1
Berkeley Center for the Study of Value Prize in Personal Integrity
Lynn Yu
Pages: 4
When, How, and Why Should We Go Public? — A Journalist’s Responsibility
It is always a journalist’s imperative to “go public” with the truth. But such
professional ideals are easier to adhere to in theory than practice.
In 2007/2008, Kenya experienced what some termed the “Kenyan equivalent of
9/11.” The presidential elections took a turn for the catastrophic when ethnic tensions
erupted into violent outbreaks of attacks and riots — the Kenyan media was disparaged in
the aftermath for its role in “knowingly fanning ethnic suspicion, advocating violence
against ‘others’ and disseminating messages of hatred and incitement.”1
When the 2013 elections rolled around, the country was on edge in fear of a
2007/08 repeat. At an elections symposium I attended last summer in Nairobi, Kenya,
three prominent Kenyan journalists spoke of their experiences in the 2013 elections. One
of them, who was referred to only as Ed from the Associated Press, recalled an instance
where 25 people were killed in an electoral skirmish in Mombasa. The AP, being a Western
news source, reported the casualties. However, many Kenyan media sources refused to go
public with the information, keeping the body count under wraps until a week after the
election was over.
“Many of these media outlets chose not to report on the 25 dead because they were
afraid it would spark more riots and protests,” said Ed. “Keeping in mind the 2007 and
2008 elections, they didn’t want their reports to feed any fires.”2 The moral dilemma that
Somervile, Keith. “Violence, hate speech and inflammatory broadcasting in Kenya: the problems with
definition and identification.”Equid Novi: African Journalism Studies Vol. 32, No. 1 (2011): pg. 82
2 Ed. “A Panel Discussion with Kenyan Bloggers, Writers & Editors on the March 2013 General
Elections.” Leakey Auditorium, Nairobi National Museum. 21 June 2013.
1
2
Ed’s colleagues faced is a difficult one — run the story, and fear the repercussions that it
could tear the countryside apart. Don’t run the story, and fail to do your job as journalists.
With just a few exceptions (e.g. WikiLeaks), the idea of “going public” and the role of
the media are inextricably linked — one cannot air an institution or an individual’s dirty
laundry without the direct involvement of a legitimate news source. The debate for editors
of major newspapers in Kenya boiled down to this: should we be prioritizing the interests
of national security, or our obligation to provide the truth for the public? So when the
question is posed: “when, how, and why should we go public?” the question cannot be
answered from an individual viewpoint. Rather, because it is ultimately a new source’s
responsibility to disseminate or disregard the information leaked to them, the question
must be asked from a journalistic standpoint: “when, how, and why should we publish
information that is potentially damaging to national security or powerful institutions?” In
the case of Kenyan media last spring, the general consensus seemed to be to temporarily
hide the story — a peaceful election, given the volatile nature of the electoral process, was
the media’s highest priority.
But what does this mean for the American context? What would have happened if
The New York Times had never gone public with the Pentagon Papers? Or if The Washington
Post and other major American newspapers had never published the Unabomber’s
manifesto, an act that eventually led to his capture?
I would contend that the time to go public is always. As long as the leak or the
source of information is credible and relevant, it is always the journalists’ responsibility to
make the information available for the general public to peruse. While information may be
damaging, it isn’t, for most institutions or governmental agencies, destructive. The NSA and
3
the CIA, despite numerous leaks and reports leading to skepticism concerning their
legitimacy, remain fixtures of the American political landscape.
However, the reasoning behind going public isn’t necessarily for truth’s sake — the
reception that “truth” will receive is variable depending on political and social contexts. If
the media is the force responsible for holding the government accountable, then a
corruptible media would entail an already corrupt or corruptible government. Going public
then, is not for the short-term public benefit of releasing “secrets,” but for the long-term
maintenance of a vigilant media force — a consistent policy to reveal credible information
relevant to the general public is a measure to ensure a media institution that will,
regardless of the circumstances, preserve an unwavering and watchful eye on government.
A media force that decides to withhold information here but not there leads to a
media force susceptible to manipulation. Boniface Mwangi, an award-winning
photojournalist and prominent Kenyan activist, accused Kenyan media of being the most
corrupt institution in the country, thereby allowing for the rampant corruption in
parliament.3 Even if the circumstances may warrant withholding information, as was the
case with the Kenyan elections, it is never the journalist’s responsibility to come to that
determination; it is only the journalist’s responsibility to present the information honestly
and without bias.
Of course, all this rhetoric is easier said than done. Then again, ideals are not
necessarily meant to be achieved, but aspired to. The purpose of going public for an
individual whistleblower is inconstant, but for the media it is to preserve an accountable
journalistic force. A democracy inspired by the people and for the people can only operate
3
Mwangi, Boniface. “A Panel Discussion with Kenyan Bloggers, Writers & Editors on the March 2013
General Elections.” Leakey Auditorium, Nairobi National Museum. 21 June 2013.
4
with these interests in mind if the people are able to employ an instrument to make their
government answerable to them.
For Americans, that instrument is the freedom of our presses. And for the presses to
remain free — free of state manipulation and free of institutional influence — the time to
go public, for the public, is always.