Ruto's rants v reality: What the public expects media to do ahead of 2027 polls

This story has significance for readers across Kenya and beyond.

The media in Kenya finds itself in a precarious position ahead of the 2027 General Election. Whereas the cardinal principles guiding media practice in Kenya require journalists and media practitioners to be neutral and objective in their reporting, recent research and surveys indicate that the public generally prefers the media to take sides on topical issues rather than remain neutral.

A Media Council of Kenya (MCK) survey of 2025 shows that 81% of Kenyans expect the media (print) to take a stand on national issues, as opposed to 19% who prefer media neutrality.

This finding presents a serious challenge to news editors, who strive daily to strike a balance between meeting public expectations and adhering to media ethics, which demand professionalism, objectivity and neutrality.

New order: The youth and social media influence on journalism

For years, the public has understood the media to be unbiased and apolitical. This is what

journalists are taught in school. And indeed, this is how it should be. However, modern-day scholars warn against this strict and rigid principle of neutrality.

Kovach Bill and Tom Rosenstiel, in their book The Elements of Journalism, argue that journalism’s first obligation is to the truth, not to neutrality itself. They note that media independence and news verification are more important than any other consideration.

Media theorist Jay Rosen warns that appearing neutral in the face of clear evidence can create “false balance,” where the truth and falsehood are treated as equally valid.

Recent research by the University of Canberra titled Younger Audience Perceptions of Journalists on Social Media found that audiences below 30 years old are comfortable with journalists expressing personal opinions on topical issues.

A separate survey by the John Smith Centre’s 2026 Youth Poll found that 61% of young people in the UK use social media as a regular news source because they feel it is a free space where content is instant and unfiltered.

In Kenya, the MCK’s 2025 survey found that 37% of respondents relied on social media for news, compared to 31% who preferred TV and 21% radio.

These findings point us to one thing: the media is increasingly dealing with a more informed, empowered and tech-savvy audience that is impatient and critical of the press that still adheres to strict neutrality.

Young people have taken over the space and want to be heard. They are not just informed but also opinionated and dominant. The media is compelled to give them space to air out their issues.

Since the Gen Z protests of 2024 that shook the social and democratic fabric of the nation, the mainstream media have consistently given the youth airtime to discuss politics, leadership and governance issues in the country. This is a complete departure from yesteryears' norm, when renowned scholars and pundits dominated such discussions.

However, this shift has attracted significant criticism, especially from government sympathisers, who feel the media is engaging in "juvenile activism" rather than professional journalism. They have also accused the media of lowering the standard and quality of panel discussions.

This begs the question: how objective and neutral can the media be? One of the questions MCK posed to respondents was: Do you think the media covers the government fairly?

The survey found that 54% of Kenyans feel the media covers the government fairly, while 46% held a different view.

This split in public opinion paints a clear picture of the precarious position the media and media practitioners find themselves in daily.

Whose concerns should the media address?

Essentially, the media exists to serve the masses and amplify their plight and interests. Its role is to mirror the emotions of the public. That is why I find the question "Does the media cover the government fairly?" a bit problematic. Why? An independent media, the world over, exists to serve the people, who, in most cases, have grievances that need to be addressed by the government.

For instance, people want their resources used prudently. They want answers over stalled projects, and expect the government to fulfil its promises. They want a functioning healthcare system, enhanced security and a working economy.

The media has to constantly remind the government of these responsibilities on behalf of the people. This "nagging habit" often bothers the government, creating unending tension between the state and the press.

An American author and journalist, Amy Goodman, responded to this concern with a straight answer: “The media's job is not to protect the government. The media's job is to protect the public from the government.

That is exactly what the media exists to do. Sometimes it's mistaken for an agent of the opposition. This is not surprising because opposition leaders often speak the language of the people, just as the press does. This convergence of responsibilities is what often unsettles governments.

For instance, in 2015, then-President Uhuru Kenyatta castigated the media's relentless criticism of his government. At one of the public meetings, Uhuru, visibly irritated, described newspapers as mere wrapping papers for meat. He felt the press was being used by the opposition to malign his administration.

On the other hand, the Opposition camp led by Raila Odinga praised the press for exposing corruption in government.

