Fandom or neutrality: Ugandan sports journalists caught at the crossroads

By Robert Madoi Nasaba

Abstract
This paper traces the position of Ugandan sports journalists on the spectrum of theory and
practice. Many Ugandans have a compulsive habit of immersing themselves in matters
pertaining to sport. The cumulative effect of this obsessional pull has been an upsurge in
sports reporting. Daily Monitor, a leading independent newspaper in Uganda, for instance
decided to carry sports news on its back page in the 1990s. There has since been an
acceleration in sports coverage by the newspaper, with a pullout being carried in its Saturday
edition. The Observer, another independent newspaper, earmarks eight pages for sport, up
from the three it initially set aside for the beat when it hit the streets in 2004. This
astronomical growth, which straddles the print and broadcast divide, has not panned out
without its drawbacks. Several Ugandan sports journalists have perennially been left at a
crossroads whilst covering their beat. There are blurred distinctions between the spectator and
the neutral. This paper will argue that Ugandan sports journalists have not always been seen to
be impartial. Many of them hail the odd goal, run or point whilst on duty in the field. Others
choose to sport jerseys of teams they are supposed to hold to account. The failure to monitor
leaders has left Ugandan sports journalism with more lapdogs than watchdogs. The domino
effect of this has seen loss perpetuate loss. Many Ugandan sports journalists have failed to get
the ears of strangers because of their perceived partiality. This partiality has gnawed at their
credibility. Widely described as the quality of being believable or trustworthy (anon),
credibility can only be merited since it accrues from ones deeds. A purveyor of bad deeds
commands no respect. Public inability and unwillingness to believe news media emanates
from bad deeds. This ultimately hampers the medias ability to act as a Fourth Estate.

Introduction
The lifeblood of a journalist is credibility. Journalism revolves around gathering, sieving and
later disseminating what is construed as news. For this to happen, a journalist has to have the
quality of being trusted and believed in. Credibility is one of the criteria used to filter out
unbelievable information (Wathen & Burkell, 2002). Consequently, establishing whether
partisanship has permeated through the fabric of Ugandan sports journalism is vitally
important. The paper attempts to ascertain the complexities of the partisanship and take stock
of their implications. To achieve this, the paper finds itself being umbilically linked to
ethnographical evidence which the researcher uses to give an account of the impact partiality
has had on the credibility of many Ugandan sports journalists. Drawing on focus group
discussions with Ugandan sports journalists and one-on-one interviews with sports news
junkies, the paper attempts to shed light on the writer-reader/ broadcaster-listener (viewer)
binary vis--vis the aspect of objectivity.
The news standard of objectivity has of recent gained as much currency as it should.
Objectivity has since time immemorial rightly been construed to represent neutrality,
factuality, and non-partisanship. It has also been described as judgment based on observable
phenomena and uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices. Yet, despite its
imperativeness, the strand of objectivity has time and again come under some sort of assault
from a school of thought that frowns upon what it represents. The proponents from this school
of thought have argued that more appropriate ethical standards lie in the news values of
fairness and accuracy.
The aforesaid proponents insist that objectivity is not just nearly improbable to apply to
practice, but that it also inhibits journalists from excavating the truth. Their argument that it
becomes terribly difficult to show and not tell once a journalist detaches himself/herself from

a subject he/she is covering has found favour with many. The proponents from this school of
thought further argue that a journalist shouldnt discard their opinions whilst reporting about
an incident.
It is, however, worth noting that, unlike objectivity, the news values of fairness and accuracy
are relative. What this means is that they cannot be used as a gold standard to filter out a
journalists emotions. Since sport is tightly interwoven with emotion, it comes as no surprise
that sports journalism has been singled out as the journalistic facet most prone to being
indented by streaks of dispassionate reporting. In fact, the world over, sports writers who have
not shied away from expressing their opinions have thrived in their beat. Their outspoken
outlook has often times portended well for them.
The response to such a perception has always been that outspokenness is best left to fans. It is
not in dispute that you cannot simultaneously wear the hat a fan and a sports reporter.
Journalistic objectivity is what helps one to calibrate, and ultimately put some daylight
between being a fan and a sports reporter. David Rowe (Allan ed. 2005) addressed this subject
when he wondered whether the modern day sports journalist can be a statistic in the Fourth
Estate or fan club whilst engaging the popular. Rowe reckons difficulties may present
themselves if a discomforting proximity is kept to people sports journalists are supposed to
hold to account. The aforesaid proximity leaves sports journalists prone to practising what he
classes as populist sports fandom (Allan ed. 2005, P.132). Although such fandom usually
turns in catchy prose and poetry, it falls well short of the parameters within which sports
journalists should work. Parameters to investigate as well as report.
Its no wonder then that striking a trade-off between informing, entertaining and critiquing has
proved to be a towering hurdle for many a sports journalist. Sports journalists often find
themselves torn between glorifying or vilifying sports personalities. If they cared to cover

