Next Article in Journal
Revisiting Relationship Cultivation Strategies: A Comparative Analysis of Strategic Communication Practice in Kenya’s County Governments and Corporate Sectors
Previous Article in Journal
Exploring Freelance Journalism in the Emirati Media Ecosystem: A Comparison of Using Freelancers Among National Media Organizations and Their Voluntary Professional Autonomy
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Journalism and Media
Volume 7
Issue 1
10.3390/journalmedia7010055
journalmedia-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Kenyan Journalists’ Perceptions of Personal Media Channels for Professional Work

by
Kevin C. Mudavadi
1,*,
Meagan E. Doll
2 and
James Shanahan
3
1
Department of Communication, College of Arts & Sciences, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA 30303, USA
2
Hubbard School of Journalism & Mass Communication, College of Liberal Arts, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA
3
The Media School, Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Journal. Media 2026, 7(1), 55; https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia7010055
Submission received: 5 February 2026 / Revised: 1 March 2026 / Accepted: 4 March 2026 / Published: 11 March 2026
Versions Notes

Abstract

Journalists’ use of personal social media accounts and websites to disseminate content has necessitated investigating their significance for Kenyan media professionals. Based on a qualitative research design, this study draws on semi-structured in-depth interviews with Kenyan journalists (N = 22) to investigate their perceptions of migrating from traditional media outlets to digital platforms, in particular, personal social media channels and independent websites, the underlying reasons for this platform migration, and their perceptions of how legacy media are responding to such shifts. The findings highlight that economic incentives and challenging media environments are the primary drivers of platform migration and that participants perceive journalists’ independent websites (i.e., j-blogs) as valuable additions to the diversification of news sources. According to respondents, legacy media organizations have responded by restructuring their newsrooms, adopting convergence strategies, and establishing on-demand platforms to slow journalists’ migration to digital media. The implications for journalists, legacy and digital media, and media consumers are also discussed.

1. Introduction

Journalism occupies a crucial position as a significant social, cultural, and political institution in societies worldwide, influencing public discourse and shaping agendas (McNair, 2005; Wahl-Jorgensen & Hanitzsch, 2009). The power of media coverage in setting political issue priorities has also been well-documented across the African continent, with its influence contingent upon various factors, including digital evolution (Isike & Omotoso, 2017; Onyebadi, 2012; Wasserman, 2020). Digital platforms have increasingly assumed critical roles as venues for public discourse and research in Kenya. This transformation is facilitated in part by the growing Internet penetration; for example, as of June 2024, Internet penetration in Kenya reached 133.7%, with 68.9 million subscribers (Communications Authority of Kenya, 2024). Additionally, the availability of various journalistic channels has further contributed to this phenomenon (Wamuyu, 2020).
However, journalists’ use of personal social media channels (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, YouTube) and independent websites (i.e., j-blogs) has posed challenges to the traditional gatekeeping role of legacy media in recent years, raising concerns about ethics, revenue, and audience engagement (de Vries, 2008; King’ori & Karugu, 2017). While the impact of such personal social media channels and independent websites on journalism has been extensively studied in Western democracies such as the United States (Fox & Steinberg, 2020; Peifer, 2018), relatively less work has been conducted in the Global South generally and Kenya in particular (but see (A. M. Hussein, 2021)). The present study, therefore, examines journalists’ perceptions of the partial migration from legacy media outlets to personal media channels, their motivations for this professional migration, and the perceived adaptation strategies employed by legacy media to slow this movement.
This study holds several crucial implications. First, in an era marked by the proliferation of dis- and misinformation (see Madrid-Morales et al., 2025; Mudavadi et al., 2025), understanding the role and perceptions of personal media channels, typically managed by individual journalists, in growing democracies is essential (Waisbord, 2018). These platforms serve as spaces for open community discourse, free from most traditional organizational pressures and gatekeeping, yet their content reliability and impact remain underexplored. Furthermore, this research contributes to the dearth of scholarship on journalism transformations and the impact of digital platforms, particularly in African contexts (Mabweazara, 2015). By examining the migration of journalists from legacy to alternative digital media sites, their motivations, and the perceived strategies employed by legacy media, this study contributes to journalism scholarship in Africa, specifically Kenya, while also facilitating other comparative studies that can recognize the significance of local journalism in the Global South.

2. Technological Advancement in Newsrooms

The digital era has witnessed the emergence of citizen journalism, the rise of digital platforms, and the expansion of investigative journalism (S. A. Hussein & Akpabio, 2023; Voltmer & Wasserman, 2014). In situations where traditional mass media may be limited by editorial decisions, organizational forces, and individual factors such as scandals (Helander, 2010), digital media platforms offer fertile ground for those whose voices may not be heard. Examples like the “Pandora Papers,” in which a global coalition of journalists exposed the avoidance of tax regulation by wealthy actors, including some with ties to Kenya, have shaken the highest levels of governments and illustrate the power of digital media to advance critical societal interests (Olewe & Louise, 2021; Mukami & Bowers, 2021).
Journalists have embraced digital platforms in various ways. First, reporters increasingly use digital media to incorporate politicians’ public statements into their news articles (K. Ireri & Ochieng, 2020). During election periods, they rely in part on political actors’ social media posts to shape their news stories, creating opportunities for healthy interactions (Hermida, 2010; Lasorsa et al., 2012). These platforms have even been shown to aid traditional journalistic processes, such as fact-checking statements by public officials (Kulundu, 2021). Still, the emergence of digital platforms has diminished the traditional gatekeeping role of mainstream media, giving rise to “hybrid” (Chadwick, 2013) media systems shaped by new topics, perspectives, and political discourses (Jungherr et al., 2019).
Advances in technology have also facilitated hyperconnectivity, providing journalists with access to information previously difficult to obtain (Heinrich, 2012; Ogola & Cheruiyot, 2022). Social media, in particular, has become a tool for journalists to incorporate public opinion by featuring quotes from their audience in their news articles (Anstead & O’Loughlin, 2015; Toff, 2016). Bunce et al. (2018) highlight the use of virtual newsrooms, connected through platforms like Slack, which have fostered stronger relationships among colleagues, albeit blurring the once distinct boundary between professional and private spaces. While Slack has enhanced transparency and trust, concerns regarding its security and privacy have also been raised (McGregor et al., 2017).
Finally, journalists have responded to digital transformations using personal social media channels and content distribution vis-à-vis independent websites. Regarding the former, existing research documents journalistic use of social media platforms, such as Twitter (e.g., Brems et al., 2017) and Instagram (e.g., Bossio, 2023), for journalists’ branding at the individual, organizational, and institutional levels (Molyneux et al., 2018). Motivations for such activities include appearing transparent and authentic with news audiences (Lasorsa et al., 2012) and organizational pressures to maintain digital audience engagement (Molyneux & Holton, 2015). However, its use may depend on the platform’s affordances and logic (Mellado & Alfaro, 2020). Beyond social media, some journalists also distribute content via independently managed websites, sometimes called “j-blogs,” as an outlet for journalistic autonomy (Robinson, 2006; Singer, 2005). Journalists’ adoption of such independent websites is said to be shaped by a similar range of individual, technological, organizational, and social factors, including those related to financial considerations, professional accolades, and supplementary legacy news coverage (A. M. Hussein, 2021; Kim, 2011).
Thus, digital media promotes communication, collaboration, and coordination among employees and fosters journalistic innovation (Paterson, 2013). Despite these positive developments, however, journalists have sometimes hesitated to embrace Internet-based technologies due to perceived incompatibility with established journalistic norms (Kioko et al., 2022). Specifically, concerns exist around clickbait and sensationalism (Chakraborty et al., 2017); engagement metrics versus quality (Costera Meijer, 2020); constant adaptation to technological changes (Posetti, 2018); credibility versus the impact of dis- and misinformation (Pickard, 2019); and lack of newsroom resources like downsizing of staff (Goyanes & Rodríguez-Gómez, 2021). Still, the growing importance of digital platforms and the forces of globalization are reshaping perceptions of journalism among practitioners and theorists alike (Mabweazara, 2016).

