By Marcus Okeny
In Kampala, conversations about mental health are becoming more open, yet stigma remains strong. As a journalism student, the way you choose to report these stories can either reinforce harmful stereotypes or help shift public attitudes. Local media still sometimes frame mental illness through crime, witchcraft, or personal failure. Sensational headlines about “mad people” or detailed descriptions of suicide methods appear too often and can cause real harm.

Responsible reporting requires deliberate choices. Instead of focusing only on crisis, students can highlight recovery stories from local communities, such as Makerere, Ntinda, or Namuwongo. Using respectful language, such as “died by suicide” rather than “committed suicide,” and avoiding graphic details follows international best practices while remaining culturally sensitive.

When reporting, including contacts for local support services, such as those offered by Butabika National Referral Mental Hospital or community organisations, can turn a story into a potential lifeline.

Uganda’s context adds unique challenges. Limited mental health professionals, strong religious and traditional beliefs, and economic pressures shape how people understand distress. And a journalism student who takes time to understand these layers produces more accurate and compassionate work.

Interviewing people with lived experience, consulting local experts, and resisting the urge to simplify complex realities are essential skills.

The stories told in Kampala’s newsrooms influence how families talk about depression, anxiety, and trauma. Journalism students who learn to report mental health with care are not only protecting their audiences; they are helping build a more informed and supportive society.

The writer, Marcus Okeny, is a final-year Media Studies student at Kampala International University.

By Marcus Okeny
For a journalism student in Kampala, the classroom is only the beginning. The real syllabus is the city itself: its traffic congestion on Jinja Road, its political tensions in the city centre, its economic grind and sudden violence.

One day you are sent to cover a protest, the next a land eviction in the suburbs, and the next the aftermath of a boda-boda crash on the Northern Bypass.

You arrive with a notebook and a deadline, and you leave with a story. And sometimes, with something heavier.

Unlike seasoned reporters, students are still building the emotional tools to carry what they witness. The risk is secondary trauma. It stays with you after you interview a survivor of domestic violence in Kawempe, after you sit with a family whose home in Bwaise has been submerged for the third time this year, and also after you spend an afternoon with street children in downtown Kampala trying to explain why they left home.

You are taught to be accurate, objective, and publishable, while also being a full-time student. Many are juggling a part-time job, navigating high data costs and transport fares, with little left for rest, let alone counselling. And then there is the silence around it.

In Uganda’s fiercely competitive media industry, admitting you are struggling can feel like a career risk. Our culture too still often reads emotional vulnerability as weakness, especially for young men.

Although University counselling services exist, they are underused and remembered only when many a student’s situation has escalated to a critical point. In turn, many journalism students suffer even more quietly, afraid that speaking up will affect their grades, their internship, or their chance at a byline.

Protecting your mind is not a luxury; it is part of the craft. The Kampala that needs its stories told deserves journalists who can stay long enough to tell them well.

In summary, journalism students should learn to practise self-care while still in school by recognising the early signs of burnout, setting boundaries on graphically disturbing assignments, debriefing with trusted peers and lecturers, and normalising professional help.

Resilience is not about feeling nothing. It is about learning how to carry the story without letting the story break you.

The writer, Marcus Okeny, is a final-year Media Studies student at Kampala International University.

The unpopular view is that legacy media can fabricate narratives so effectively that audiences accept claims that are not true. Vocal media critics such as Elon Musk have often described regular TV audiences as living in an “alternate reality.”

While it may sound biased or blunt, it begs questions for anyone who relies on established news outlets: how often do you question what you are being told, even when it comes from a source you trust? Basic questions like who benefits if I believe this, and what is missing, are a good starting point.

When public image and perception outweigh transparency and accountability, reputable media houses can find themselves pressured to serve the commercial or political interests of large entities, often their biggest advertising customers. Simply put, it’s the airing of paid, biased, fake, or propagandistic content. While it is understandable that some media are struggling to stay afloat, you don’t have to fall for misinformation.

Here’s how to tell if your trusted news source is publishing paid or propaganda content on behalf of governments, powerful organisations, or the elite to conceal the truth.

#1. Same Headline and Content
It’s common for trusted media houses to report on the same story, but offer different perspectives or delivery styles. It becomes a red flag, however, when multiple outlets push the same narrative as if it were written by a single hand. In many cases, these drafts are directly sent to newsrooms by external entities.

“If you see the same headline across multiple outlets, someone is paying for it.”

Typical warning signs include identical publishing times, the same recycled photos, and word-for-word content, often appearing on affiliated news outlets within the same trusted media group. This is paid content designed to drive a specific narrative, not always false, but to divert public attention from an underlying issue. These narratives are then hammered home through repeated coverage over several days or weeks.

For instance, when Politician A is under investigation for misusing public resources (let’s say, iron sheets), legacy media outlets, and sometimes even social media influencers, often pivot toward the surrounding controversy. Instead of the theft, the focus is turned to a “distraction” story, such as a long-standing personal feud between Politician B and Politician A. By shifting the spotlight, the real issue is gradually buried.