However, in 2017, the same Opposition asked Kenyans to boycott Daily Nation, The Standard newspaper and Capital FM over alleged bias in their reporting. In 2023, similar calls were made against The Star newspaper.

When President William Ruto was declared the winner of the 2022 Presidential race, he openly took a swipe at Citizen TV's political affairs reporter Stephen Letoo, who had extensively covered Raila Odinga's presidential campaigns. He satirically asked other reporters to pass his greetings to Letoo and Citizen TV. To him, the media outlet and the reporter had covered him unfairly. His then deputy, Rigathi Gachagua, was more critical of the media. He called on Kenyans to boycott the Daily Nation newspaper for "writing lies," warning that the media was yet to see the worst.

However, since his impeachment, Gachagua has become the biggest defender of media freedom in Kenya.

Ruto is still feeling the heat of the media's criticism, and he can't hide his frustrations anymore.

Last week, he went on a ranting spree, castigating the Standard Newspaper for negative coverage. He accused the publication of "greed and extortionism" and dared it to do the worst.

The Standard Media responded to the president's public outbursts with a hard-hitting statement, vowing to continue exposing the rot in his government.

The media house accused the government of withholding KSh 1.2 billion owed to the company purposely to frustrate its operations.

This clash between the media and the government is unhealthy and undesired, but sometimes necessary to test the limits of our democracy

Way forward

From the above examples, the question that needs to be answered is: how should the media deal with public expectations, especially during the electioneering period? Should it bow to public pressure or resist?

Scholars across the globe have extensively studied and discussed this longstanding tension between media, politics and public perception. Still, none has come up with a universally agreed-upon approach to reconciling them.

Prof. Marjorie Hershey of Indiana University argues that perceived media bias, especially on political matters, is mostly in the eyes of the beholder. In her analysis of President Donald Trump’s media coverage, Hershey noted that Republicans and Democrats only spotted bias in articles that favoured the other party. If an article was tilted in their favour, they saw it as unbiased.

"Many people define 'bias' as 'anything that doesn’t agree with me.' It’s not hard to see why,” she observed.

Secondly, she argued that the media is plural in nature, yet research questions are often framed as though the media is a single outlet. For instance, she argued that in America, there are over 900 daily newspaper publications, numerous radio stations, network TV, cable TV, blogs, websites and social media platforms. All these outlets, Hershey argued, do not take the same perspective on any given issue. Respondents may give feedback based on their interaction with a specific media outlet, not all of them.

Prof Hershey observed that while a survey may point the media to a certain direction, editors should critically examine the impact of following that route. They must ask themselves what the implications could be. They must seek to establish whether the feedback is genuine or is influenced by respondents’ own political biases.

This is critical, especially in Kenya, where politics is highly emotive and divisive. Politicians often profile the media depending on whether the coverage favours them. Those who accuse the media of bias quickly change their stance when the story is tilted to favour their side.

A comparison between MCK's 2024 and 2025 findings on the question of how the media covers the government confirms these fears. In 2024, the survey found that 73:6% of respondents felt the media covered the government unfairly, while only 26.4% endorsed the media coverage as fair. In the 2025 survey, 56% approved media coverage of government as fair, while 46% had a contrary opinion. The stark difference is telling.

Away from these conflicting perceptions, the media's role is cast in stone. It does not exist to report positively or negatively but to present news of public interest accurately and ethically.

The press does not owe any entity a debt of positive coverage.

A bold and independent press that neither bows to public pressure nor state intimidation is good for society and democracy.

While journalists are accountable to the public, they should not surrender their independence and professional obligations to the same public.

The public can influence, but it should not dictate to the media what is fair and what is not because, as Prof Hershey puts it, even the public itself is biased on certain emotive topics like politics.

The media is therefore expected to respect public opinion and expectations, but remain true to the dictates and principles of ethical reporting.

Prof Hershey concluded that political bias in the media doesn’t necessarily threaten democracy.

According to her, the media’s true bias that tinkers with the tenets of democracy and the public's right to information lies in commercial interests and editorial policies that prioritise viral content over informative content.

As we head into the 2027 General Election, journalists and media practitioners must appreciate that times have changed and make necessary adjustments, but retain independence and authority in news reporting. Journalism must continue speaking truth to power without fear or favour.

Source: TUKO.co.ke

Reporting originally appeared via TUKO. Read the full source for additional context.