Kangema FM went on air in 2008, and is located in a rural area in the central region of Kenya.
It is a project of Kenya’s Meteorological department, but staffed by community members drawn from the surrounding areas. Apart from the funding from the Kenya Meteorological Department, the station generates income from announcements and local advertisements. As of 2015, Kangema FM was considering a partnership with the current governor of the area, but that had not been confirmed. The station also acts as an information centre for the community about government services and initiatives. This includes contacting other government ministries to get information and resource people to inform the community about for instance best seeds to plant a particular season, how to stop livestock disease, and where to go in case of lost livestock. Kangema FM focuses on farming and climate information as a way to improve the region’s food security. This is particularly because the region is prone to mudslides which have in the past taken lives and destroyed property. The station receives daily text messages from KMD with the weather forecast, and broadcasts these to the community.
It also receives seasonal forecasts via email and airs them. In addition to their journalistic training, the station staff are trained in reading of weather instruments which are located at the station. They observe and record weather patterns several times a day and send the data to the KMD, which uses the data to compile forecasts. In case of heavy rains that could lead to mudslides, the station warns the community and recommends mitigative steps to take, for those who live in mudslide-prone areas.
The station manager terms the station’s relationship with the community as a ‘partnership’ and describes it as follows: “The community will provide the staff and the programmes for the community; the Kenya Meteorological Services will provide equipment and weather content”
(KJ 2014). The station manager is a meteorologist by training, seconded from the Kenya Meteorological Department (KMD). He argues that despite KMD’s ownership of the license, the station is a community station because of the involvement of staffers drawn from the community in the station’s day to day running and generation of content. The station staff are paid as government casual workers, through the Meteorological Department. The station begun with any willing even if untrained youth available, but by 2014, six years later, it had succeeded in implementing a policy of recruiting only those with training in mass communication. Thus, the majority of the station’s staff are holders of a diploma in mass communication.
At this station, the hierarchies are clear and tasks are clearly demarcated, as in any government office. Of the three stations, this one is where the interns are most closely monitored and given specific tasks daily, as are the producers. Interns are assigned specific duties, often as partners to the already existing producers, and the onus is on the producer to train the intern on the job by sharing tasks with them. The intern goes on air with the producer, and accompanies them to the field or is sent out to the field to file stories from the producer’s beat. The internship lasts for three months, with the opportunity of extension, if there is still need for the intern’s services and no new interns are coming in. Just as all the producers are expected to be promptly at the station before their show is due to begin, the interns are also expected to be timely each day and to fulfill all assigned duties. The Kangema FM content production and station management hierarchy are outlined in Figure 3.
As illustrated in Figure 3, there are clear reporting lines with each person aware of whom they are answerable to. The communication officers are the producers assigned to specific studio shows, while the information officers are the producers who are mainly engaged in news gathering, compilation and presentation. The latter are also seconded to specific shows, should the main studio host be absent. However, the producers who are show hosts are not exempt from news gathering. When they are not in studio, they are expected to be engaged in news collection and compilation.
Figure 3: Kangema FM Organisational Structure
The station manager explains the management structures put in place to ensure community participation in the station’s management and content:
…..the head of the community is the area MP, because he is a community leader. He selects or appoints someone to be the chair of the board of the community radio…. In this board we have the provincial administration represented, we have the department (Meteorological) represented and we have other areas; gender, and other stakeholders, farmers groups…so they are all represented in that committee, to ensure that all issues are covered in the station in the broadcasts. (KJ 2014)
Station manager
Station Administrator
Receptionist, Cleaning staff, Security
Programmes Manager
Technician
Information Officers (5)
Communication Officers (5)
Interns
CONTENT PRODUCTION TEAM TEAM
Local Management Committee (LMC) KANGEMA FM ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE
From this structure, the top-down nature of station management is evident. The Member of Parliament is elected by the people in the area, but is at the same time clearly a member of the bigger governmental power structure. That this person has the power to appoint the chair of the radio station management board raises questions about how impartial the station management can be, even with representatives from all sections of the community as outlined by the station manager.
The radio station views itself as a community station and operates under a community radio license, but the government’s influence on the station’s management is also apparent in, for instance, the hiring procedure. The station management advertises on the radio and through posters at the local chiefs’ offices that they have a vacancy, receives applications, vets them to ensure all applicants meet the minimum requirements, and then conducts several rounds of interviews, the last of which is attended by a representative from the Kenya Meteorological Department’s head office. The selected community members are then put on the government payroll as casual workers, and are termed as ‘volunteers’. This management and hiring structure positions the station more as a government than as a community station: with the funding from government sources, making use of government channels for sourcing and conveying information, and the highest managing board being composed of government-appointed people. Nevertheless, in view of the constant battle for financial sustainability that community radio stations in Kenya face, taking on the community members as government casual workers and thus ensuring a regular income for them each month seems to provide a solution in this context. One positive aspect of this arrangement is the low turnover of staff, with, according to the records, only three having left by 2014, six years after the station began.