In a country like Uganda, where only a few major media houses dominate the flow of information, it becomes easier for large advertisers such as the government, telecoms, banks, and religious entities to pull the strings on how some stories are reported, aligning coverage with their interests rather than independent reporting. This is how paid narratives operate behind the scenes.

#2. Selective Reporting & Last-Minute Coverage
Selective reporting often begins with silence. A widely followed story is dominating online discussions, independent platforms, and public conversations, yet some trusted media houses remain eerily quiet, as if the story does not exist. Then, coverage suddenly appears, but only to highlight outcomes favourable to the influential individuals, brands, or institutions involved.

This tactic is particularly common in high-profile court cases. After weeks of damaging hearings and allegations going unreported, the media finally breaks the silence, covering a single moment of the story to shift perception to benefit one side.

By narrowing the coverage on a minor win for the defence while burying months of negative context, they effectively flip the public script. Such patterns are a clear indicator that someone is paying or indirectly influencing your trusted news source on when or whether to report certain topics.

There was a time when radio was all the rage in Uganda. Many Kampala-goers couldn’t wait to tune in to their favourite presenters, laugh at the latest jokes on morning shows, or get caught up in the banter of evening dedications. My favourite has always been Capital and X FM, as with many youths of that time. But today? Not so much.

Streaming platforms like Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and YouTube have changed how young people consume audio content. Radios are slowly becoming obsolete for the modern Ugandan youth, who now turn to podcasts and online music platforms. That said, podcasts haven’t caught on in Uganda the way they have in countries like the U.S. or South Africa. So, the big question is: How can you start a podcast in Uganda that people actually listen to, with pro tips from Top Ugandan podcasts?

The Rise of Podcasts Globally, But Not Quite Locally
Globally, podcasting has exploded. From crime thrillers to self-help shows, there’s a podcast for nearly every niche. In Uganda, however, the growth has been slower. A few urban creators and media-savvy youth are catching on, but for the majority, the idea of “subscribing to a podcast” is still foreign.

Why? A combination of high internet costs in Uganda, limited awareness, and cultural disconnect. But where there’s a gap, there’s opportunity. Uganda has a vibrant, youthful population and a growing internet user base. The potential is huge for anyone willing to meet Ugandans where they are, with the right content, tone, and accessibility.

How to Create a Podcast That Ugandans Will Listen To

#1. Know Your Audience: It Starts with Understanding the Ugandan Youth
Uganda’s population is among the youngest in the world, with over 78% under the age of 35. These young people are the primary consumers of digital content. But they’re also diverse, ranging from university students in Kampala to Boda Boda riders who stream YouTube and TikTok during breaks.

Ask yourself:
What do Ugandan youths care about?
What keeps them up at night?
What makes them laugh, cry, or think?

Popular themes for a successful podcast targeting Ugandans:

Entrepreneurship and hustle culture, because quite frankly, everyone is trying to secure “the bag”
Personal development and mental health, especially among young youth grappling with the themes of adulthood; University students facing stress, older youth with family woes, to name a few.
Love and relationships in the digital age: This is especially popular among university-going youth who find relationships a battle zone with the modern trend of promiscuity, money-chasing-dames and lies when it comes to love. Check out Money or Love in a Relationship: Ugandan Women (& Men) Chasing Cash Over Romance.
Politics and civic education: This is one of the major selling niches for Ugandans. We like to know what’s going on, the state of affairs in our country and all such stories.
Ugandan pop culture, music, and celebrity gossip.
Diaspora experiences and migration stories.

#2. Language Matters: Speak Their Language.
English may be the official language, but podcasts that weave in Luganda, Swahili, or other regional dialects instantly feel more familiar, more Ugandan. Many Ugandan podcast listeners report feeling more connected when the host “sounds like us.” It’s not about slang for the sake of it; it’s about cultural grounding. Humour, metaphors, and idioms go a long way to connect audiences to the program.

#3. Production: Don’t Let Bad Audio Kill Your Good Content
Ugandans might forgive a fuzzy photo, but they won’t stick around for an echo-filled, poorly recorded podcast. Luckily, podcasting doesn’t need to break the bank. If you’re on a budget:

Use a smartphone and a good external mic; Rode Shure and Rode Microphones are recommended and available on Jiji and Jumia Uganda.
Record in a quiet room with no echoes—closets and cars actually work well!
Use free editing tools like Audacity or GarageBand
You can also book studio space from local outfits like Nzou or Motiv if you want that professional touch.

#4. Keep It Real: Authenticity Over Perfection
People listen to podcasts for real voices and relatable stories, not polished PR speech as if you are trying to sell them the next Capital Chicken Scheme. Whether you’re talking about surviving heartbreak or starting a chapati stall, your audience wants honesty. Interviews with everyday Ugandans, the hustlers, students, and creatives, can be just as powerful, if not more than, celebrity features on a publicity stunt.

