Engaged Kenyans are questioning, verifying and regulating social media
What you need to know:
- Many a politician can be found on social media. A primary motivation, especially for those who engage in their personal capacity, is to directly share, and perhaps connect with the electorate.
- The desire to regulate social media is not unique to the Kenyan government. It is an issue that comes up often in many countries, including our neighbours, who have interesting laws in effect.
- That, in fact, isn’t the first of those cases. Nor is the sharing of unverified information, rumours or misinformation new, much in the same way we are used to alternative versions of events being shared on these platforms.
In the past week, we have seen one faux-pas in an Embakasi digital prayer cell group go viral and the private recordings of a private affair between a DJ and a woman become a matter of ‘public interest’.
All irreversible. All embarrassing to those in them, and entertaining and appalling to the (un)willing recipients.
These are some of the outcomes of a digital society, one that is set to continue growing in the numbers of both passive and active users. The gadgets in our hands and on our laps or our desks are avenues through which to transmit all manner of content and data.
“Traditional” disseminators of information find themselves contending for attention with the more connected and engaged audiences who have the means at their disposal to create, produce and share news, gossip, (mis)information and more.
Kenyan media and corporate Kenya have, since the turn of the decade, been getting in on the social media game. The creative ways in which social media managers for various brands leverage a trending topic to do product placement is impressive, if sometimes inappropriate, and speaks to just how mainstream social media has become as a channel for communication and marketing.
There are dedicated social media channels for breaking and sharing news and engaging audiences. Civil society, one would contend, is being redefined or reclaimed on social media.
We have, to some extent, a digital government. Indeed, this was the alternative branding the incumbent government used during the pre-2013 election campaign period.
Many a politician can be found on social media. A primary motivation, especially for those who engage in their personal capacity, is to directly share, and perhaps connect with the electorate.
As with mainstream media and corporates, politicians are having to learn that the rules of social media engagement are different. These are avenues for many-to-many communication and it does not suffice to merely broadcast, no matter who you are.
The question many are now asking is whether social media use can, or should be, regulated.
Recently, some Kenyan lawmakers called on the Communications Authority to draft policies that would enable Parliament to enact laws regulating the use of social media, citing the fast-moving, irreversible nature of information shared on these platforms.
We have seen the good, the bad and the ugly that real-time sharing of information presents. In their case, the parliamentarians cited a case of the news of an MCA’s passing being posted first on social media, before the family of the deceased had been informed.
That, in fact, isn’t the first of those cases. Nor is the sharing of unverified information, rumours or misinformation new, much in the same way we are used to alternative versions of events being shared on these platforms.
The desire to regulate social media is not unique to the Kenyan government, but comes up often in many countries including our neighbours, who have interesting laws in effect.
Efforts to reign in electronic forms of communication through laws such as the contentious Security Laws (Amendment) Bill, and the recent announcement by some Members of Parliament hint at reactive, rather than proactive, evidence-based approaches.
The benefits of social media, and the internet in general, in connecting people to each other and to vast opportunities don’t seem to be at the fore of legislative considerations.
Besides, regulating social media content is a game of whack-a-mole at best. It has been offered that a more effective approach to dealing with bad speech or content is to enforce more speech, and free speech.
Digital literacy, in my view, is best acquired through continued engagement, and not necessarily training sessions, especially in the pedagogical format favoured in most cases, though granted, there might be an appetite for the latter.
It is through trial and error and being corrected along the way by others with whom we engage, that we learn when to stop and question the veracity of a piece of information before spreading it. This is increasingly evident among Kenyans online.
The confrontations and counter-narratives presented around news items that captured public attention this past week, and many other times before, indicate that it’s not easy to propagate one narrative, and have it go unchallenged.
This is starkly different from traditional forms of communication, where often the audience would not get a chance to share their views, especially in a sustained fashion, be it traditional media or politicians as the information nodes.
Lawmakers would do well to spend time better understanding how social media in Kenya is used before proposing laws to ‘regulate’. The bad and the ugly are not the entire story.
Twitter: @NiNanjira