This offers stability and continuity for the station. However, despite the continuity offered, the extent of government involvement in the station raises questions about the station’s editorial independence, given that the station would not air information perceived to be critical of the government. This is reflected in the station’s claim to avoid overt ‘political’ and ‘religious’
content. The station manager describes the station’s stance as follows:
We are non-religious and non-political… That does not mean we do not have prayers in the station…every morning we have prayers and we also have some programmes on counselling based on the Bible, because we are very much concerned about the morals of the community. Non-political does not mean that we do not broadcast political issues…. Non-political in a sense that you cannot come and tell who you are and why we should vote for you. We cannot discuss issues of who is to be elected, or why should one prefer this one to the other one. But we can talk of the policies of the parties, or
what the parties expect to do for the country. And you see when you talk of parties it is all the political parties that are in the contest. (KJ 2014)
This quote describes the station’s view of itself as an extension of the developmental government, charged with performing an oversight role in the community, which includes having the right to guide the people in terms of morals. As summarised by the station manager,
“we are a non-profit organization where we educate, inform and entertain the community unlike other commercial stations who make profits” (WW 2014). The station is positioned as a top-down communicator to the community, rather than acting as a place where dialogic communication can take place, as community broadcasting is envisioned to be. The station’s focus on weather and agricultural issues and deliberate avoidance of overt political content positions it as different from commercial stations and from the state broadcaster. However, with this set-up, the community’s voice is muzzled when it comes to political discussions in the mediated public sphere created by the radio. It brings into question whether the station is truly a voice for the community, or instead, a localized government voice. It is however interesting to note that despite its stated avoidance of religious content, the station not only begins its morning broadcasts with prayers, but also airs a religious Christian programme each afternoon.79
Community access, interaction and participation
Regarding community access to the radio station as an aspect of participation (Carpentier 2012), there is a stated openness for the community to do so, but the parameters of access are firmly defined by the station management. For instance, one cannot walk into the station at any time without having a clearly defined purpose. This was apparent from comments such as the one below, during group interviews with community members: “We should be allowed to come to the station. Because many times one wants to come to the station, but when you come you are told no, come at another time. You see the issue that you wanted to share with the station you won’t share it quickly?” (Interviewee 8, Group 2, Kangema, 26.11.14)
This comment was made in the context of an issue that emerged from group discussions: that some of the fan group members had been trying to schedule an appointment with the station manager for several weeks but had not been successful so far.80 This suggests that the station
79 This is discussed further in the chapter about content of the radio stations
80 Apparently, the fan groups were active when the station commenced, but over time the members had lost interest in them, since they felt that there was no support from the station. They currently operate as self-help
is not truly accessible to the audience. Indeed, it is the station management (and by extension the government) that sets the parameters for community access to the station, pointing to unequal power relations between station management and the community members. This can be viewed as a ‘manipulated participation’ (Bordenave 2006), in which there is an invitation from the government to the citizenry to participate in government projects, but no real freedom for the latter to participate in the specific ways that they would wish. Apart from this postponement, the station’s location is also a likely factor influencing whether community members feel free to walk in or not. The radio station is situated in the local police post’s compound, which is adjacent to the previous Member of Parliament’s office. This location exudes government authority. As such, it would be more intimidating than inviting to community members. As it turns out, the idea of the station as an intimidating government location is ‘by design’, because, according to the station management, the station houses precious government communication resources that should not be accessed by just anyone.81
From this, one sees contradicting logics at work. On one hand, the station was mooted by KMD for top-down communication to the community especially about weather patterns. On the other hand, since it holds a community radio license, the station is required by law to be participatory space accessible by all community members. However, broadcast legislation does not specify what exactly participation entails. If one goes by the three levels of participation suggested by Carpentier (2012): access to the station, interaction with station staff, or being equal partners in decision making, it is not clear which, if any, the broadcast legislation has in mind when stating that community radios should be characterised by community participation. The station is thus in the position of trying to meet two contrasting ideas: top-down communication and being a participatory space, the latter of which does not have clearly specified parameters. To meet the ‘community participation’ requirement, Kangema FM has a management board consisting of community representatives, and has hired local community members as staff.