2.1. The Kenyan Media Landscape and Use of Personal Media Channels

Of course, journalists’ working environments are essential to their job satisfaction and performance, and a growing corpus of research documents the effects of digital transformations on journalists in parts of the Global North (Hanusch, 2015; Wahl-Jorgensen, 2019). However, empirical research on such changes in African journalism remains relatively scarce (Cheruiyot, 2022; J. K. Ireri, 2015). Beyond the opportunities and challenges of digital migration, Kenyan journalists may have unique or additional perspectives shaped by their media landscape.
For instance, the Kenyan media system is shaped by a complex interplay of political and economic factors that influence media freedom and the financial stability of media organizations (Reporters Without Borders, 2021; Reelforge & TIFA, 2019). Kenyan media houses, for example, are particularly reliant on advertising revenue. The digital revolution has intensified the competition for news audiences and advertising earnings, exacerbating media houses’ financial challenges, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic (McIntyre & Cohen, 2021; Ipsos Synovate, 2022; Kwamboka, 2020). Fortunately, this reliance on commercial revenue gives Kenyan media organizations some protection from political influence, though this can vary with the contemporary political and economic context (Freedom House, 2023; Reporters Without Borders, 2023).
Moreover, Kenya demonstrates widespread news consumption among its audience and is renowned for its high-quality journalistic output (J. K. Ireri, 2015). With mobile phone penetration approaching 100 percent and an increasing presence of internet service providers in Kenya, accessing information and news through various digital channels has become commonplace (Communications Authority of Kenya, 2022; GeoPoll, 2021; Kibarabara & Cheruiyot, 2024). Kenyans frequently rely on platforms such as WhatsApp, Facebook, and YouTube for news, highlighting the importance of social media in their information landscape (Wamuyu, 2020). Additionally, the country’s media outlets are widely respected, recognized for their innovative approaches (Ismail & Deane, 2008), and acknowledged for hosting some of the most technologically advanced newsrooms in East and Southern Africa (Moyo et al., 2020). These factors contribute to the flourishing presence of social media platforms curated by experienced journalists in Kenya.
Finally, journalists in Kenya face professional challenges, including low salaries, psychological stress, and limited job autonomy (Mudavadi, 2025; J. K. Ireri, 2015; Feinstein et al., 2015). A survey among Kenyan journalists revealed that although 70 percent expressed professional satisfaction, nearly half were dissatisfied with their monthly earnings (K. Ireri, 2016b). Many Kenyan journalists work as correspondents1 and are compensated based on the number of stories or words, often earning as little as USD 100 per month (Helander, 2010; K. Ireri, 2017). Research has shown that job autonomy and satisfaction significantly impact turnover rates, employee commitment, and productivity (Spector, 1997; Mudavadi, 2025). Consequently, job autonomy is a critical indicator of working conditions in journalism (Willnat et al., 2013).
The challenges of low income and limited job autonomy have pushed journalists in Kenya to even consider bribery as they seek alternative sources of income (Mudavadi, 2025; K. Ireri, 2016a). Similarly, some media professionals engage in moonlighting, which refers to journalists seeking additional avenues—mainly through reporting news via personal social media channels and independent websites—to generate income from advertising (Mabweazara, 2010). These actions are attempts to mitigate the financial consequences of low salaries and raise concerns about the quality of news and the nature of journalism as a profession. Toxic working environments in Kenyan newsrooms, characterized by overbearing organizational policies and threats to journalists’ well-being, further exacerbate these issues (Einashe, 2016; Udobang, 2019).
Given the combination of high digital news consumption alongside professional challenges pushing journalists to alternative sources of income, Kenya provides an ideal case study for examining media professionals’ migration from legacy media to personal media channels. To date, however, little work explores how journalists perceive the use of these channels, nor how news organizations may be responding to such developments in low- and middle-income contexts. Existing work on disruptive innovation theory, however, introduces potential answers to these questions.

2.2. Disruptive Innovation

Christensen’s (1997) theory of disruptive innovation explains how various technological innovations can disrupt and necessitate changes in organizational operations to ensure sustainability (Christensen et al., 2013; McDowall, 2018). According to Christensen, disruptive innovation occurs when a product, service, or invention initially gains traction in more straightforward applications at the lower end of the market and gradually progresses to higher market segments, eventually displacing established competitors (Christensen et al., 2001; King & Baatartogtokh, 2015). The theory highlights the opportunities and challenges that arise from the lack of preparedness for new technologies incumbents face, in this case, Kenya’s legacy media (Christensen, 2013). It is based on critical propositions, including the alteration of business models, technological innovation, the influence of consumer demand, and the need for sustainability (Christensen et al., 2018; King & Baatartogtokh, 2015).
Kenyan journalists’ use of personal social media channels and websites (i.e., j-blogs) disrupts traditional news production and dissemination. Disruptive innovation theory thus helps explain the conditions underlying this shift, at least from an economic and market perspective. Specifically, this theoretical perspective assumes that journalists harness innovative, accessible tools for disseminating news content to circumvent professional challenges, ultimately redefining professional value, competition, and work. However, the theory does not necessarily illuminate journalists’ perceptions of this disruption—such as the extent to which it deviates from traditional journalistic norms and practices—nor the precise challenges that appear to motivate platform migration. Such insights are critical for understanding the professional conditions that ultimately give rise to innovation and professional migration within news industries. These considerations, therefore, motivate the following exploratory research questions:
RQ1:
What are Kenyan journalists’ perceptions of the migration of journalists from legacy media to personal media channels, such as social media accounts and blogs, to deliver news?
RQ2:
What are the reasons for the migration of journalists from legacy media to personal media channels, such as social media accounts and blogs, to deliver news?
Disruptive innovation theory also assumes that innovative products or services eventually overtake, or at least redefine, established incumbent players (Christensen, 1997). In this research context, “incumbents” refer to legacy news organizations that ostensibly must adapt to the entrance of journalists’ personal news delivery channels to the news ecosystem. Individual journalists are presumably exposed to news organizations’ adaptation strategies as part of their continued proximity to and work within the broader news industry. Thus, a third research question explores how legacy media houses in Kenya are responding to the use of personal media channels from the perspective of journalists themselves:
RQ3:
What adaptation strategies are legacy media in Kenya using to slow journalists’ migration from legacy media to such personal media channels?