sports objectively, they wouldnt have to worry about neither. They would be couched in the
Fourth Estate; not the fans club. Instead of sports journalists investing much energy and
exuberance as would a spectator, they are called upon to provide a critical check to abuse of
power. Although new media have blurred the contours between producers and consumers of
media content, sports journalists and fans will always be worlds apart both online and offline
(Deuze 2007). Fans place an emphasis on hero worship and celebrityhood. This usually
translates into a subjective interpretation of events. The journalists are markedly different
because, as Stofer et al (2010, P.17) succinctly put it, they dont root for teams; they root for
stories.
Drawing on orthodox rhetoric, reflexive analysis
It is for this reason that sport writers have to desist from embracing a home-grown angle. This
home-grown angle, otherwise known as orthodox rhetoric, is only acceptable when one is
wearing the hat of a sports columnist. Narratives steeped in commentary allow a sports
journalist to get away with authorial subjectivity (Boyle and Haynes 2009, P.169). Even
then, the sports columnist has to exercise a sizeable degree of restraint and even-handedness.
Boyle and Haynes (2009) have suggested that orthodox rhetoric can be used in a news story.
There is an addendum, though, as only seasoned sports journalists have the right to subscribe
to orthodox rhetoric. Their vast experience is what gives them the right to be subjective.
Rookie journalists are expected to address different problematics head-on by eschewing any
simplified celebration of sport through reflexive analyses. Such analyses see journalists
reconcile the celebration of sport with [their] particularised subjective position (Boyle and
Haynes 2009, P.170). There is a danger in letting rookie sports journalists make subjective
judgments. As Morgan (2007) posits, journalists who view sports from a subjective position
make assessments that incorporate their own personal beliefs, desires, needs, values, goals,

perceptions, and sensations. However, when viewed objectively, a detached viewpoint in

which reflection rules over our desires acts as an undisputed guidepost for the journalists. The
key goal for any journalist worth the salt, therefore, is to assume an impersonal, mediated and
objective outlook. Anything short of this will always been dangerous.
Covering the standoff between Fufa and USL
An ethnographical study over a month-long period of how Ugandan sports journalists covered
the standoff between Federation of Uganda Football Associations (Ugandan football
governing body) and Uganda Super League Limited (organisers of Ugandas topflight football
league at the time) set out to describe the nature of its informants. Empirical data was
collected through participant observation as well as interviews and focus group discussions.
The dispute between Federation of Uganda Football Associations (now hereafter Fufa) and
Uganda Super League Limited (now hereafter USL) saw the two bodies battle for supremacy.
A small number of Ugandan sports journalists did what is expected of them during the
standoff by dispassionately reporting the status quo. They were, however, outnumbered by
press corps who identified themselves with one of the parties. Fufa discernibly had the
goodwill of most of the above mentioned press corps. It is easy to tell why. When Lawrence
Mulindwa ascended to the helm of Fufa back in 2005, one of the maiden things he did was to
co-opt influential practising sports journalists by cajoling them into an umbrella Media
Committee. Mulindwa knew that he would achieve a lot of rhetorical work if he managed to
sway the football press corps.
Before Mulindwa took over the mantle of the Fufa presidency, Denis Obua his predecessor
had a hands-off media relations policy. Obuas distrustfulness manifested itself in him
sporadically availing himself for media interviews. The symbiotic relationship that
newsmaker and newsgatherer share was evidently absent. This made newsgatherers reluctant

