Modernisation and structural imperialism theories of communication have played a role in the growth of capitalism through the propagation of imperial powers’ competitive economic and military objectives (Thussu, 2006). Until now, communication is an instrument of power for the ruling class as has been noted in the patterns of ownership and production of media and communication organisations. This rings true in the Kenyan context where the upper class, who own the majority of media powerhouses, continue to rule the masses with the backdrop of the growing disparity between the rich and the poor.
With reference to structural imperialism, the said ruling class in the developing world are supported by the elite in the western world. This is because the interests of the elite of the centre correspond with that of the elite in the periphery. Therefore, the centre (North) maintains its political domination over the periphery by backing its elite. Kenya’s market serves as an instrument of political control and exploitation for the west and most recently, China (Ndege, 2009). This has deteriorated the country’s national debt, hence, exacerbating income disparity and poverty levels among the population (2009).
Modernisation in international communication was a proponent of the transfer of economic and political models of the west to the third world (Thussu, 2006). As mass media was seen as the key to the transformation of traditional societies, Kenya’s adoption of the western model of societal attributes has led to cultural dilution. The acquisition of English as a primary language, western clothing, storytelling and religious behaviour ushered in the decline of our traditional culture. This has contributed to a cultural identity crisis in the youth and the decline of creativity in storytelling which has had a domino effect on the lack of original and ‘uniquely Kenyan’ content in mass media programs.
According to the modernisation theory, mass media can raise the aspiration of citizens of developing countries from defeatism and fear of change (Thussu, 2006). Although this rings true in the context of the digital age whereby the ease of access to information has greatly contributed to democracy, it is a stretch to think that the level of media development directly correlates with societal development (Rogers, 1962). The definition of development from the western perspective failed to discern that development and the overall improvement of life for the public population are dependent on the equitable distribution of wealth for the public good (Thussu, 2006). Drawing from structural imperialism, this has not been the case because, globalisation has had adverse effects on labour markets in Kenya (Manda & Sen, 2004). The inequality in earnings between the rich and the poor begs the question, who does modernisation serve? Consequently, the disparity contributes to the growing sense of citizen apathy, especially on the part of the middle class. Resulting in a decline in civic participation, the silence and ripple effect it has had on public services such as the dismal state of the transport and health sector has grossly affected the lower class citizens. Heavy reliance on the private sector to provide public services has decreased accessibility to essential services.
Communication as a malady of imperialism not only reinforces the duplication of economic activities but also the dependency relationship in the flow of information from the centre to the periphery (Thussu, 2006). Like other developing countries, Kenya receives news events from the lens of the developed media system at the centre. The invasion of Somalia by the Kenya Defense Forces was covered in the same light as the invasion of Iraq by the USA military. The similarities in the two cases go beyond the insurgency groups they purport to fight. The media does not cover the economic benefits of these ‘insurgency’ wars and who it actually serves.
The heavy influence of the one-way flow of information from the South to the North aggravated the negative effects on the economy and political climate of developing countries. The MacBride reports’ aim to end this model of dependence by minimising the power and control of dominant communication institutions is commendable. However, to escape the grip of the ruling elite, the Kenyan mass media has a long way to go. It could be argued that there is a plurality of sources and channels of information but the ownership and sponsorship of the majority of these channels go back to the ruling class of the country, who serve the interests of the ruling elite of the centre. Secondly, freedom of access to information and all communications professionals has recently taken a downward turn. Was the self-censorship of the 2013 election a precaution to reduce voter tension or was it a directive of the ruling power to limit the flow of information? Fortunately, the new digital age enables the decentralisation of information. Kenyans have been able to voice their concerns and hold the authority accountable. They have been visibly criticising the ruling elite on social networks, which is a step towards better living standards in the country. This can be seen in the recent shut down of the popular club The Alchemist after Kenyans spoke up on the popular social network, Twitter, against the racial segregation caught on camera.
References
Manda, D. K., & Kunal Sen. (2004). THE LABOUR MARKET EFFECTS OF GLOBALIZATION IN KENYA. Journal of International Development, 16, 29–43. DOI: 10.1002/jid.1061
Ndege, P. O. (2009, August 6). Colonialism and its Legacies in Kenya. Retrieved 6 1, 2022, from https://africanphilanthropy.issuelab.org/resources/19699/19699.pdf
Rogers, E. (1976). Communication and development: the passing of a dominant paradigm. Communication Research, 3(2), 213-40.
Thussu, D. K. (2006). International communication: continuity and change. Bloomsbury Academic.
Be First to Comment