#5. Distribute Wisely: Use Platforms Ugandans Actually Use
You could be producing gold, but if it’s hiding on a platform no one is using, you’ll be your only fan. In Uganda, this is tricky business as we hop from one trending platform to the next. But here are a few long-standing platforms. In Uganda:

YouTube is king. Post video or audio versions there.
Afro Mobile is growing in popularity, especially for Ugandan content.
Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and Anchor (now Spotify for Podcasters) are still essential for reaching beyond.
Promote heavily on TikTok, Twitter (X), Instagram, and WhatsApp Statuses.

#6. Make it Interactive: Don’t Just Talk at People
Let your audience guide you. Run polls, take suggestions, invite feedback, or go live and engage in real-time. Podcasts like The MishMash Podcast and The Joel Ssenyonyi Podcast have built loyal listeners partly because they stay engaged and relevant. Any event or activity that makes you feel a part of it will stick with your mind. I remember the first time my call to an X-FM program went through…memorable.

#7. Monetise Smartly: Make That Mic Pay You Back
Podcasting doesn’t have to be a passion project forever, like most social media on the internet; a podcast can be monetised.

Offer ad slots to local businesses.
Introduce a Patreon or Buy Me a Coffee account.
Sell branded merch, things like T-shirts, mugs, etc.
Partner with NGOs or organisations looking for storytelling platforms.

#8. Be Consistent: Drop Those Episodes Like Clockwork
If you say weekly, mean it. Audiences build habits fast, and disappearing for months kills momentum. Plan your seasons and batch record episodes if needed. The goal is to make sure your audience builds a habit of tuning in to your podcasts. Take it like your radio program or your favourite TV show, if the program is an episode per week, you will tune in every week at that time to watch it.

Top Ugandan Podcasts: Who’s Doing It Right?
To understand what works in the Ugandan podcasting space, let’s look at some standout names:

The Ugandan Podcast.
Hosted by Ronnie Habasa, this show tackles a variety of topics including culture, business, and societal issues. The Ugandan Podcast’s success lies in its well-structured interviews, professional sound quality, and a tone that resonates with middle-class, urban Ugandans.

The MishMash Podcast.
Known for its humorous takes and casual vibe, this podcast discusses everyday life, trending stories, and cultural commentary. Its appeal comes from relatability and the easy banter between hosts.

The Joel Ssenyonyi Podcast
Hosted by the political spokesperson turned MP, this podcast provides analysis and insight into politics and leadership in Uganda.

Uganda may not be on the global podcasting map yet, but the signs are clear, and the appetite is growing. More youths are getting online, more creators are experimenting, and more listeners are discovering the beauty of on-demand audio content.

If you’re a creator thinking of starting a podcast in Uganda, don’t wait for perfection; start with honesty. Start local, stay consistent, because the truth is, Ugandans love stories, we just haven’t been served our own the right way yet.

Please consider joining our WhatsApp Channel

News coverage and distribution have come a long way since the early days when publishing houses like The NewVision, The Monitor, and the Kampala Gazette were the main sources of information. Today, the scene has grown to include WhatsApp groups, e-papers, X (formerly Twitter), and Reddit threads as sources of news and information. Despite the growing cases of misinformation and fraudulent posts tailored for engagement; Uganda’s youth consume digital news with vigor.  Thus, the question arises: Do they place more trust in online news than in traditional print media?

To better understand this, it’s essential to examine how information is gathered, presented, and consumed in each medium. Traditional print media, despite its speed challenges, has long been seen as a trusted source. A print story typically undergoes multiple stages of fact-checking, editorial reviews, and approvals before it reaches the reader. This layered approach to news reporting is aimed at ensure credibility, accuracy, and ethical journalism.

Digital platforms like X and Reddit, on the other hand, thrive on the immediacy of user-generated content, often bypassing the rigorous editing process that print media requires. Here, information can be shared as it happens, often accompanied by images and videos taken by eyewitnesses themselves on scene. While this raw, unfiltered access to unfolding events is a strength of these platforms, it also becomes a weakness. Digital news may be “closer” to the events, but it also has a higher likelihood of including inaccuracies.

One reason young Ugandans trust online news sources is their accessibility. Mobile phones and social media apps have made it possible to access information instantly, and this ease of access naturally draws us, a generation used to the rapid speed of the internet. According to a recent survey, around 80% of Ugandans ages 18-35 regularly access news through social media platforms while fewer are purchasing newspapers. And true, waiting for tomorrow’s print edition feels rather outdated for many young people who can get real-time updates in just a few clicks-and-scrolls through their feeds.

Moreover, another appeal of online news is in its ‘rawness.’ The unfiltered nature of digital reporting can feel more transparent, and more ‘real’ compared to the carefully curated and sometimes sanitized reports in national print publications. A citizen video on-site, describing what transpired as he tours around often feels more like an insider perspective, which resonates with many readers seeking a direct connection to the story.

