Journalists and NRM: is there a red line?

By Charles Kazooba

Around mid-March a list of 150 names of journalists allegedly recruited to promote the suspected Premier Amama Mbabazi’s presidency project ahead of the 2016 elections circulated on social media; it was a bombshell.

Never have journalists been accused of being partisan in such big numbers. The document was well packaged and designed that to a none-keen observer it would pass for gospel truth.

The attack on the media surfaced in a war of words between pro-President Yoweri Museveni and pro-Mbabazi supporters. Amidst that tension, the media was dragged into the fray.

Of course, the allegation that over 100 journalists had been hired by Mbabazi to polish his image was not true. In fact, many prominent pressies chose to ignore it.

Those of us that got interested in the subject settled of two theories behind the allegation; that originators of the document wanted to blackmail the President by making him panic into thinking that his closest political ally had serious intentions to challenge him in 2016 general elections and by dragging the media into partisan issues journalists’ work would lose credibility.

Tainting the credibility of journalists and their work means undermining the entire media industry. And when this happens, especially now, when everybody is preparing for the 2016 general elections it becomes easier to manipulate the media and even pre-determine what is published. 

However, the Mbabazi allegation opens a can of worms and drags us into a much bigger debate of whether Uganda’s media or journalists are partisan and what should be done.

When anyone raises the proposition that Uganda's media are mostly partisan must gird himself for a barrage of protests from journalists. But anyone with an IQ above five will concur with me that there is some level of bias.

In May 2011, President Yoweri Museveni, in a letter published in the New Vision Wednesday, called journalists “enemies” for their coverage of anti-government protests in which at least 10 people had died.

“The media houses both local and international such as Al Jazeera, BBC, [regional television station] NTV, The Daily Monitor, etc, that cheer on these irresponsible people are enemies of Uganda’s recovery and they will have to be treated as such,” wrote Museveni.

More than a dozen times the Opposition has also attacked some media houses and individual journalists for being partisan. In very common cases some journalists have deliberately refused to balance their stories to carter for their interests.

On the other hand, at many other news organizations, some journalists are essentially advocates for political parties, in many cases hired by news organization because of their affiliation.

But still the media will insist that it is objective. What is happening right now is the equivalent of politicians keeping secret their party membership and trying to convince the electorate that their only objective is to work for the good of the country. Which everyone knows is completely ludicrous.

One issue we also can’t rule out is ignorance. It is also possible that some media practitioners cannot tell whether their actions or statements make them partisan.

So, what do we do? Either our mass media needs to come clean and declare their bias or they must insist that journalists, reporters, commentators and particularly opinion contributors, declare their political bias or allegiance.

Secondly, since over 90 per cent of practicing journalists only know President Museveni’s government it is important to re-orient the Uganda media to appreciate multiparty politics.

We could probably adopt the European style of journalism, which is aggressive, analytical, and opinionated. The European media are not afraid to express their opinions while presenting the researched facts. 

Or we could do the American way where objectivity is emphasized. Objective journalists make quick decisions, and seemingly have more credibility. 

US news organizations have policies discouraging journalists from revealing political affiliations outside of work for the sake of safeguarding the organization’s impartiality. 

For instance, many U.S. newspapers do not allow reporters to voice their opinions publicly, march in demonstrations, volunteer in political campaigns, wear political buttons, or attach bumper stickers to their cars. The ball is in our court, and we have to decide now.