3. Method

This study adopts a qualitative research design to explore journalists’ experiences and perceptions. To answer these questions, we conducted and thematically analyzed the content of 22 in-depth interviews with current and former Kenyan journalists. The interviews were conducted via Zoom between February and March 2022 in English, the second official language in Kenya. The Institutional Review Board of Indiana University-Bloomington approved the study.
Sampling. To recruit the journalists (11 men and 11 women), we used a combination of purposive and snowball sampling. We first approached an editor of a major news media house in Kenya, who possessed significant insights into the local media landscape and industry dynamics. At the end of the interview, we asked the participant to recommend additional possible interviewees. Those who participated lived in Nairobi and its vicinity, worked at major news organizations, and were aged 25 to 41 (five participants did not provide their age). Nairobi county—Kenya’s cosmopolitan capital city—and its vicinity are the country’s media hub, housing major news organizations and providing a representative sample of professionals at the forefront of national journalism (see J. K. Ireri, 2015).
Additionally, participants were selected from established news outlets to ensure insights from journalists with significant influence and access to the resources needed to navigate industry challenges. The age range of 25 to 41 was chosen as most journalists in Kenya fall within this bracket (K. Ireri, 2017), thus capturing perspectives from both early-career journalists familiar with contemporary practices and mid-career professionals experienced in adapting to the rapidly evolving media landscape. At the time of data collection, 11 participants were mainstream media-employed journalists (either print or broadcast), and the rest were former journalists (broadcast or print) who had migrated to digital platforms or were working in communication firms (see Table 1).
Procedure. The interviews were conducted using a semi-structured guide, which included an introduction and seven distinct question blocks. These sets of questions coalesced around journalists’ (1) personal use of digital media generally; (2) professional use of digital media generally; (3) personal use of digital media to get news; (4) professional use of digital media to report news; (5) perceptions of migration from legacy to new media; (6) perceptions of legacy media adaptation to migration of journalists to personal channels; and (7) perceptions of challenges facing journalism in Kenya. First authors’ familiarity with the Kenyan media landscape facilitated rapport during interviews and enabled a nuanced understanding of institutional and professional dynamics. Moreover, during interviews, efforts were made to create an open, non-judgmental space for participants to share their experiences.
Analysis. All interviews were audio-recorded with participants’ consent. The average length of the interviews was 38 min, with a minimum of 30 min and a maximum of 55 min. The first author transcribed the interviews before conducting a thematic analysis using NVivo (version 14), a computer program commonly used in the qualitative analysis of texts (Jackson & Bazeley, 2013). Semi-structured interviews lend themselves to interpretive analysis and allow researchers to pursue situated motivations or meanings (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Hopf, 2004).
A codebook was designed through both inductive and deductive processes. Specifically, we began by listing possible themes based on the existing literature and the interview protocol described above. We then read a sample of the transcriptions to identify additional themes. The final codebook included seven themes (e.g., “new media migration” and “personal experiences with digital media”) and 28 sub-themes (for example, under the theme “new media migration,” we identified sub-themes such as “reasons for digital migration,” “impacts of personalized digital media platforms” or “digital media threats to mainstream media”). To mitigate potential bias, we engaged in reflexive memoing throughout the research process and approached the thematic analysis iteratively, allowing patterns to emerge from the data rather than imposing preconceived interpretations.

4. Findings

This section presents the findings of our thematic analysis, which focuses on three main research questions. First, we explore participants’ perceptions of journalists transitioning from legacy media to digital platforms in Kenya (RQ1). Second, we investigate the perceived motivations behind this migration (RQ2). Finally, we examine the perceived adaptation strategies employed by legacy media to mitigate the rise of digital media platforms among journalists (RQ3).