However, it still considers itself to be a government body and runs as one, characterised by hierarchy and limited access to the premises. Even though it is supposed to be a space in which the community can participate, the station’s location designates it as more of a government space than a community space.
groups without much input from the station. At the time of the research, the fan groups were trying to relaunch themselves and rebuild a closer relationship with the station.
81 As explained by the station manager during fieldwork in October 2016
In this case, the station acts as an ‘invited space’ (Cornwall, 2004) - one that did not naturally occur in the community, but was created for a specific purpose. Often, invited spaces are designed for a purpose that did not previously exist in the community system, and the participants are expected to act and communicate in ways that fulfil these purposes, despite not having prior experience in the same. They therefore draw upon their prior experiences and expectations in figuring out the ways to act in this new space. Invited spaces are characterised by unclear rules and improvisation; “Any newly-created space quickly comes to be filled with expectations, relationships, institutions and meanings that have been brought from elsewhere, and which impinge upon how that space comes to be experienced” (Cornwall 2004, 85).
The invited space of Kangema FM calls on all involved to participate in it, both the initiators and those in whose community the space has been created. Both the community members and the station management then draw on their repertoire of past experiences to figure out how to participate in the new space. For instance, Kenyan government involvement in community-level initiatives usually consists of development projects thought up by the government or local leaders, and primarily managed by them, even when they outsource implementation to other local, non-government actors. The government manages the finances and makes the most important decisions on the project. These traits are apparent for this radio station. Although the station was designed as a community media project, the management style is centralised and government-managed, with minimal community involvement in decision-making. This harks back to the lower rungs of Arnstein’s ladder of participation, where participation does not involve equal decision-making power for all actors.
Indeed, the community does not engage much in the station’s management process, and perhaps also, with the station’s management personnel as noted during group interviews. When asked about participation possibilities in content or in running of the station group responses included: “The main means of participation is through making calls or sending texts to the shows…” (Intervewee 2, Group 1, Kanoreero, 26.11.2014) and “There are no other opportunities to participate in the station; if the station could organize events for fans and attend fan events whenever they arise this would enhance cohesion.” (Interviewee 4, Group 3, Kanoreero, 26.11.2014).
From the last section of the comment, there is a perceived lack of closeness with the station, with community members feeling a need for ‘more cohesion’. However, the station manager
and staff indicate that community members are free to walk into the station at any time.
Audience members in separate group interviews recommended the provision of different means of access to the station, mostly revolving around the provision of alternative means of communication or another location through which they could raise their concerns, such as agents or sub-county offices, in which to give their announcements and greeting cards without having to physically go to the station. This apparent reluctance to visit the station underlines the intimidation that the community feels in relation to the station. As well, there seem to be community mores in place which discourage participation especially in giving opinions about station management and content. Responses during a group interview with a fan group in the community offers a pointer to community thinking about the station. For instance, when asked which programmes they disliked in Kangema FM, community members gave obviously guarded responses:
Let me say there is none, because to be a fan is to be happy with what there is.
(Interviewee 1, Group 2, Kangema, 26.11.14)
…we say that this one is ours which we gave birth to ourselves; there is no time you will give birth to a child, and then you despise her/him. (Inteviewee 4, Group 1, Kiereini, 26.11.14)
Yet, this same community at the same time expressed that they lacked the opportunity to truly express themselves to the station:
…it is like going to an office, let’s say like the headman of this area, you can’t go to him and tell him some things, because it will look like you are interfering in his work.
In the same way, now a local station like this one, for us to interfere [is inappropriate].
You see like now, you have come [to ask for our opinions], that’s when we would be free to say some things. But to take yourself there to say such things now that is playing politics. (Interviewee 3, Group 3, Kanoreero, 26.11.2014)
These comments point to an unwillingness to criticize the station, not overtly due to its political ties, but based on perceived ‘family’ ties with it. It seems that the station, even when primarily answerable to the government, is taken as the community’s ‘child’. However, from the latter quote, the lack of criticism seems grounded not so much in honest opinion as in wanting to maintain peaceful relations with the station. The station is perceived to be in a position of authority and thus there is an effort to maintain friendly relations with it – a relationship of conviviality – even while there is dissatisfaction with the access possibilities provided. As indicated above, community members do not have the perception that they can walk into the station at any time that they wish, despite the station manager’s and staff’s statements of the
opposite. As well, there is a reluctance to express criticism of the station, even if one has such
opposite. As well, there is a reluctance to express criticism of the station, even if one has such