Dr Ndemo, Your last e-mail will perhaps require further clarification to better understand where you're coming from and want to go. When something happens in reality like what changed the world forever......the bombing of the twin-towers in New York....is there anything wrong with airing it as it happened? Why would one want to conceal reality/the truth? I'm yet to clearly understand the real reason behind the ban on live broadcast! On this issue of bribery, as the saying goes "it takes two to tango". In any case of bribery, there are two sides to the coin. I do not condone corruption or suggest that the media did not do what you report, I'm trying to get us to think more broadly and adopt a "systems approach" to issues. In an evaluation methodology called "outcome mapping", the term "boundary partners" is used to define the "immediate partners" who interact with "the subject/unit of analysis" under evaluation in order to better determine the outcomes/effects of any action and to understand and document the behavioural changes among these partners so as to be able to attribute the change. In this suggested study, who are the "boundary partners" of the media? Shouldn't they be part of the analysis? I think a holistic assessment (multi-faceted approach) to the subject at hand should be employed - targeting the media alone will not help if we want to bring change. If your reason for evaluating is for policing or auditing purposes, then note that evaluation has since moved to be for learning purposes and for taking corrective action - in most cases it involves the subject under evaluation and the boundary partners for joint learning and actions. In this regard, I trust that the evaluation will observe the four internationally recognized evaluation standards: 1. Utility - who are the intended users? The evaluation should serve the information needs of intended users, who should be defined from the outset. 2. Feasibility - it should be realistic, prudent, diplomatic and frugal. 3. Propriety - it should be conducted legally, ethically and with due regard for the welfare of those involved in the evaluation, as well as those affected by its results. 4. Accuracy - it will reveal and convey technically adequate information about the features that determine the worth or merit of the subject being evaluated. Lastly, the purpose would need to be clear is it? "on improving rather than on proving, on understanding rather than on reporting, and on creating knowledge for action/policy change rather than on taking credit/punishing." Edith -----Original Message----- From: kictanet-bounces+eadera=idrc.or.ke@lists.kictanet.or.ke [mailto:kictanet-bounces+eadera=idrc.or.ke@lists.kictanet.or.ke] On Behalf Of bitange@jambo.co.ke Sent: 13 February 2008 19:47 To: eadera@idrc.or.ke Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: [kictanet] Media Dear David, Thank you for supporting the baseline review of Media. The purpose of the study is to provide baseline data to improve on our media policy. You must admit that this is the first time in the history of this country that the Government is consulting stakeholders on its intentions to improve the sector. We have involved Media Council from day one. It is the MC that would provide the sectretarial services. It is the Media Council that would recommend names to the task force. It is the Media Council that we are using as a bridge to improve the conditions of journalists in this country. We need an objective study that is done by independent minded Kenyans. It is not prudent however to have current employees of media houses to serve in the task force. Unfortunately, most members of the MC fall in that category. That leaves us with Media Academics,special interest groups, retired media personalities to do the study. There is nothing in our sleeves against media and I think by now you should have known that we are only interested in developing a vibrant Media in this country. The study is important because we feel that there are multiple reasons why Media behaved the way they did. We cannot simply blame Tribalism. We have all gone to school and know very well know that Journalists were taking bribes. From many studies in media, we can speculate on reasons why they were easily bribed as mainly poor pay. Bribes cloud objectivity and eventually what we see is nothing but incitement. There are more other factors that we need the task force to establish. We have sent the TOR for the study to MC and I think it is upon them now to consult the wider stakeholder before we move forward. It is our responsibility to ensure that we do not repeat the mistakes we have made again. From the policy perspective, the study is a must if we have to address the problems in the Media. We need to make informed decisions. Bitange Ndemo.
Dear colleagues,
Having followed the debate on the media audit, I'm convinced there is consensus that it's important that we review how the media handled the elections, before, during and after. That is perfectly in order. What's alarming is the insistence that the government should do it, whereas there is an organisation, the Media Council, whose mandate includes checking how the media operates with a view to protect the%2
---------------------------------------------- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by Jambo MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. --------------------------------------------- "easy access to the world" _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet This message was sent to: eadera@idrc.or.ke Unsubscribe or change your options at http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/eadera%40idrc.or.ke