4.1. Perceptions of Migration to Digital Platforms

Participants shared diverse perspectives on migrating experienced journalists from traditional legacy media to personal media channels. In particular, interviewees (1) consider personal media channels as legitimate news reporting platforms, recognizing a fundamental shift in news production and dissemination; (2) expressed concerns regarding the implications of this shift and the reluctance of legacy media to embrace social media’s role in news distribution fully; and (3) perceived it as a threat to mainstream media’s sustainability, acknowledging the transformative operational changes within mainstream media that will not quickly falter due to their longevity.
Regarding personal media channels as news reporting platforms, participants expressed appreciation for “online-based” platforms, including social media and independent websites, as valuable additions to the news landscape in Kenya. They regarded these platforms as an alternative means of reporting news stories and acknowledged their significant role, particularly in disseminating investigative pieces during the COVID-19 pandemic. One journalist (J-20) characterized such sites as “channels offering alternative storytelling methods that diverge from traditional approaches” and pointed to YouTube as a specific example, noting that it “enables journalists to unleash their creativity and explore unconventional storytelling techniques.”
To this point, many respondents have lauded personal media channels as homes for content that may not be published in mainstream outlets. One participant summarized this position, saying, “The rise of social media has offered a platform for journalists who faced limitations within the confines of mainstream media due to editorial guidelines and policies” (J-17). Participants saw such opportunities as pushing the journalistic field forward, ultimately compelling journalists and news organizations “to adapt and change along with the times” (J-11).
Thus, participants recognized the value of personal media channels for creativity and innovation. They also imagined how legacy media’s role could effectively respond to the emergence of these channels. For example, respondents suggested that mainstream media have already implemented mechanisms, such as convergence, to handle the increasing importance of social media effectively. One participant summarized this view succinctly, saying, “I believe the future of mainstream media is not under significant threat from the emergence of digital channels. Mainstream media outlets have adapted by implementing various survival mechanisms to navigate the changing media landscape” (J-1).
To capitalize on strategies like convergence and stay ahead of the curve, participants likewise recommended that mainstream media consider serious investments in training journalists, using digital media, and responding to audience demands “to ensure the sustainability of the media industry” (J-16). Specifically, participants highlighted that personal media channels are often the primary sources of dis- and misinformation, sometimes disguised as satire. This situation was attributed to the significant influence of Kenyan comedians on both mainstream media and digital platforms. Participants noted that these comedians lacked the necessary training in journalism. One respondent illustrated this perspective, saying:
Despite the evolving media landscape, there is still a valuable space for the media to fulfill its essential role. The government relies on the media to shape public opinion and disseminate vital information, and the audience continues to rely on it as a reliable source. Therefore, the media must invest in journalism beyond mere reporting, embracing innovative approaches and expanding their journalistic endeavors.
(J-16)
Furthermore, journalists emphasized that the emergence of digital channels, coupled with the growing importance of social media, has led to a fundamental shift in how news is produced and disseminated. For example, one participant highlighted the transformation within mainstream media organizations, explicitly mentioning the Standard Media Group in Kenya. They mentioned that these organizations have revamped their newsrooms and embraced a “digital first” strategy (J-1). This means that breaking news is now first shared on social media platforms before being broadcast on the main television channel, reflecting the changing priorities, journalistic roles, and practices in news reporting.
Participants also agreed that collaboration with fields adjacent to journalism may be critical to effectively addressing the challenges posed by personal media channels. For example, respondents highlighted a trend in the media industry in which hiring managers prioritize candidates with qualifications beyond journalism, such as user experience design, web development, and data analysis. “The future of media hinges on collaboration with various partners,” one respondent summarized. “There is a pressing need for collaborative efforts to explore the next stage, as we cannot assume we have all the answers” (J-12).
While journalists were acutely aware of the growing importance of these personal channels and saw opportunities for legacy media to embrace digital media, they also raised concerns about potential implications, particularly if mainstream news organizations do not adapt. One participant articulated this sentiment when saying, “I see a bleak future if the traditional media do not conform to the emergence of these new norms… we might not even have them in the next ten years” (J-10). To this point, interviewees discussed the influence wielded by these personal channels, mainly social media websites. Further, they encouraged legacy media outlets to begin shifting, suggesting that audiences would remain devoted to individual journalists and follow them regardless of the transition. “The upcoming landscape will emphasize substantial collaboration between new media and mainstream media,” another respondent (J-13) added.
Respondents discussed timeliness as a looming threat posed by the slow recognition of personal media channels. Journalists highlighted that delays caused by editorial policies and gatekeeping practices in mainstream media hinder the timely delivery of news, in contrast to the audience’s demand for immediate, current information in Kenya. One respondent illustrated this issue by saying, “…for instance, a journalist with their social media platform can report live, while those working for traditional media are required to travel long distances to reach the office for editing before dissemination” (J-11).
Beyond editorial decisions, some respondents characterized the slow pace of legacy news production as untenable. One journalist (J-22) described this shift: “…a prominent newspaper in Kenya, which used to print nearly 500,000 copies a decade ago, now produces less than 100,000 copies. This shift is due to people accessing news articles on their phones. Why would I purchase a newspaper to read a story I have already read online?” This discrepancy in meeting audience expectations was cited as a factor driving audience preference for social media and independent websites over mainstream media, consequently influencing journalists’ decisions to migrate to these digital platforms.
Despite these challenges, some participants pointed out that mainstream media still maintains an advantage due to its long history, suggesting that its significance will not diminish despite the rise of social media. For instance, one journalist highlighted the enduring credibility of traditional media, particularly radio, stating that it is unlikely to fade away soon. However, this respondent also pointed out the trend of television stations transitioning to digital platforms and ceasing their terrestrial broadcasts. The closure of Switch TV, a television station in Kenya, and its subsequent move to an exclusively online presence are examples of this shift (J-18).
Overall, participants expressed positive perceptions of journalists’ use of personal media channels, while remaining careful to acknowledge the significant threat to legacy organizations, particularly if mainstream media fails to embrace digital channels and collaborators. According to interview respondents, this reluctance has already led to various challenges faced by media houses in Kenya, resulting in some medium-sized media houses, such as Switch TV, transitioning to digital-only platforms for reporting. Despite these challenges, participants acknowledged that digital channels bring valuable additions to the media ecosystem, particularly for investigative journalism, which may struggle to find space in traditional media due to editorial and organizational constraints.

4.2. Reasons for Migration to Personalized Digital Media Platforms

In addition to general perceptions of journalists’ use of personal media channels, respondents also discussed perceived reasons for migration. Here, journalists cited (1) economic incentives; (2) journalistic creativity and autonomy; and (3) generally unfavorable work environments in many mainstream news organizations, including editorial policies, ownership, and lack of recognition for journalism as a profession.
In the sample of 22 participants, 20 journalists identified economic motivations as the primary driver for journalists’ shift to personal media channels. Interviewees explained that mainstream media roles often have demanding workloads not proportionally reflected in their salaries. In some cases, journalists reported earning as little as $180–$200 USD per month. Additionally, the participants pointed out salary discrimination within media organizations, where higher-ranked journalists receive significantly more compensation than their lower-ranked counterparts. For instance, one respondent said the following:
I decided to leave due to the low salary. I can earn up to $2000 per month through my social media channels. It does not make sense to stay in a newsroom where I am only paid $200 monthly.
(J-18)
While journalists acknowledged the prestige of working for traditional media, they also expressed significant concerns about external and internal factors that hindered their reporting freedom within these organizations. Media ownership, editorial pressures, and micromanagement were identified as critical factors affecting their ability to report. Financial pressures were also identified by respondents, in particular, that “pursuing stories that contradict advertisers’ interests can be suppressed within traditional media. In contrast, independent journalists have the freedom to create podcasts, YouTube videos, or personal documentaries to share their work without such restraints” (J-13). Participants appreciate the financial freedom that comes with delivering news on personal media channels in which “you [journalists] have control over all the revenue generated” (J-14).
In addition to financial pressures and incentives, journalists highlighted “toxic” working environments as a significant factor driving preferences for personal media channels over mainstream media. One participant expressed that while accomplished journalists are celebrated in Western media houses, the situation is quite different in Kenya, where envy and internal conflicts prevail. One respondent described this experience, saying the following:
Despite winning six medals and becoming the first journalist at our media house to earn a gold medal since its establishment, the achievement brought me problems. Senior employees perceived my success as a threat to their positions and attempted to eliminate me, viewing it as the best solution. (J-18). Such experiences lead to unhealthy, competitive atmospheres within media houses, thereby reducing job satisfaction and motivation.
Decreased motivation includes the motivation to produce innovative work. According to participants, this type of cutting-edge reporting is not necessarily rewarded in legacy news environments, as mainstream journalists tend to be “motivated by prestige… rather than a desire for innovation” (J-12). This lack of recognition and support leads to concerns about the future, particularly regarding retirement and financial stability. Thus, such factors ultimately motivate journalists to seek new ventures that offer a more secure and fulfilling financial and psychological future.