The trade-off for this convenience, however, is the question of reliability. While traditional print media benefits from a structured verification process for its pieces, digital news sources do not always prioritize accuracy. Platforms like X, Reddit, and even the WhatsApp groups, where footage often leaks, rely heavily on user-generated content. On these platforms, the drive for engagement—through likes, shares, and views—often takes precedence over the pursuit of truth. In fact, research shows that sensationalized/polarizing news content is more likely to be amplified through algorithms on these platforms, ultimately spreading misinformation…not to mention AI deepfakes making rounds these days.

So why then, would these Gen Z Ugandans trust online news despite its vulnerabilities?

In part, it may come down to familiarity digital natives feel they are generally able to distinguish questionable content online and may even feel equipped to discern between trustworthy and untrustworthy sources. But the reality is that the overwhelming influx of online information, together we out pressure and need to ‘stay updated’ often blurs the lines between credible news and speculative or outright false stories.

Another factor driving young Ugandans towards digital news is the perception that traditional media might sometimes withhold and skew certain stories, especially those involving high-profile figures or sensitive political matters. When a newspaper or television station hesitates to address controversial topics, the assumption is often that digital platforms will fill in the gaps.

Digital platforms, especially those that allow real-time posting from the scene of an accident can offer a level of transparency that print media can not match.  For instance, during a public demonstration, an online witness account might provide a live-stream video, while traditional media will wait to confirm the details before publishing and at specific times when news is broadcast. This immediacy and perceived ‘freedom’ of online news make it a go-to source for young people eager for an unfiltered view of current events.

In the long run, the choice between print and digital media isn’t an all-or-nothing decision but rather viewed in the prospect that both mediums offer valuable insights, albeit with their own strengths and weaknesses.

To try and bridge the gap within the modern news landscape, native publications have established online alternatives that try to capture benefits from the online news part. Platforms like The NilePost, The Monitor, and The NewVision have all established their online publications, some even building mobile apps to capture the youth’s reliance on online coverage.

True, digital news offers speed and accessibility, but print still holds the mantle of rigorous reporting and editorial oversight. In the end, we continue to navigate both worlds, finding a balance between immediacy and accuracy.

Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter) has emerged as the leading news source in the world, surpassing legacy media outlets. Not long ago—depending on where you were and the extent of internet, social media, and smartphone penetration in your region—seeking information on current affairs or clarifying street rumors often required turning on that TV, tuning in to the radio, buying a local paper, or consulting a friend, neighbor, or workmate who had the opportunity to access TV, radio, or local papers.

Over time, these once-dominant news sources have gradually been overshadowed by social media, smartphones, and widespread internet use as people gravitate towards these modern platforms. Though one would say legacy media initially benefited from this shift—with their audiences listening to radio frequencies on phones, reading news on their websites, and even watching live news on TV Apps, and YouTube channels—social media platforms quietly expanded their influence. At first, they were largely seen as spaces for global connection until they became dependable sources for current affairs. How the rivalry began!

A short while ago, platforms like X, Facebook, and LinkedIn evolved into credible sources for clarifying a range of topics, from celebrity news to natural disasters. Social media’s reach and efficiency have given it a significant edge; for instance, users—in this case locals—can instantly report a wildfire long before legacy media reporters arrive on the scene. Similarly, if a false rumor circulates about the death of your favorite music artist, you are likely to check their official social media pages or browse trending topics to verify the truth—I bet you wouldn’t turn on the TV. This trend underscores X’s relevance as a source of timely information.

The rise of social media as a dominant news source can also be attributed to the bias and compromises that have plagued many corporate news media houses. Today, almost every institution and individual—from presidents and government bodies to schools, businesses, and private citizens—maintains a social media presence. Given this, it’s worth asking: where does news originate? While traditional media still holds value, the shift to social media as a primary source of news is undeniable.

Currently, X ranks #1 in the news category on the App Store, #2 in the social media category, and #6 on Wikipedia’s most visited websites in 2024, indicating a growing trust in the platform as a trusted source of news. Although reports such as the Reuters Institute Digital News Report suggest that TikTok has become a more significant source of news in some areas. It’s worth asking whether people truly rely on TikTok for verifying breaking news.

Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter, now X, driven by goals like “saving free speech,” among other reasons, has significantly transformed the platform. While some may prefer Jack Dorsey’s former administration, X has undeniably grown into a more dynamic platform. Features like X’s Community Notes, initially launched in 2021 during Jack Dorsey’s tenure for U.S. users, have been expanded and improved under Musk and CEO Linda Yaccarino, making the platform even more reliable for news and fact-checking. Community Notes not only verify facts but also analyze tweets; for instance, a recent tweet from Kenyan President William Ruto congratulating Donald Trump on his electoral victory as the 47th U.S. President was flagged as AI-generated—something traditional media might overlook. Such features create a community-based environment where facts are checked even amid free speech, minimizing biased and sensationalist reporting often seen in traditional media driven by traffic and profits.

