Happy Monday! I pray many have found their steps in the real world away from the social sphere even as this fiasco hits many of our families and institutions. Firstly, I wish to point out and assert that the BAKE Press Release might not be accurate. Even if attempting to prove that blogging/social media is a 'good guy' here, might be spreading an online falsehood which BAKE cites it is against by citing that no bloggers or social media users were beneficiaries. Unless the press release means that BAKE has already followed the food chain for the proceeds, has 100% verified that the cited direct beneficiaries are not/have not been bloggers in their own spheres and do not hold any social media presence - has verified with the individuals or the host companies. A tall order I suspect this would be! I would understand attempting to say social media as a tool did not go into the bank and cash out or make the leaders act as they might have or that the entity wasn't a direct participant. Secondly, the social media boasted and was largely credited for the Arab uprisings. The uprisings had many effects, many negative including loss of lives, economic turmoil, most of which is still felt today. Even in the midst of this, what was the social media given credits for? - Bringing democracy, 'giving the citizens a voice (platform)'. This means that groups of people may choose the side of the coin to glorify or cling to based on their interests. Thirdly, I would imagine that when the first cheque leaf was invented, some ingenious (yes, innovative) people deviced their own in the backstreets. Due to this, the real inventors had to go back and extra innovate measures to build confidence for verification of cheques. Social media is sitting in this space now and this cannot go on for too long. Where is the real, veri-checked, authentic information to be found? Even as you and I become sources of information in 'public journalism'. How to ascertain that the WApp press release or video message circulating as from CBK, from Chase Bank, from IG is for real or the real one. Please do not even refer to the official website...some may already have duplicates, diversions etc. This not addressed, the online space will continue to be viral yes, msema kweli to some, yet mostly viewed as venom ground, active users with many followers cited to be paid, thus shrouded with suspicion and this kills the confidence it should be breeding as a tool that is actually a sector. Yes, it gives Government agencies whose work is to govern and hold public interests a battle ground which CSOs will keep calling 'muzzling of freedoms'. Finally, it would be exciting to have a study done on the influence of social media on the financial services sector and most recent happenings. It would be great for the Central Bank of Kenya to run this from the government point. And since a meeting of minds on findings with CSOs may not happen at the onset, CSOs from the industry insider Kenya Bankers Association to internet champions ISOC KE, KICTANET, BAKE to consumer bodies COFEK may proactively run their own. As 'mattress banks' and 'maize granary banks' mushroom, definitely there has been an impact. Some lessons that may be leveraged upon, while others avoided or managed early. Have a well cushioned blessed week! Regards/Wangari On Apr 9, 2016 13:27, James Wamathai via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:

http://www.blog.bake.co.ke/2016/04/09/bloggers-and-social-media-are-not-to-b...

"The continuous and sustained efforts to blame bloggers for the financial turmoil at Chase Bank cannot continue unabated. A statement from the Central Bank of Kenya (CBK) blamed bloggers stating “Chase Bank Limited experienced liquidity difficulties, following inaccurate social media reports and the stepping aside of two of its directors.”

Nothing can be further from the truth. Chase Bank was put under receivership on 7th April, 2016 for liquidity challenges due to lack of integrity by the management. None of the top directors; the Chairman and the Chief Executive are bloggers. No blogger or social media user was the recipient of the huge loans the directors and staff of the bank gave themselves, against banking regulations."