4.3. Mainstream Media Adaptation Strategies

Participants were also asked explicitly how legacy media organizations respond to journalists’ use of social media and independent websites. Perceived strategies included (1) incorporating “on-demand” platforms that enable audience engagement; (2) diversifying their staff to include professionals from different backgrounds beyond journalism; and (3) reorienting content to include a greater emphasis on soft news.
Among these strategies, one particularly noteworthy approach is integrating “on-demand” platforms, such as apps and websites, to facilitate audience participation and engagement. Such changes are reflected in the ongoing training of journalists to better adapt to the shifting media landscape. One respondent summarized both developments, saying, “Alongside publishing stories on our website, we also share videos on YouTube… Whenever our journalists go out in the field, they are instructed to prioritize digital content creation and promptly ensure that stories are shared online” (J-14). However, some respondents noted that increased engagement with on-demand platforms does not necessarily mean higher engagement with news content. As one respondent cautioned, “I must mention that the increase [in engagement] is not primarily attributed to journalistic content; rather, it is skewed more towards softer, non-news content” (J-21).
A significant concern raised by respondents is the perceived shift toward disseminating soft news—which respondents discussed as related to sensational coverage of individuals or events—rather than hard news to attract larger audiences and generate higher advertising revenues. Participants indicated that some media houses have even ventured into producing gossip newspapers, such as The Nairobian, which have gained significant popularity and demand, especially among the youth (GeoPoll, 2015; Media Council of Kenya, 2020). Another journalist shared a similar sentiment, stating:
One notable strategy employed by media houses is repurposing content, wherein they modify the type of content featured on their mainstream media platforms compared to what is posted online… making efforts to enhance its presentation by incorporating additional texts and graphics.
(J-21)
While respondents expressed reservations about these editorial decisions, many news organizations “are leaving no avenue unexplored, understanding the significance of reaching their audience where they prefer to consume content” (J-21).
This includes hiring additional staff as needed to meet audience demand. Participants reflected that media houses are expanding their teams to include professionals with diverse backgrounds beyond journalism, such as software developers, data analysts, lawyers, and more. In one case, a participant’s employer recently established a dedicated social media unit. “This unit is responsible for uploading various features and news pieces to our YouTube channel,” they said. “This marks a departure from the past practice. Additionally, we now conduct live streams for both television and radio broadcasts, enabling our audience, including those in the diaspora, to engage with our content in real-time” (J-17). With the increasing emphasis on digital skills and interdisciplinary expertise, respondents anticipate a restructuring of newsrooms in coming years. For example, one respondent forecasted “a surge in virtual reporting, leading to the downsizing of newsrooms with only a handful of permanent employees retained” (J-21).

5. Discussion and Areas of Further Research

This study examined Kenyan journalists’ perceptions of migrating from traditional legacy media to personal media channels, including personal social media accounts and independent websites or blogs. It delved into reported motivations behind this shift, including economic incentives, creative freedom, and an escape from unfavorable work environments. The research also examined the perceived strategies that legacy media employ to adapt to this trend. Overall, respondents expressed generally positive views of personal media channels, recognizing them as valuable alternatives for news reporting, particularly stories that might otherwise be excluded from mainstream media due to editorial guidelines or political influences.
Such findings provide valuable insights into the disruptive forces in the Kenyan media landscape, especially about journalists’ perceptions of distributing news via personal media channels. Our findings extend existing theorizing in disruptive innovation theory (Christensen, 1997) by illuminating how individual media practitioners perceive and experience innovation disruptions within their day-to-day workflows. More specifically, findings indicate that these digital platforms are not simply competitors to traditional news organizations; instead, study participants perceived personal channels and websites as precursors to necessary industry changes. These platforms were also characterized as important alternative venues for content that may not be deemed suitable for legacy outlets, including investigative pieces impacted by organizational pressures or censorship.
Such insights also underscore the potential limitations of disruptive innovations in Kenya’s journalistic landscape. For example, based on disruptive innovation theory, one might expect legacy news organizations to adapt to the rise of these personal media channels by integrating more investigative content themselves. However, journalists interviewed here did not necessarily sense this shift and, if anything, described an organizational turn toward softer news topics. It is thus possible that innovative disruptors absolve news organizations from certain normative responsibilities or tasks in under-resourced or low-press freedom environments, though a more comprehensive study of news publishers and media owners is needed. With respect to audience experiences, innovative disruptors such as personal media channels may also create distinct market niches that raise new concerns about selective exposure in growing democracies like Kenya (Aruguete et al., 2023; Grinberg et al., 2019; Guess et al., 2018).
At a more gestalt level, this study extends work on disruptive innovation theory by examining its arguments alongside individuals’ perceptions. While most work in this area has focused on organizational or institutional responses to digital disruption, we explore these phenomena from the perspectives of those engaged in these transformations on the ground. It is worth noting, however, that disruptive innovation theory assumes that relevant actors possess sufficient agency to adapt and make changes. As our findings suggest, organizational, institutional, and even regulatory pressures may make certain types of adaptation untenable, which may have shaped the responses we received. Moreover, disruptive innovation theory does not deal directly with variation in media contexts, so future studies may seek to compare responses to digital disruption cross-nationally. Disruptive innovation theory, initially formulated from an institutional perspective to understand businesses, offers a fresh perspective on how individuals perceive new technologies and provides one lens for understanding the emergence of personal media channels for distributing news in Kenya.
Our findings further affect journalists, legacy media organizations, and news consumers. For journalists, concerns have been raised about the future of journalism as a career in Kenya, stemming from the increasing emphasis on digital skills and interdisciplinary expertise. This shift aligns with the principle of disruptive innovation theory, which underscores the entry of new technologies (new media) that disrupt the normal operations of old technology (legacy media) (see Robinson, 2011). In response, journalist respondents stressed the importance of collaborating with professionals from diverse fields to tackle potential challenges associated with personal media channels. However, it is essential to note that most journalists interviewed for this study were younger and in their early-to-mid careers. Thus, their call for legacy media houses to adapt or face the impending changes may reflect evolving norms concentrated within younger generations, and a follow-up study might seek to compare early-to-mid and late-career perceptions of personal media channels.
Relatedly, research suggests that media professionals are sometimes motivated by the promises and ideals of journalism, which may help them overlook some of the more unattractive aspects of the field, such as low remuneration or toxic work environments (Powers & Vera-Zambrano, 2023). This study’s findings suggest that such organizational challenges drive journalists to seek alternative working conditions, many of which can be found on digital platforms outside established journalism structures. Consequently, future studies should continue to investigate the relationship between technological changes and job motivation, particularly within media organizations in the Global South.
For legacy media organizations, these findings reveal various challenges that motivate journalists’ migration to personal media channels. In response, this research would suggest that legacy media should embrace these new reporting approaches to retain journalistic talent, providing opportunities for individual creativity and expression while responding to audience demand for digital media consumption. In doing so, mainstream media organizations must negotiate the place of ethical journalism standards vis-a-vis third-party social media sites, such as YouTube or X, which have not historically abided by a clear or consistent code of ethics (Ward, 2019). Furthermore, the approved use of independent journalist websites or j-blogs to disseminate reported content would allow reporters to establish direct communication channels with their audience, which is in demand (Brems et al., 2017; Hanusch & Bruns, 2017). However, this would likely provide new avenues for the spread of mis- or disinformation to large swaths of followers in contexts already impacted by the rampant spread of dis/misinformation (see (Mudavadi et al., 2025)). Existing work suggests that journalists who use personal websites and social media channels are broadly aware of these ethical obligations and seek to mitigate harm through transparency (e.g., Robinson, 2006); the practical application of such strategies warrants additional research.
Finally, these findings also have implications for audience consumption of news content. Audiences may prefer a more personalized news experience (Wahl-Jorgensen, 2020), marked by following a specific reporter or social media channel. For example, this carries its own media literacy responsibilities. In other words, audiences may need to develop new or additional skills to navigate the increasingly complex media landscape flooded with information from organizations and individuals via personal media channels (see Ogola & Owuor, 2016; Okoye et al., 2019). Additional research should investigate audience members’ evaluations of content from personal media channels to understand the extent to which such information is perceived as more credible than mainstream sources.
While these findings offer valuable insights into digital disruption in sub-Saharan Africa, the Nairobi-centric sample may introduce bias. Journalists in major urban newsrooms often possess greater access to digital tools and professional networks than their rural or independent counterparts; thus, their experiences may not reflect the realities of resource-constrained media settings. Given Kenya’s high mobile and internet penetration, future research should employ quantitative methods with representative samples to examine how personal media channels affect journalists outside the mainstream. Finally, this study illustrates how platformization reshapes professional norms and labor dynamics within the Kenyan context. Comparative research in other Global South regions is essential to determine how these technological pressures interact with political and economic factors, providing a more comprehensive understanding of journalism’s global digital transformation.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.C.M. and J.S.; methodology, K.C.M. and J.S.; software, K.C.M.; validation, K.C.M.; formal analysis, K.C.M.; investigation, K.C.M.; resources, K.C.M. and J.S.; data curation, K.C.M. and M.E.D.; writing—original draft preparation, K.C.M., M.E.D. and J.S.; writing—review and editing, K.C.M., M.E.D. and J.S.; visualization, K.C.M.; supervision, J.S.; project administration, K.C.M.; funding acquisition, K.C.M. and J.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Kern Scholarship Award for Innovation in Journalism. And The APC was funded by the first author.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (or Ethics Committee) of Indiana University-Bloomington (protocol code 13851 and 3 January 2022).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available from the corresponding author upon request, due to ethical and privacy considerations related to participant confidentiality.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Note