Despite potential downsides to free speech and rapid news dissemination, X is playing a transformative role in the news sector. In summary, X is increasingly becoming a reliable alternative to legacy media for accessing and verifying news. More will be written about this topic in depth.

Uganda’s mainstream media landscape is now tasting the bitter Pangent mulondo-esque horrendous flavour of a government that lingers too long, wrestling with the shadows of control that stifle its little voice. Under the weight of an overreaching government, whose incumbency has kept the national debt growing, hence heavy taxation of almost every sector, the essence of journalism—fairness, balance, and clarity as taught in media school—struggles to breathe, seized in a web of financial sponsorships and heavy state interference. Increased Threats to Freedom of Expression in Uganda, a deeply resourceful report exposes the ‘rotten’ underbelly of the media environment, revealing the alarming challenges that suffocate independent journalism, and we can’t agree any less.

Media owners in Uganda are contending with a complex set of challenges that make it increasingly difficult to operate media businesses effectively. As aforementioned, and as Version1.com suggests, one of the most pressing issues they face is the burden of heavy taxes, particularly income tax, significantly reducing their overall profitability. Netsuite.com states plainly: ‘Media costs are not the straight expenses they used to be when the primary expenses were production costs and media buys to place finished ads. Accounting for media costs is more complicated now with marketing spending spread across many digital platforms… This requires more careful bookkeeping and accounting… as many media are paid based on results…and an accurate view of performance.’

Similar to Orina Callen Bosibori’s argument in her research paper to the University of Nairobi, we suppose that this overwhelming financial situation is compounded in trying to balance the following: high electricity tariffs; running a media outfit requires substantial daily electricity consumption to power equipment, broadcast signals, and maintain operational facilities. Many media outlets are forced to rely on gallons of petrol and diesel to run generators due to frequent electricity load-shedding, which disrupts the power supply and makes it challenging to maintain consistent operations. The need for fuel further escalates operational expenses. Moreover, they must manage employee salaries and other operational costs to keep their teams’ pockets smiling! However, as profits dwindle under the weight of these financial burdens, media owners often find themselves unable to pay competitive salaries. This inability tends to lead to low morale among employees and a decline in the quality of media output and turnover, as overworked staff struggle to put food on the table.

Faced with these overwhelming challenges, many media owners feel compelled to compromise some fundamental principles of journalism to survive in an increasingly tough industry.

This introduces the widespread practice of heavy sponsorship of radio and TV programs and newspaper articles, including news bulletins. Such sponsorship often stems from corporate entities and political figures who effectively ‘buy’ news gatherers to produce even ‘fabricated stories’ about them, whether positive or negative or a mix. Some of the largest corporate advertisers in Uganda include Airtel, MTN, Uganda Breweries Ltd, Nile Breweries, Uganda Lottery, various Hotels, Kituzi drink, Buganda Kumbucha drink, Movit, Unilever, Mukwano Group of Companies, Skypins Tours and Travels, and a cross-section of property dealers, etc. The biggest beneficiaries of this sponsorship include NBS, Bukedde TV, NTV, Sanyuka TV, Spark TV, BBS, Salt Media, Super FM, Galaxy FM, Bukedde FM, and CBS Radio.

When such media houses rely heavily on sponsorships, their ability to report impartially is compromised. Sponsored content often prioritises the interests of sponsors over objective journalism, unlocking the door to biased reporting; news coverage may favour the sponsor’s agenda, sidelining critical issues and alternative viewpoints that do not align with their interests.

Audiences are increasingly becoming aware of these sponsorships and may perceive news as less credible or trustworthy. Research indicates that groups feeling unfairly covered are less likely to trust the media, which can lead to a broader disengagement from reputable news sources. This erosion of trust undermines the media’s role as a watchdog and diminishes its effectiveness in informing the public.

When Telecom X sponsors XTV’s news bulletin, the financial dependency creates an inherent conflict of interest. If Telecom X faces allegations regarding unfair pricing of call and data tariffs, poor product quality like handsets or data devices, or adverse effects of its infrastructure (like mast towers), XTV may choose not to report these issues. This behaviour stems from a desire to maintain the sponsorship relationship, which is crucial for the station’s revenue. The fear of losing financial support can lead to self-censorship among journalists and editors, resulting in a media landscape where critical issues are overlooked or downplayed.

The failure to report on significant issues related to Telecom X can severely undermine public trust in the media. Audiences perceive XTV as biased or untrustworthy if they notice a pattern of ignoring negative stories about its sponsor. Moreover, if Telecom X’s products are found less satisfying than advertised, such as inflated claims about service quality or reliability, XTV’s credibility is further jeopardised. Viewers may question the integrity of the news outlet, suspecting that it is complicit in misleading advertising rather than serving as an independent source of information. If Telecom X’s sponsorship suppresses critical reporting, it creates an environment where only favourable narratives are presented.

