Choice of pictures and readers’ perception

One of the problems I have in resolving readers’ complaints is when they are couched in generalities.

I need evidence-based complaints to be able to play my role as your advocate in the newsroom.

Here is a complaint that I received this week but I’m unable to determine unless I embark on a research mission of my own.

“You guys are openly biased against President. His pictures on front page appear to be the worst when I believe you have better in your library.

"There is one that is your favourite where he appears like he has not even washed his face properly. On the contrary, Raila and others you fish out the best. Why?”

PHOTOS

I don’t know which pictures he had in mind, though I think I know the general drift of the problem he has in mind.

It has something to do with editorial decisions made with regard to the use of stock or file pictures.

But I need examples, just like if you’re going to court to seek divorce on grounds of cruelty or infidelity you would have to give the specifics.

I’ve, however, another complaint which is more specific.

ZUMA PICTURE

Francis Kiiru wrote to say he was upset by the lead story in Monday’s Daily Nation, “Zuma, man who brought down Mandela’s party”.

The headline had a kicker, “South African leader gets the corruption right and little else, least of all his succession”.

The front page also carried a withered picture of President Zuma, who is normally a fired-up, singing, stomping, and dancing man of the people and a Zulu warrior.

Mr Kiiru said the Nation headline plus the photo was hateful.

WRONG HEADLINE

He characterised the story as “fake” as he thought it was “breaking news from South Africa” only to find the two-page story was “spewing hatred” for Zuma and his ex-wife Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, former African Union Commission chairperson.

“I was extremely disappointed that NMG could stoop so low as to borrow such from South Africa or did that Chris Erasmus (author of the story) pay for the coverage?”

Mr Kiiru said the headline was not supported by the content, which he said was an effort to campaign for Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa to take over from Zuma.

“What a stupid way to sell somebody! If Ramaphosa has these kinds of campaign managers, he should completely avoid contesting. I honestly believe there are better ways of expressing divergent opinions,” he said.

“I have previously been uncomfortable with the way Otieno Otieno, Maina Kiai, George Kegoro and the likes of Makau Mutua or Godwin Murunga articulate their issues but after reading this article, I think they are real intellectuals.

"If you didn’t read that article Mr Mwaura, please do so and let’s have your opinion as it is a shame for a respected paper like Nation to highlight such personal indifference.”

GET IT RIGHT

I agree with Mr Kiiru on the headline and picture that made Zuma look old and withered.

Readers look at headlines and pictures before they read a story, and headlines provide a context for the story.

Pictures colour and shape the readers’ understanding of the story.

If they don’t read the rest of the story, they take away with them the impression given by the headline and picture.

But in this case, the story is why Zuma has a snowball’s chance in hell of getting Dlamini-Zuma to succeed him, not how he has destroyed the ANC.

EDITORIAL DECEPTION

News organisations re-use old photos to illustrate a news story if they don’t have a current one.

It is okay, if they acknowledge it’s a file picture.

However, it’s not okay if the picture gives an impression that’s not part of the story, because that amounts to editorial deception, bias or distortion.

In this case, the Nation didn’t even acknowledge it was a file picture (by Reuters).

Send your complaints to the [email protected]. Text or call 0721989264