared with previous years. Encouragingly, community and vernacular media also made significant contributions, meeting the high standards set by the awards. This year’s AJEA also attracted the attention of international media based in Kenya.

However, amid the accolades, areas for improvement were evident. Many radio entries lacked essential sound effects, diminishing their storytelling impact, while in print, while competition was fierce, it was primarily concentrated within a single media organisation.

“Some categories were dominated by this media house, and in some instances, only their stories were entered in certain categories,” the judges observed. “This begs the question: What strategies does this media house employ to maintain such a high level of competition?”

Furthermore, a concerning decline in story quality was noted in another publication, once considered a leader in the industry.
In the digital sphere, commendable progress was observed, yet there remains room for further development to fully exploit the potential of digital storytelling. Judges identified common pitfalls such as excessive hyperlinks and subpar video quality, emphasising the importance of aligning digital creativity with quality standards.

The media freedom category lacked strong entries, highlighting the need for greater advocacy and consistent reporting on press liberty, given its crucial role in a democratic society.

This lack of strong entries in the media freedom category could indicate a disconnect between the media’s appreciation for the importance of press freedom to society and its role in actively promoting and defending it. This is particularly concerning given recent developments where media freedom has come under significant threat.
Despite these shortcomings, entries from across the country, including submissions from university students, were lauded by the judges for their diversity and inclusivity.

Finally, freelancers emerged as a formidable force this year, underlining their vital role in journalism. Their strong entries serve as a reminder that quality journalism transcends institutional affiliations but also speaks to the need to focus beyond the mainstream.
The reality is that news consumption habits are rapidly changing, and it is upon the institution of journalism to improve the quality of delivery at all levels and across all facets of practice.