On April 30 2023, The Monitor ran a big slapping story: Gov’t should support rural radio stations! It is an OMGing headline that we shall use to explain the second major trend impacting media integrity in Uganda: the state’s interference in media freedom, which occurs through various overt and covert means. This interference, born out of a certain level of financial desperation on the part of the media, not only compromises journalistic independence but also stifles the diversity of opinions essential for a healthy democracy.

One of the most significant ways the government exerts control over the media is through the licensing process. The state often has the power to grant or deny permits to media outlets, which can lead to a biased media landscape. Outlets that align with government narratives are more likely to receive licenses, while those that challenge or criticise the government may be denied or face bureaucratic hurdles. This creates a chilling effect, discouraging potential new voices from entering the market due to fears of not being granted the necessary permissions to operate.

Once licensed, media outlets often face pressure to adhere to specific content regulations that favour state perspectives. This can include direct censorship—where government officials demand that certain stories be killed or altered—or more subtle forms of pressure, such as informal warnings or threats against journalists who report unfavourably on government actions.

The state may also use legal threats as a tool for intimidation. Felix Osike of New Vision suggests that criminalisation of media offences is unfavourable to the media, and yes indeed it is! When laws concerning defamation, sedition, or national security are used against journalists and media houses that dare to publish critical content, the fear of legal repercussions deters journalists from pursuing investigative stories or reporting on issues that could provoke government ire. This legal framework effectively silences dissenting voices and curtails critical reporting.

In more covert ways, state surveillance and harassment have often created an atmosphere of fear among journalists, as far as the opposition is concerned. Reports have surfaced of journalists being monitored, harassed, or even detained for their work. Such tactics serve to intimidate not only those directly targeted but also their colleagues who may reconsider their editorial choices in light of potential repercussions.

In Uganda, there are persistent allegations in the corridors of power to the effect that state officials engage in corrupt practices, requiring media owners to allocate shares in their companies in exchange for broadcasting licenses. In a country where everything is as bad as it is possible, this arrangement allows government personalities—the big turks to acquire equity in media outlets, enabling them to earn dividends from shares obtained through dubious means.

This corrupt practice creates a troubling dynamic where media outlets become beholden to government interests rather than serving the public good. It goes without saying that media owners, who in such situations are reduced to half-owners, do feel pressured to comply with these demands, effectively turning journalism into a transactional relationship rather than an independent pursuit of truth. As a result, critical reporting is stifled, and the media’s role as a watchdog is compromised, leading to a landscape where the public is deprived of unbiased information essential for informed decision-making. Government officials are slowly, steadily and effectively buying freedom of speech, controlling what the public hears and sees while silencing dissenting voices. By manipulating media narratives, they dictate information flow, regulating the gate-keeping process, and ensuring only state-approved messages reach the masses.

This corruption extends to milking money from private sector players for personal gain. Media owners, desperate to maintain their licenses and financial viability, often comply with demands for favourable coverage, leading to a corrupt cycle where profits are shared with state bigwigs without any tangible investment—essentially reaping where they (state bigwigs) have not sown.

This corruption severely undermines journalistic integrity. When media organisations prioritise the interests of state officials over their commitment to unbiased reporting, the quality of news diminishes. Journalists may be coerced into softening critical stories, omitting important facts, or presenting government narratives without question. This not only distorts public perception but also erodes the fundamental principles of journalism, which hinge on accountability, transparency, and the pursuit of truth.

The implications for investigative journalism are particularly dire. Investigative reporting often requires significant resources and a willingness to challenge powerful entities. However, when media outlets are financially tied to the state through corruption, they may shy away from pursuing stories that could expose wrongdoing or inefficiency within government operations. This lack of accountability allows corruption and mismanagement to flourish unchecked, further damaging public trust in both the media and governmental institutions.

In the end we all need to hum ‘Kumbaya, my Lord, Kumbaya‘ for our beloved mainstream media.

Growing up as a child, I hoped to be an inventor, a creator of new concepts and designs…well, and that was until I read my first book. Realising then that there was power in words, in stories, and as such, while my objective remained to be a creator, it was to be a creator of stories. To journal, to write, to inform and to entertain. As I grew older, I began to understand the critical role that storytellers play in society, particularly those in the press.

The press, in any country, plays a crucial role in providing information to citizens through media coverage. The press records events, writes, covers events and informs the population of the numerous happenings that occur in society.  Consequently, He who controls the press holds the narrative, so in an instance where the government clashes with the press, the life of a Journalist becomes increasingly difficult and dangerous as they strive to report the truth despite oppression. It is not new that sometimes information is deliberately censored from the population, a government ploy here and there, some social injustices under cover-up, yet still, journalists of the press brave the odds to inform and illuminate what citizens ought to know.