to put across Obuas narrative whenever he was in a predicament. Some observers contend
that, with the benefit of hindsight, Mulindwa set up the Fufa Media Committee to avoid the
fate that befell Obua. But as Fred Katende, a journalist-turned-Fufa employee at the time told
me, USL also acted swiftly to achieve a lot of rhetorical work during the well-documented
dispute. Katende alleged that USL gave jobs to Ugandan journalists to publicise the league on
pay-TV SuperSport only if they espoused their narrative.i Katende argued that this, in effect,
compromised the journalists who were sub-contracted to do a string of media duties for
SuperSport. The said journalists found it extremely difficult to chide USL as doing so would
mean shredding their sub-contracts with SuperSport.
The proximity that Mulindwa shares with Ugandas football press corps is rather puzzling.
This closeness has seen journalists morph from watchdogs to out-and-out lapdogs. This
metamorphosis has not only stunned sports junkies/fans, but also some sports journalists. The
Observers John Vianney Nsimbe is one such journo. When I interviewed him, he recounted
an incident from a Fufa media briefing in 2011 when a sizeable number of football press corps
welcomed Mulindwas rant with an earsplitting applauseii. This, in my view, is utterly
unacceptable as professional journalists should not be seen to be taking sides, openly or
otherwise.
Tilting towards the Fufa narrative
Similar shenanigans were evident during the four weeks I observed Bukedde TVs Firimbi
programme. An hour-long programme that largely fixates its gaze on football, Firimbi was at
the time anchored by Lauren Lubulwa with Ben Baggio Nyombi the sole panellist. Both
journalists are relatively inexperienced, with Lubulwa an unquestioned Johnny-come-lately.
Lubulwa ventured into sports reporting in 2005, a year after Nyombi. Given their rawness, I
found it rather perturbing that they spoke with the finality and orthodox rhetoric that is

supposed to be a preserve for seasoned sports journalists (Boyle and Haynes 2009). Also
equally disturbing especially from my point of view as an armchair sports columnist who
was seeking a balanced narrative to help take stock of the dispute was the programmes onesidedness. Three of the four shows I observed saw both anchor and panellist take potshots at
USL whilst covering Fufa in glory. The fourth, and last show of the month, saw the
programme play host to then Fufa Vice President, Moses Magogo who gladly parroted and
reinforced the narrative that both anchor and panellist had been accentuating over the previous
shows. In my assessment, I reckon it would have done the Firimbi programme a world of
good if it assumed a middle of the road position by objectively bringing out both sides of the
tale. Choosing to be couched in full-blown activism gave the programme a bad countenance,
certainly amongst the neutrals.
Singing from the same hymn sheet with USL
When John Vianney Nsimbe was approached by USL, and later consented to play out the role
of a co-commentator whenever SuperSport telecast topflight football matches, never in his
mind did he expect newsmaker and newsgatherer to become intimate bedfellows. Nsimbe,
The Observer newspapers chief sports reporter, says working for USL did not in any
uncertain terms muzzle him. He also reveals that no riot act was read to him. He was
essentially given carte blanche. Yet when USL used referees devoid of a semblance of
authenticity at the height of its standoff with Fufa, criticism from the likes of Nsimbe was
conspicuous by its absence. In my view, if the journalists hired by SuperSport were impartial,
they would and should have foregrounded USLs flaws. They didnt. Instead, they accentuated
the hero worship that Stofer et al (2010) treat with contempt.
Nsimbe was, however, quick to cite the example of Mark Ssali who was headhunted by USL
to work as a match summariser on SuperSport. Ssali, a revered Ugandan sports journalist who

has exercised his authorial subjectivity prudently, uses his Tuesday column in Daily Monitor
to hold sports officials to account. An in-depth look at selected commentaries penned by the
journalist during the USL-Fufa standoff returned a mixed bag. While Ssali often came off as
somewhat impartial, at times it appeared as if his affiliation with USL tinged his judgment as
the paragraphs below culled from his January 17, 2012 column suggest.
The only problem is that the conflicts in Ugandan football are unnecessary and have so been
personalised that exasperated observers get confused about the issues because it comes
down to, say, Lawrence Mulindwa vs Kavuma Kabenge. The feud currently heading towards
a frenetic climax is all about control over the league, the proverbial bread and butter of the
countrys football which has literally become that.
Kabenge might not be everyones cup of tea, but while even I have disagreed with some of
his methods in the past, I know it is not just about him and appreciate his role in earning the
league the autonomy which has put it on a lucrative path unimaginable just a few years ago.
Let us not kid ourselves, the league was never going to become that under Fufa, who had
bigger fish to fry and neglected it until they needed it for politicking. Now, as we make every
effort to get the fans back and fuel this accelerated development, we are frustrated because
ugly conflicts off the pitch will not allow us to talk about the beautiful things on it.
(Ssali, 2012)