1
Correspondents in Kenya are often undervalued and considered to hold a lower status, which contrasts with the connotation of correspondents in other contexts, such as the United States, where they are perceived differently. In Kenya, correspondents face challenges and are sometimes marginalized within the media industry. However, it is important to note that the perception and status of correspondents can vary across different countries and media systems. While in Kenya they may be demeaned, in the United States and other contexts, correspondents are often regarded with higher esteem and play a crucial role in news reporting.

References

  1. Anstead, N., & O’Loughlin, B. (2015). Social media analysis and public opinion: The 2010 UK general election. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(2), 204–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  2. Aruguete, N., Bachmann, I., Calvo, E., Valenzuela, S., & Ventura, T. (2023). Truth be told: How “true” and “false” labels influence user engagement with fact-checks. New Media & Society, 27(3), 1443–1464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  3. Bossio, D. (2023). Journalists on Instagram: Presenting professional identity and role on image-focused social media. Journalism Practice, 17(8), 1773–1789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  4. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  5. Brems, C., Temmerman, M., Graham, T., & Broersma, M. (2017). How employed and freelance journalists stage themselves on social media. Digital Journalism, 5(4), 443–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  6. Bunce, M., Wright, K., & Scott, M. (2018). Our newsroom in the cloud. New Media & Society, 20(9), 3381–3399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  7. Chadwick, A. (2013). The hybrid media system: Politics and power. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  8. Chakraborty, A., Sarkar, R., Mrigen, A., & Ganguly, N. (2017). Tabloids in the era of social media? Understanding the production and consumption of clickbaits on Twitter. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 1(CSCW), 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  9. Cheruiyot, D. (2022). Comparing risks to journalism: Media criticism in the digital hate. Digital Journalism, 12, 294–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  10. Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Harvard Business School Press. [Google Scholar]
  11. Christensen, C. M. (2013). The innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause significant firms to fail. Harvard Business School Press. [Google Scholar]
  12. Christensen, C. M., McDonald, R., Altman, E. J., & Palmer, J. E. (2018). Disruptive innovation. Journal of Management Studies, 55(7), 1043–1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  13. Christensen, C. M., Raynor, M., & Verlinden, M. (2001). Skate to where the money will be. Harvard Business Review, 79(10), 72–83. [Google Scholar]
  14. Christensen, C. M., Raynor, M. E., & McDonald, R. (2013). Disruptive innovation. Harvard Business Review. [Google Scholar]
  15. Communications Authority of Kenya [CAK]. (2022). Sector statistics report Q3 2021–2022. Available online: https://repository.ca.go.ke/items/f7ac491f-0bd6-43bb-a8c2-dbe0f51458c6/full (accessed on 1 January 2023).
  16. Communications Authority of Kenya [CAK]. (2024, October 14). Mobile (SIM), data/internet subscriptions surge in 3 months to June 2024. Available online: https://www.ca.go.ke/mobile-sim-datainternet-subscriptions-surge-3-months-june-2024 (accessed on 3 March 2026).
  17. Costera Meijer, I. (2020). Understanding the audience turn in journalism: From quality discourse to innovation discourse as anchoring practices 1995–2020. Journalism Studies, 21(16), 2326–2342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  18. de Vries, F. (2008). Blogs in the mainstream media: An exploration of a code of ethical conduct for j-bloggers at Die Burger Western Cape [Doctoral dissertation, University of Stellenbosch]. [Google Scholar]
  19. Einashe, I. (2016). Living in fear for reporting on terror: A Kenyan journalist speaks out after going into hiding. Index on Censorship, 45(2), 31–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  20. Feinstein, A., Wanga, J., & Owen, J. (2015). The psychological effects of reporting extreme violence: A study of Kenyan journalists. JRSM Open, 6(9), 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  21. Fox, J. R., & Steinberg, E. (2020). News you cannot use: Jon Stewart’s daily show media critiques. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 97(1), 235–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  22. Freedom House. (2023). Media freedom. Available online: https://freedomhouse.org/issues/media-freedom (accessed on 3 March 2026).
  23. GeoPoll. (2015, February 13). Data on newspaper magazine readership in Kenya. Available online: https://bit.ly/3L9rIaX (accessed on 5 January 2023).
  24. GeoPoll. (2021). Mobile penetration and growth in Kenya. Available online: https://bit.ly/3l6zBRw (accessed on 10 January 2023).
  25. Goyanes, M., & Rodríguez-Gómez, E. F. (2021). How uncertainty redefines journalists’ career expectations. Journalism, 22(1), 52–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  26. Grinberg, N., Joseph, K., Friedland, L., Swire-Thompson, B., & Lazer, D. (2019). Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 US presidential election. Science, 363(6425), 374–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  27. Guess, A., Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2018). Selective exposure to misinformation. European Research Council, 9(3), 1–34. [Google Scholar]
  28. Hanusch, F. (2015). Australian journalists’ perceptions of changes in their work. Media International Australia, 155(1), 38–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  29. Hanusch, F., & Bruns, A. (2017). Journalistic branding on Twitter. Digital Journalism, 5(1), 26–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  30. Heinrich, A. (2012). What is “network journalism”? Media International Australia, 144(1), 60–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  31. Helander, E. (2010). A critical view of the Kenyan media system through the perspective of the journalists. African Communication Research, 3(3), 521–542. [Google Scholar]
  32. Hermida, A. (2010). Twittering the news: The emergence of ambient journalism. Journalism Practice, 4(3), 297–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  33. Hopf, C. (2004). Qualitative interviews: An overview. In U. Flick, E. V. Kardoff, & I. Steinke (Eds.), A companion to qualitative research (pp. 203–208). SAGE. [Google Scholar]
