The Press needs to protect democracy, not seek to overthrow it.
Spiro Theodore Agnew, the 39th Vice President of the United States under Richard Nixon, and Rigathi Gachagua, the former Deputy President of Kenya, have at least one thing in common: both left office in disgrace.
The American was forced to resign after being charged with corruption and tax fraud. The Kenyan was impeached for a slew of constitutional malfeasance. Both men were vituperative in and out of office. Their similarities end there.
One was white, the other black. Where Mr Agnew left pithy and witty if memorably angry phrases, Mr Gachagua is leaving behind a linguistic desert.
Mr Agnew often faulted the Press, which I do here today, though I don’t do it often. Sections of our Press have become reckless and irresponsible.
Mr Agnew, a rabid conservative pugilist, a species of politician I have nothing in common with, popularised the phrase “nattering nabobs of negativism,” which he used to lampoon the political left and the Press. I feel some of that description may fit part of our Press today.
It’s a fact that expressive rights, especially the right to speak and assemble, are central to a democracy. In fact, no democracy can exist as a matter of normativity without them. They are the heartbeat and lifeblood of a democratic polity. That said, expressive rights can be abused when used to fan the flames of genocide as we saw in 1994 in Rwanda. That abuse can literally send a country to hell in a hand-basket.
Constitutional rights
Those who abuse the constitutional rights to speech often start out as “nattering nabobs of negativism.” Then they beat themselves into a frenzy before setting countries afire. A beautiful thing as speech can become a nuclear weapon. Think, for example, of hate speech whether racist, religious, misogynistic, or tribal.
Adolf Hitler’s Germany of the Third Reich, South Africa’s apartheid, the degradation by speech of Blacks by Whites or the dehumanising of Palestinians by Israelis come to mind. This is the stuff of which genocides are made. Genocidaires shouldn’t be allowed to hide behind the veil of the Press to cause splitism and wreck society. That’s why we should never conflate a free or private Press with an independent, ethical, or moral Press.
We all know democracy isn’t perfect. It can even be used against itself. In fact, it often is. I remember the first democratic multi-party elections in a certain North African country in the early 1990s. The dominant party, which was religious, intended to impose harsh religious laws after the election. In that election, the first for women’s suffrage in the country, the religious party’s cadre was heard telling a woman as she cast her ballot, “go ahead and vote, but this is the first and last election in which you will vote.”
Democracy isn’t a cure for stupidity, idiocy, or hate. It can fuel all three, or create conditions for their mitigation. That’s why the Press sits at a delicate crossroads in the society. The Press can cause a national conflagration. It, therefore, needs to be responsible and not abuse freedom.
In the print Press, the headline on the front page usually signals the ethics or seriousness of the paper. That’s why headlines sell papers. Tabloids are known for their steamy, misleading, or outright inflammatory headlines. They go for base instinct to arouse, repel, or attract. Whatever it takes. I am afraid some Kenyan papers are becoming tabloids. Screaming headlines. The constant use of blood-dripping words – such as “horror,” “terror”, “death,” and so on. But if you go beyond the headlines, you often find the story itself is “hot air.” There is no “there there.” It’s a just headline without a thinking head.
Political agenda
It’s fine for the Press to prosecute a political agenda, even to be aligned to a political party. That’s democracy.
It’s okay for a newspaper to oppose the government and its policies. Those rights are ironclad. It’s not okay for a paper to stoke hatred and division, or to call for the overthrow of the government.
A national paper shouldn’t be used like a juvenile social media handle on X or Facebook. No – responsible journalism requires that a paper’s editors think more nobly than a testosterone-fuelled teenager whose brain in still baking in the oven. Even some high school papers are better than some national Press.
I don’t know whether some of the headlines are sanctioned, or dictated by, ownership. But some are so outlandish as to require a psychologist’s help.
The Press is part of a country’s democratic processes. It needs to protect democracy, not seek to overthrow it. Responsible journalism understands its role within the state. It shouldn’t, for example, collaborate with an enemy state, or sell state secrets that have come into its possession. It shouldn’t stoke division and hatred. A Press shouldn’t hate its own country.
Makau Mutua is SUNY Distinguished Professor and Margaret W. Wong Professor at Buffalo Law School, The State University of New York. He’s Senior Advisor on Constitutional Affairs to President William Ruto. On X: @makaumutua.