The above text above is grounded in the reflexive outlook that Morgan (2007) posits. In
admitting that Julius Kavuma-Kabenge, the USL chairman, is at times a tad too abrasive, Ssali
is in my estimation self-critiquing since he works for USL by extension. That said; Ssalis
column, which ran on March 13, 2012, doesnt quite come off as a reflexive effort. More than

anything, it risks resting on the cornerstone of celebrityhood despite falling within the
parameters of fair comment (i.e. facts truly stated).

Fufa were never going to witness and endorse player-contracts submitted by the USL
when they were at loggerheads, and the clubs in cohorts with the federation did not even
sign up with the league body in the first place.
No surprises there, for we have known Fufa to only talk about rules when it suits them,
exploiting the ignorance of the public and manipulating the media case on point is the
refereeing situation but that is for another day.
The USL say that those millions from the sponsors that we so love to quote do not pour in
at once but are sent in allotments, and that they hand the money to the clubs but have no
right to dictate to the clubs how to use it.
(Ssali, Sports, 2012)

Its plain to see that the above excerpt from Ssalis column sets out to achieve a lot of
rhetorical work for USL whose bond he wasnt free from. Nsimbe, nonetheless, insisted that
working under the auspices of USL didnt impel him or indeed his colleagues to overleap
governance issues that dogged the sports body. He said: While me and [Daily Monitors
Ismail Kigongo] Dhakaba are not staff at SC Villa (a leading football club in Uganda), being
pundits on their TV show ends at that, and there are no strings attached. Once I return to The
Observer, Villa is treated like any other club without fear or favour. And even when we are on
their TV, we can criticise the things we feel are being done wrongly in the club especially on
the technical side.

Weve been on Villa TV and criticised the manager, Mike Mutebi, for some tactical decisions
he has taken and never at any one time have they told us that its wrong because they realise
we are journalists, and thus have to be impartial.iii
Focus group discussion
The unifying strand that emerged during a focus group discussion I had with Ugandan sports
journalists during a monthly Uganda Sports Press Association (Uspa) interfaceiv was that it is
unquestionably wrong to showcase partiality in an implied manner or otherwise. But, as one
of the journalists reasonedv, they quite often find themselves in a most awkward quandary
since it is time-tested that for one to be grounded in the goings-on of an organisation a subtle
proximity has to be maintained to gain trust. There was general consensus that sports
journalists, like anyone, are predisposed to having, in typical sporting jargon, a soft spot for a
sports outfit or personalities, but they should strive to be dispassionate. The distinction
between spectator and neutral was accentuated by the acknowledgement that a journalist can
cheer without being a cheerleadervi.
Another strand that emerged from the focus group discussion was the importance of
distinguishing between journalists who are expected to play out the role of out-and-out
reporters and those who are pundits. It rather came out strongly that Ugandan sports
journalists have failed to make the differentiationvii. Ultimately, it was agreed that a journalist
who both reports and opines has a very fine balancing act to perform. Ugandan sports
journalists, however, do not distinguish between reporting and opining because of financial
bottlenecks that have afflicted the media industry in their country. Most Ugandan media
appear to be incapacitated so much so that they fuse the facets of reporting and opiningviii. It
was further revealed that a circumscribed budget has birthed a palpable patronage with sports
journalists now doing Public Relations journalism a subgenre in writing that sets out not to

