Media sounds alarm on rising political violence, are duty bearers listening?

By Janet Nyakundi and Fardosa Abdi          

A subtle but increasingly powerful shift is unfolding in Kenyan media’s editorial landscape. Coverage is no longer anchored only in what has already happened, but it is becoming increasingly shaped by what those events might mean for the future, especially as political attention gradually drifts toward the 2027 elections.

A clear pattern has emerged across different dates and outlets: multiple editorials condemning violence, but also quietly linking it into a broader narrative of political risk.

What is taking shape is a journalism style that does more than report incidents. It interprets them, connects them across time and quietly projects them forward. Violence is no longer treated as an isolated disruption. It is increasingly framed as part of a developing pattern that may shape the country’s political future if left unchecked.

The shift was most evident on April 9. Taifa Leo’s editorial, titled “Magenge hatari yakabiliwe mara moja” (“Dangerous gangs must be dealt with immediately”) went beyond a routine call for law and order. While urging firm action against violent groups, the piece warned that these gangs are doing more than disrupting public peace. They are altering how political rivalry is conducted. Competition, it suggested, is steadily being replaced by intimidation and democratic engagement is giving way to fear.

What gives the piece its weight is not just its urgency, but also its sense of direction. It does not treat violence as a sudden problem. Instead, it frames it as something that develops over time, something that once normalised becomes harder to reverse. In that framing, the real concern is not only what is happening now, but what it could become if left unchecked.

That same day, the People Daily echoed the concern in its editorial responding to the brutal attack on Vihiga Senator Godfrey Osotsi in Kisumu. Titled “Attack on Senator must be condemned by every Kenyan citizen,” the paper demanded swift investigations and police accountability, citing available CCTV evidence.

Yet it also placed the assault within a larger context of growing political intolerance and a shrinking space for open civic expression. The editorial subtly shifts the conversation away from a single violent episode toward something more structural. The concern is no longer just that an attack happened, but that similar incidents are becoming familiar enough to form a pattern.

On April 10, the Daily Nation sharpened that pattern into a clearer warning in “Pursue all the suspects in attack on senator.” The editorial described the violence as part of a “growing and dangerous trend” involving organised political actors. It linked the present situation to a history of weak enforcement, suggesting that repeated failure to act decisively has allowed political thuggery to persist and adapt.

On the same day, The Star delivered perhaps the most striking interpretation, not through words, but imagery. Its political cartoon showed Senator Osotsi under attack by armed goons while a police officer sat nearby, inactive. The symbolism was immediate and unambiguous. The violence appeared coordinated and almost routine. The response appeared absent or ineffective.

In a single frame, the cartoon captured what the editorials weere collectively pointing toward: a normalisation of political violence, and a weakening of institutional response. It did not just illustrate an incident but a condition.

By April 22, the tone across the media shifted decisively from observation to urgency. An editorial in The Standard argued that arresting suspected goons was no longer sufficient. It highlighted repeated incidents of political violence and raised concerns about possible police complicity. More importantly, it warned that public trust in law enforcement was eroding. That erosion, it suggested, was as dangerous as the violence itself.

The editorial called on Interior CS Kipchumba Murkomen to move beyond statements and ensure real accountability. But it also pushed the analysis further up the chain. The real drivers of violence, it argued, were not only those who carried it out, but those who financed and organised it. Without addressing that layer, enforcement remains incomplete—and the cycle continues.

That same day, The Star reinforced the urgency in its editorial “Arrest politicians financing goons across the country.” The message was direct and uncompromising. Both perpetrators and political sponsors must be held accountable. With just 14 months left before the next elections, the editorial warned that delay is not neutral—it is enabling. Every moment of inaction allows structures of violence to deepen and entrench.

Taken together, these editorials form something larger than commentary. They reflect a growing journalistic consensus: political violence in Kenya is no longer being viewed merely as random acts of disruption, but as an emerging system with identifiable sponsors, patterns and long-term consequences.

This evolving coverage functions as an informal early warning system. By connecting incidents across time and reading them for their cumulative effect, the media is signaling that the country is witnessing not just sporadic unrest, but the gradual entrenchment of organized political intimidation.

None of this guarantees what comes next, but it does clarify the stakes. When patterns begin to repeat in plain sight, they stop being just news. They become warnings.

Janet and Fardosa are media analysts at the Media Council of Kenya