  34. Hussein, A. M. (2021). When the personal and the professional clash: An analysis of the dual professional identity of selected Kenyan j-bloggers [Doctoral dissertation, Daystar University, School of Communication]. [Google Scholar]
  35. Hussein, S. A., & Akpabio, E. (2023). Exploring the attitude of Tanzanian journalists to citizen journalism. In New journalism ecologies in East and Southern Africa: Innovations, participatory and news making cultures (pp. 165–181). Springer International Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  36. Ipsos Synovate. (2022, July 5). Kenya all media establishment survey 2022. Available online: https://bit.ly/3cXfIep (accessed on 20 February 2023).
  37. Ireri, J. K. (2015). Constructing a portrait of Kenyan journalists in the 21st century [Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University]. [Google Scholar]
  38. Ireri, K. (2016a). Examining “The Corruption Dragon” in Kenyan journalism. Journal of Media Ethics, 31(4), 245–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  39. Ireri, K. (2016b). High job satisfaction despite low income: A national study of Kenyan journalists. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 93(1), 164–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  40. Ireri, K. (2017). A national survey of demographics composition of Kenyan journalists. Journalism, 18(2), 241–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  41. Ireri, K., & Ochieng, J. (2020). Politicians in newspaper news: Who attracts coverage in Kenyan politics. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 25(4), 675–691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  42. Isike, C. A., & Omotoso, S. A. (2017). Reporting Africa: The role of the media in (un) shaping democratic agenda. In Political communication in Africa (pp. 209–227). Springer. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  43. Ismail, J. A., & Deane, J. (2008). The 2007 general election in Kenya and its aftermath. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 13(3), 319–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  44. Jackson, K., & Bazeley, P. (2013). Qualitative data analysis with NVivo. SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar]
  45. Jungherr, A., Posegga, O., & An, J. (2019). Discursive power in contemporary media systems. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 24(4), 404–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  46. Kibarabara, J., & Cheruiyot, D. (2024). Kenya: From a checkered press history to an ever-expanding digital media ecology. In Media compass: A companion to international media landscapes (pp. 422–431). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  47. Kim, Y. (2011). Understanding j-blog adoption: Factors influencing Korean journalists’ blog adoption. Asian Journal of Communication, 21(1), 25–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  48. King, A. A., & Baatartogtokh, B. (2015). How useful is the theory of disruptive innovation? MIT Sloan Management Review, 57(1), 77–90. [Google Scholar]
  49. King’ori, M., & Karugu, M. (2017). Influence of journalistic practice on news blogging among selected Kenyan bloggers. Journal of Communication and Media Research, 9(2), 186–196. [Google Scholar]
  50. Kioko, P., Mwangangi, B. N., Chege, N., & Kimweli, P. (2022). The adoption of artificial intelligence in newsrooms in Kenya: A multi-case study. European Scientific Journal, 18(22), 278–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  51. Kulundu, M. N. (2021). Fact-checking in the digital era: A multi-case study of how newsrooms address disinformation during breaking news [Master’s thesis, Aga Khan University, Graduate School of Media and Communication]. [Google Scholar]
  52. Kwamboka, E. (2020, June 23). Fury as Mediamax fires journalists in night SMS. Available online: https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/sso/?content=eyJpdiI6IktYRk9RVHNkaGNwSE42Y2FtYWozTVE9PSIsInZhbHVlIjoiZTNOU2F4ZzZzMHQ1VFI0b2cwYWVBaGdhbU9rR2lpcW5URjVjZkF5WVI0bEQ2LzVQYVlrQXNoR3RJZ1RaVUFSbFdSb3h3ZVdQbVVuR09KMDF3SUxnZXluRnJpTUcxZFRwV1NhTFRHVGNEclk9IiwibWFjIjoiYmRlNmExODVkYjhiMjU4NGYyYjAyNWU5NWM5ZTM5MDViZDAzNzQzY2JlOWY2Y2ZhMDZkNjk4ZWU4YWE2NDkwYyIsInRhZyI6IiJ9 (accessed on 3 March 2026).
  53. Lasorsa, D. L., Lewis, S. C., & Holton, A. E. (2012). Normalizing Twitter. Journalism Studies, 13(1), 19–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  54. Mabweazara, H. M. (2010). When your “take-home” can hardly take you home. African Communication Research, 3(3), 431–450. [Google Scholar]
  55. Mabweazara, H. M. (2015). African journalism in the ‘digital era’: Charting a research agenda. African Journalism Studies, 36(1), 11–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  56. Mabweazara, H. M. (2016). Introduction: ‘Digital technologies and the evolving African newsroom’: Towards an African digital journalism epistemology. In Digital technologies and the evolving African newsroom (pp. 3–12). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  57. Madrid-Morales, D., Tully, M., Mudavadi, K. C., Matanji, F., & Diop, L. (2025). True Costs of Misinformation | Exploring Audience Agency in Countering Misinformation. International Journal of Communication, 19, 2382–2406. [Google Scholar]
  58. McDowall, W. (2018). Disruptive innovation and energy transitions. Energy Research & Social Science, 37, 243–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  59. McGregor, S. E., Watkins, E. A., & Caine, K. (2017). Would you Slack that? The impact of security and privacy on cooperative newsroom work. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 1(CSCW), 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  60. McIntyre, K., & Cohen, M. S. (2021). Salary, Suppression, and Spies: Journalistic Challenges in Uganda. Journalism Studies, 22(2), 243–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  61. McNair, B. (2005). What is journalism? In H. de Burgh (Ed.), Making journalists: Diverse models, global issues (1st ed., pp. 19–34). Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  62. Media Council of Kenya. (2020). Status of the media survey: November 2020 report. Available online: https://mediacouncil.or.ke/ (accessed on 20 March 2024).
  63. Mellado, C., & Alfaro, A. (2020). Platforms, journalists, and their digital selves. Digital Journalism, 8(10), 1258–1279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  64. Molyneux, L., & Holton, A. (2015). Perceptions, practices, and emerging norms. Digital Journalism, 3(2), 225–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  65. Molyneux, L., Holton, A., & Lewis, S. C. (2018). How journalists engage in branding on Twitter. Information, Communication & Society, 21(10), 1386–1401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  66. Moyo, D., Mare, A., & Matsilele, T. (2020). Editorial metrics and the reconfiguration of online news production practices in African newsrooms. In Measurable journalism (pp. 104–120). Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  67. Mudavadi, K. C. (2025). Despite lower pay, Kenyan journalists express higher job satisfaction: A decade later. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  68. Mudavadi, K. C., Tully, M., & Lomoywara, D. B. (2025). Exploring Kenyans’ interactions with misinformation on WhatsApp. Mobile Media & Communication, 13(1), 69–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  69. Mukami, P., & Bowers, S. (2021, October 15). Pandora papers: The secret offshore world of Kenya’s first family. Available online: https://bit.ly/3ztWipg (accessed on 20 March 2024).
