Setting the Agenda for Conflict: Newspaper framing of referendum campaigns on the proposed constitution in referendum campaigns on the proposed constitution in Kenya

Abstract

Campaigns for the 2005 referendum on the proposed new constitution in Kenya was marked by violence, acrimony and claims of media bias. This study set out to investigate those claims and to establish whether the media were biased as claimed. Although the results seem to support claims that Nation was pro-Banana and Standard pro-Orange, the media were neutral in general terms. Both newspapers made a reasonable attempt harmonise the headlines and content of neutral stories. The percentage of neutral headl ines and neutral content was almost equal and balanced. The attempt to remain impartial was, however, watered down by cartoons that favoured Orange over the Banana side. On conflict, there was little evidence of attempts to frame headlines to reflect orientation towards or against any side. In the 213 headlines depicting conflict, the newspapers did not play up conflict stories above the others. Only 27% of the sampled headlines depicted conflict. Although the study shows that the two mainstream newspapers did not set the agenda for conflict, it does not mean that they did not playa part in it. However, there was evidence of sensationalised stories - those with headlines that hyped certain emotions without supporting content. In that sense, it may be said that the newspapers fuelled the conflict during the referendum-campaigns. In terms of placement, 30 of the conflict headlines in both newspapers were on Page 1 stories. Of the 58 headlines depicting conflict, 51 % had the highest priority. Conflict stories had only 1 % .greater visibility over non-conflict stories. Thus the two newspapers did not set the agenda for conflict through placement of conflict stories.