While the constitution guarantees press freedom in Uganda, the practical implementation often deviates from these legal protections. Journalists and media houses operate under the constant threat of harassment, arrest and violence, especially when reporting on sensitive issues such as government corruption and human rights abuses.

This dynamic is starkly evident in the tensions between the government of Uganda and the Daily Monitor, one of the country’s leading independent newspapers that emblemize the ongoing struggles around press freedom and government censorship in the country.

Since his ascent to power in 1986, The President of Uganda, H.E Y.K Museveni’s administration is believed to have met numerous allegations of authoritarianism often manifesting in efforts to suppress dissenting voices and control the national narrative; The Daily Monitor is known for its crucial reporting on government activities, has frequently faced the brunt of government harassment, highlighting the broader issues of press freedom and censorship.

One of the most notable clashes in the newspaper was the Uganda Police raid on their offices, triggered by a published letter written by General David Sejusa that seemed to antagonise the government.

“One of the newspapers, Daily Monitor, had reported on April 29^th a letter written by Gen. David Sejusa, or Tinyefuza, Coordinator of Security Agencies, to the director general of Uganda’s Internal Security Organisation earlier that month. The letter, which Sejusa confirmed writing, called for an investigation into an alleged plot to assassinate senior government officials who were opposed to Brigadier Muhoozi Kainerugaba, son of President Yoweri Museveni, assuming the presidency in 2016, the Monitor had reported…” by Committee to Protect Journalists.

Adam Mayambala, a Ugandan journalist, also recounted encounters with press oppression at the frontlines, facing harassment, unfounded accusations and imprisonment at the news front lines.

Talking about injustices against journalists in Uganda, we cannot exclude the assault that occurred while covering protests related to the arrest of then Presidential candidate Robert Kyagulanyi Ssentamu, some of whom are believed to still be held incarcerated to this day. Documentary filmmaker Moses Bwayo was shot in the face with a rubber bullet while covering a protest in February 2020 as he was filming opposition leader Bobi Wine’s campaign activities when police dispersed the crowd using excessive force.

The arrest of investigative journalist Charles Etukuri in 2018, who was detained by security agents after reporting on sensitive matters involving the security forces, highlights the challenges faced by investigative journalists. Many journalists today prioritise self-preservation by avoiding sensitive topics for fear of facing the same fate. This, however, defeats the essence of investigative journalism.

Another hit against journalism was seen in 2020 when Joyce Bagala, a journalist and news manager at NBS Television, faced threats and harassment after interviewing opposition politicians and covering stories critical of the government. Bagala’s home was attacked, and she received numerous threats aimed at silencing her.

The brutal arrest and subsequent death of freelance journalist Robert Ssempala in 2021 brought international attention to the issue. His death was widely condemned and highlighted the risks faced by journalists in Uganda.

“It is unacceptable that violence has become an everyday hazard for journalists on the political beat in Uganda,” said CPJ’s sub-Saharan Africa representative, Muthoki Mumo.” Committee to Protect Journalists.

While these oppressions might seem contained only to Uganda, they span different African countries as seen on the World Press Freedom Day commemorated in May.

“Amnesty International, marking World Press Freedom Day, has condemned the escalating suppression of freedom of expression and media liberty across East and Southern Africa. Documenting a pervasive pattern of intimidation, harassment, and imprisonment of journalists, the organisation highlights governmental crackdowns on reporting of corruption and human rights abuses. Authorities frequently exploit national security and cybersecurity laws to stifle dissent, with broad provisions enabling arbitrary arrests and the prosecution of journalists.

Cases from Madagascar to Zimbabwe underscore the dire challenges faced by journalists, including bans on coverage and imprisonment under draconian legislation. In several countries, journalists endure threats, censorship, and violent reprisals, exemplified by the detention of Stanis Bujakera in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the imprisonment of Floriane Irangabiye in Burundi.

Journalists in Nigeria have been attacked while covering political unrest, Burkina Faso‘s decision to suspend foreign news outlets following reports of alleged military atrocities highlights the ongoing threats to press freedom in the region.

Amnesty International urges regional authorities to release unlawfully detained journalists, cease targeting the press, and uphold the freedom of the media.”  Press Freedom Under Attack as Journalists Face Crackdown – All Africa.

International organisations like the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and Reporters without Borders (RSF) often rank Uganda poorly in terms of press freedom, citing incidents of intimidation and violence against journalists.

Government censorship of the press can take many forms, from direct action against media outlets to more subtle forms of pressure. The Uganda Communications Commission (UCC) has broad regulatory powers, including the ability to suspend media operations and censor any content they deem in violation of national security or public order.

The government can also employ legal mechanisms such as the Anti-Terrorism Act and the Public Order Management Act to justify crackdowns on the press.

However, while these powers are meant to protect, govern and allow for reputable distribution of information, they are often used to silence critical voices, leading to self-censorship among journalists in a bid to stay in good graces with the powers that be.

