State directive on advertising was meant to cripple independent media

The High Court ruling quashing the government’s directive to restrict all public sector advertising to the State-owned Kenya Broadcasting Corporation (KBC) is a landmark victory for press freedom and economic fairness in the media industry. The directive, issued a year ago by Broadcasting PS Edward Kisiang’ani, sought to deny independent media houses crucial advertising revenue. It was not just an attack on editorial independence but also an attempt to economically cripple the independent media. The ruling reversing the directive reaffirms a fundamental truth: Press freedom is not just an editorial ideal - it is also a commercial imperative.

Press freedom is the lifeblood of democracy. It is enshrined in Article 34 of the Kenyan Constitution, which guarantees freedom of the media, and is echoed in global frameworks such as Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Sustainable Development Goals, particularly Goal 16 emphasises the need for access to information, transparency, and accountable institutions - values that a free and independent media upholds.

Restricting government advertising only to state-owned media undermines these principles by creating an uneven playing field where private media houses struggle to survive financially. Had the policy shift remained unchallenged, it would have exacerbated the already difficult operating environment for the media enterprises, leading to more layoffs, a weakening in investigative journalism, and an overall decline in media pluralism - factors that weaken democracy.

Advertising revenue is the primary financial bread and butter of independent media enterprises. Being one of the largest spenders in advertising, the government, by diverting all its spending to a single state broadcaster funded by taxpayers, it would have created an unfair commercial advantage. This move contradicts global best practices where governments distribute advertising fairly across multiple media outlets, ensuring a balanced and independent press ecosystem.

Media theorists such as Dennis McQuail have argued that financial sustainability is essential for press independence. When a media house lacks revenue, it becomes susceptible to editorial manipulation and compromises, reliance on external funding, or even self-censorship to appease government interests. This weakens the Fourth Estate’s role as a watchdog over state institutions and promoters of public interest.

Countries with strong democracies, such as Germany and the United States, ensure that government advertising is equitably distributed to foster diversity in media ownership and perspective. The UK's Advertising Standards Authority also regulates public sector advertising to prevent state influence over editorial policies.

Kenya has a vibrant and highly competitive media industry. Major outlets have for years played a critical role in holding power to account. However, they rely on a mix of government, corporate, and public advertising to sustain operations.

The now-overturned directive was a clear attempt at economic censorship, a trend seen in other nations where governments use financial muscle to silence critical journalism. Similar strategies have been employed in countries like Hungary and Tanzania where state control over media advertising has led to the decline of independent journalism.

Government should not attempt to muzzle the press through advertising cuts because this tactic undermines media sustainability. Private media houses need revenue to pay journalists, invest in investigative journalism, and sustain operations.

Democracy thrives on diverse voices. By channeling resources to one state-owned outlet, the government reduces media pluralism by limiting divergent perspectives, leading to one-sided narratives.

Such a move also violates fair business practices– it is anti-competition, contravening Kenya’s fairtrade principles and the Competition Act, which prohibits unfair business practices that disadvantage private enterprises.

Governments are obligated to provide information to all citizens, not just those who consume state-controlled media.