hold newsmakers to account, but rather help them achieve a lot of rhetorical work. The
underpaid Ugandan sports journalists get quite a windfall from this subtle popular
journalismix.
Sports fans reactions
So, what do the people the news targets think? Five fans one female and four males all
under the age of 35 were sounded out via interviews. The misgivings they expressed about
the nature of sports reporting were not dissimilar. All five fans spoke almost in unison about
sports reports being quite one-sided. They also all said that they were able to tell which
faction particular sports reporters sided with during the Fufa-USL standoff. Only one of the
five fans interviewed for this paper seemed to empathise with sports journalists, reasoning
that he doesnt expect them to mimic robotsx. The other four fans implicitly or explicitly said
that they expected media ethics to rein in any streak of conflict on interest in the practising
sports journalists. There was an agreement across the board from all five fans that the
perceived partiality of the sports journalists greatly corroded their credibility.
Conclusion
There are deep-seated problems afflicting Ugandan sports journalists. Some of the problems
are structural, others self-inflicted. One thing is for sure, the problems have contrived to erode
the credibility of the journalists who are for all intents and purposes viewed as lapdogs by
their target audience. A host of factors have shrunk the distance between newsmaker and
newsgatherer. This has perpetuated a fandom that is not quite endearing in the journalism
business.
There is no silver bullet here, but indications are that improvements in remunerations and
subsequent widening of sports desks can prove to be telling. Poor pay has precipitated
moonlighting bouts that have ended up bringing the newsgatherer much closer to the

newsmaker. The narrowness of sports desks at different media houses has not helped matters,
with many a sports journalist having to double as reporter and pundit. Whichever way, there
are problems that need to be squarely addressed in the Ugandan sports journalism realm.

Endnotes

i Interview with the Ugandan national football teams Liaison Officer, Fred Katende, on April 2,
2012.

ii Interview with The Observers chief sports reporter, John Vianney Nsimbe, on March 27,
2011.

iii Interview with The Observers chief sports reporter. John Vianney Nsimbe, on February 12,
2012.

iv The interface was held on April 2, 2012 with 37 sports journalists from both print and broadcast
media vehicles in attendance.

v Former WBS TV senior football correspondent and current liaison officer of Ugandas senior
national football team, Fred Katende revealed that he benefited from enjoying a close relationship
with players. He further revealed that sharing a proximity that dovetailed newsmaker and
newsgatherer got [me] firsthand information and scoops. He also admitted to this close
relationship having a downside.

vi Uganda Sports Press Association president and Daily Monitor Sports Editor, Mark Namanya,
stated thus: We all have our affiliations. Growing up, I supported a soccer club, a basketball team,
a certain golfer, a talented tennis player and so forth. The sports fan in me can't be erased; how else
would I have been attracted to journalism in the first place? The thing is impartiality is imperative
once you set out to become a journalist of any beat. Impartiality starts from the field. We can't be
seen to cheer or support sides. Problem is that there are some plays in sport that have to be
applauded, but could well be misconstrued. I cheered Bonny Baingana's goal against SC Villa
because of its sheer beauty. At basketball, it is almost impossible not to celebrate the monster dunks
of Jeff Omondi or Ivan Enabu's up-and-down lay ups.

vii Paul Mbuga, a practising lawyer whose punditry is used by the Vision Group during the Africa
Cup of Nations, Euros and World Cup, contended that: part of the problem in Uganda is that we do
not have a proper distinction between journalist-reporters and journalist-pundits. A reporter should
be impartial and dispassionate. It is improper for a journalist to closely associate with clubs,
regulators and governing bodies.
A pundit, on the other hand, attracts an audience because of his/her positions. It is important for a
pundit's allegiances to be well-known. There is nothing more galling than reading/ listening to a
pundit who attempts to sit on the fence. Even when you are being beautifully impartial, I need to
know that you are a Manchester United fan.

viii
Leon Ssenyange, a former Sports anchor at NTV, wondered if there is any Ugandan media willing
to pay different bills to sports reporters and pundits before concluding that our industry does not
facilitate the separation of [reporters and pundits]. We participate in the games, we cover the stories,
and we give opinions on the stories. If FUFA can take a journalist to cover a Cranes game in
Morocco and the company he works for cant, what do you expect?

ix
Uganda Journalists Association secretary, Stephen Ouma Bwire revealed that when heads of
Ugandan Journalists organisations came together under Article 29 Coalition back in 2010, a
working document generated in one of the umbrella groups reports claimed that Ugandan sports
journalists are the most corrupt, unethical, easily compromised, quacks and untrained. Article
29 Coalitions study, however, did not avail the much-needed empirical evidence.

x
In an interview with Geoffrey Wanyama on February 22, 2012, he said: I think it is difficult for any
human beings, and that includes referees, pundits and journalists, not to be biased. They cannot help
it, and they are not robots. Even robots can be biased, depending on who is running them.