Despite these challenges, the press and journalism at large continue to play a crucial role in Uganda’s media landscape, striving to uphold the principles of journalistic integrity and accountability. Not all heroes need capes after all

Have you ever stumbled upon an article or a post on social media that seemed legitimate but was actually propaganda? A rumour or someone’s ravings posing as factual news? While spotting fake news online takes some detective work, it’s an important skill to master today. So, today, let’s share tips on how to spot fake news on social media.

Know Your Source: First and foremost, always establish whether the source of information is reputable. Is it a news organisation you recognise? Fake news sites often have names that mimic reputable ones but with minute typos or strange URL links. Endeavour to check the “About Us” section for credibility.

Examine the Story: When engaging with online news and articles, it is essential to look out for some key indicators of credibility:

• Facts and Sources: Does the article or story cite its sources? Are there quotes or statistics from experts? Look for references to studies or expert opinions. Reputable news articles often link to authentic sources or provide enough detail for you to find the source independently. Be wary of articles that make sweeping claims without backing them up with evidence.
• Dates and Timelines: Check for incorrect dates or timelines of events. Misinformation often involves manipulating dates or presenting outdated events as current. Pay attention to the publication date of the article and any dates within the text to see if they make sense in the given context.
• Bias and Balance: Is the story overly one-sided? Credible stories often aim to present multiple perspectives. Be suspicious of articles that use emotionally heavy language or those that seem to push a specific agenda without acknowledging other viewpoints. Balanced articles will often include counterarguments or responses from different stakeholders.

Understand the Purpose of the Article: Consider why the story was written. Is it meant to inform, entertain, or provoke an emotional response? Articles designed to generate outrage or fear often lack factual accuracy. News articles primarily aim to inform, so you should try to recognise the difference between news, opinion, and satire.

Analyse the Comments and Engagement: Often, fake news sites have inflammatory or highly polarised comments designed to divide opinions into two completely opposing groups. High engagement doesn’t necessarily mean the news is credible, but it can give clues about the content’s intent and reception. Sometimes, knowledgeable people will debunk false news directly in the comments section. These fact-checking comments can help you verify the accuracy of the article’s content. If many users are pointing out factual inaccuracies or providing evidence that contradicts the article, then it’s a strong indication that the article may not be reliable.

Verify with Other Sources: If a story is true, it will likely be reported by multiple outlets. Cross-check with other sources to see whether they too have content on the topic. Fact-checking websites like FactCheck.org can also assist in verifying the claims made in the articles.

With the increased accessibility of online publications, honing your ability to discern fact from fiction is crucial. Stay informed and sceptical before accepting online information as the sole truth.

Social media platforms have become an integral part of our lives. We use them to stay connected with friends and family, to share our thoughts and experiences, and to learn about the world around us. In fact, social media platforms are now so ubiquitous that it’s hard to imagine a time before they existed.

The first social media platforms were launched in the early 2000s. Friendster, Myspace, and LiveJournal were some of the early pioneers. These platforms were primarily used for personal networking and sharing photos and stories, and that was until the mid-2000s, when social media platforms began to evolve. Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter emerged as the dominant platforms. These platforms offered a wider range of features and functionality, such as the ability to create groups, share videos, and send direct messages.

In addition to these three platforms, there were a number of other social media platforms that emerged in the mid-2000s. These included Flickr, LinkedIn, and Tumblr. These platforms offered a variety of features and functionality, and they appealed to different types of users. For example, Flickr was popular for sharing photos, LinkedIn was popular for connecting with professional contacts, and Tumblr was popular for blogging and sharing creative content.

In the 2010s, social media platforms continued to grow in popularity. New platforms, such as Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok, emerged to cater to specific interests and demographics. Social media platforms also became increasingly integrated with other technologies, such as smartphones and wearables.

Today, social media platforms are used by billions of people around the world. They have become an indispensable tool for communication, entertainment, and information. Leaving a major impact on society, changing the way we interact with each other, consume news, and learn about the world.

Social media has proved to be a powerful tool for improving lives, not only by connecting societies, sharing thoughts and experiences, and learning about the world, but also by creating new opportunities for people to make a living, from social media managers, content creators to influencers, earning them a living through sponsorships, affiliate marketing, product sales, speaking engagements, and consulting.

Web developers who are hired by social media platforms to develop and maintain these platforms are responsible for everything from the user interface to the underlying code. By developing social media platforms, these developers have made it possible for us to use these platforms smoothly, but most importantly, get paid for the great job they do

Businesses are also among those who benefit from this era. Social media has helped them reach a wider audience and promote their products and services. They do this by posting content that is relevant to their target audience, running advertising campaigns, and connecting with influencers on these social media platforms to increase sales and brand awareness.

Overall, social media has been a powerful force for good in the world. It has made it easier for people to connect, share their thoughts and experiences, learn about the world, and organise and mobilise, as well as do business. However, it is important to be aware of the potential risks of social media, such as addiction, cyberbullying, fake news, and data privacy. It is also important to use social media safely and responsibly.