Columnists should be partisans for a cause

Over the last few weeks, readers have raised the issue of bias in my column. Most of those who complain are from the Jubilee Party. To be sure, there are also those others who support my writing unreservedly, and who find their views and voices in what I write. I am sure similar complaints mixed with fervent support are voiced for fellow columnists.

However, we must revisit the notions of objectivity and bias that are canvassed in comments without a sense of what they mean. We operate with an unproblematised notion of objectivity. Objectivity is equated to balance and balance is perceived as something that can be achieved on some weighing scale. Bias is understood to mean the absence of one contending perspective to an issue.

This notion of bias requires that every single columnist should reflect in their opinion the views of all parties at issue. Thus, if it is a commentary on Kenyan politics, objectivity rests in including the views of Jubilee and Cord. Rarely do I receive complaints about failure to include views of other parties such as Ford-Kenya or Amani National Congress. In other words, those who complain forget that their complaints reflect their own biases. Worse, few of these biases are derived from superior ideological convictions. Most are simply tribal.

MUTILATED DEBATE

The consequence of this limited understanding of objectivity is that we have mutilated debate and reduced it to a balancing act between political positions. The television stations have perfected the art where objectivity is encapsulated in having present on the show people from the different political persuasions. The mere appearance of those persons equals objectivity.

Objectivity is a farce when one or both positions being “balanced” lack merit and facts and is simply constituted by baseless ululations on behalf of a favoured party. Opinions are valid so long as they have and respect basic facts, advance thought, are logically argued and have the capacity to impact society in some, preferably, positive ways. Thus, opinions do not have to be objective in the sense in which we seem to understand it in Kenya. They don’t exist like meat on a weighing scale.

As a columnist, I am not contracted to pretend to some notion of objectivity. I am a partisan of some position that I believe to be right. In my writing, I strive to mobilise fact and argument in favour of that position.

SWAYING FORCES

However, this is a position I have arrived at in spite of the political, economic or cultural forces swaying us. For instance, mine is a premeditated position that allows me to understand that human rights are worth fighting for, that excessive greed has undermined the potential for economic growth in Kenya, or that women’s rights are integral to human prosperity. Where evidence challenges my position, I will admit that into my thinking and adjust my views accordingly. It is a mark of a good columnist to remain faithful to a position arrived at independently and adjust the position in view of new evidence. That is how schools of thought are built and nurtured.

Schools of thought are built on conscience and convictions. This is the point Prof Makau Mutua was schooling Attorney-General Githu Muigai on this week. Columnists should be driven by conviction. Where those convictions align with a particular political movement, columnists cannot be blamed for bias. Instead, they must stand to defend their position as a matter of right. So, those requiring of me that I should reflect the Jubilee Party position in my writing are wasting their time because my positions are arrived at independent of political parties even though they might eventually align with the thinking in one or two political movements.

Godwin R. Murunga is a senior research fellow at the Institute for Development Studies at the University of Nairobi.