  70. Ogola, G., & Cheruiyot, D. (2022). Algorithms and the news media in Kenya: Emerging issues in data policy and accountability. In J. Meese, & S. Bannerman (Eds.), The algorithmic distribution of news. Palgrave Macmillan. [Google Scholar]
  71. Ogola, G., & Owuor, M. (2016). Citizen journalism in Kenya as a contested “third space”. In Participatory politics and citizen journalism in a networked Africa: A connected continent (pp. 229–243). Palgrave Macmillan UK. [Google Scholar]
  72. Okoye, J.-B., Owino, R. A., Anyasi, L., & Mule, D. (2019). The alternative platform: Kenya’s television stations navigation during the switch off of Raila Odinga’s “Swearing-In”. Journalism Practice, 13(9), 1091–1105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  73. Olewe, D., & Louise, A. (2021, October 4). Pandora papers: Uhuru Kenyatta family’s secret assets exposed by leak. Available online: https://bbc.in/3zVlGWe (accessed on 20 March 2024).
  74. Onyebadi, U. (2012). Newspaper agendas and public opinion in the 2007 Kenyan presidential election. Equid Novi: African Journalism Studies, 33(2), 36–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  75. Paterson, C. (2013). Journalism and social media in the African context. Equid Novi: African Journalism Studies, 34(1), 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  76. Peifer, J. T. (2018). How TV news parody’s media criticism can influence perceived news media importance and media trust. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(3), 734–756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  77. Pickard, V. (2019). Democracy without journalism? Confronting the misinformation society. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  78. Posetti, J. (2018). Towards a sustainable model of journalism innovation in an era of perpetual change. Journalism Innovation Project. [Google Scholar]
  79. Powers, M., & Vera-Zambrano, S. (2023). The journalist’s predicament: Difficult choices in a declining profession. Columbia University Press. [Google Scholar]
  80. Reelforge & TIFA. (2019). Kenya media landscape report-July 2019. Reelforge Kenya; TIFA Research Limited. [Google Scholar]
  81. Reporters Without Borders. (2021). Kenya: World press freedom index. Available online: https://rsf.org/en/kenya (accessed on 20 March 2024).
  82. Reporters Without Borders. (2023). Index 2023 global score. Available online: https://rsf.org/en/index?year=2023 (accessed on 20 March 2024).
  83. Robinson, S. (2006). The mission of the j-blog: Recapturing journalistic authority online. Journalism, 7(1), 65–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  84. Robinson, S. (2011). Convergence crises: News work and news space in the digitally transforming newsroom. Journal of Communication, 61(6), 1122–1141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  85. Singer, J. B. (2005). The political j-blogger: ‘Normalizing’ a new media form to fit old norms and practices. Journalism, 6(2), 173–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  86. Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences. SAGE Publications, Inc. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  87. Toff, B. J. (2016). Journalism, polling, and the battle to define public opinion in American politics [Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin–Madison]. [Google Scholar]
  88. Udobang, W. (2019). Kenyan journalist Catherine Gicheru is worried her country knows everything about her. Index on Censorship, 48(3), 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  89. Voltmer, K., & Wasserman, H. (2014). Journalistic norms between universality and domestication. Global Media and Communication, 10(2), 177–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  90. Wahl-Jorgensen, K. (2019). Challenging presentism in journalism studies. Journalism, 20(5), 670–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  91. Wahl-Jorgensen, K. (2020). An emotional turn in journalism studies? Digital Journalism, 8(2), 175–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  92. Wahl-Jorgensen, K., & Hanitzsch, T. (2009). On why and how we should do journalism studies. In K. Wahl-Jorgensen, & T. Hanitzsch (Eds.), The handbook of journalism studies (pp. 3–16). Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  93. Waisbord, S. (2018). Truth is what happens to news: On journalism, fake news, and post-truth. Journalism Studies, 19(13), 1866–1878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  94. Wamuyu, P. K. (2020). The Kenyan social media landscape: Trends and emerging narratives. Available online: https://www.usiu.ac.ke/assets/image/Kenya_Social_Media_Lanscape_Report_2020.pdf (accessed on 20 March 2024).
  95. Ward, S. J. A. (2019). Journalism ethics. In The handbook of journalism studies (pp. 307–323). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  96. Wasserman, H. (2020). The state of South African media: A space to contest democracy. Publizistik, 65(3), 451–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  97. Willnat, L., Weaver, D. H., & Choi, J. (2013). The global journalist in the twenty-first century: A cross-national study of journalistic competencies. Journalism Practice, 7(2), 163–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
Table 1. Participant Information.
Table 1. Participant Information.
Name *GenderAgeCountyOccupationInterview Date
J-1M33KiambuJournalist2 February 2022
J-2MN/AKiambuFormer Journalist29 January 2022
J-3FN/ANairobiFormer Journalist12 February 2022
J-4M40NairobiEditor31 January 2022
J-5M36KiambuFormer Journalist3 February 2022
J-6F28NairobiFormer Journalist10 February 2022
J-7MN/ANairobiJournalist20 February 2022
J-8F25NairobiJournalist23 January 2022
J-9M29NairobiFormer Journalist15 February 2022
J-10M30NairobiFormer Journalist19 February 2022
J-11M28NairobiJournalist21 February 2022
J-12M29NairobiJournalist23 February 2022
J-13F26NairobiFormer Journalist27 February 2022
J-14M26NairobiJournalist26 January 2022
J-15F33NairobiFormer Journalist7 February 2022
J-16FN/ANairobiFormer Journalist16 February 2022
J-17F34NairobiJournalist24 February 2022
J-18MN/ANairobiFormer Journalist28 January 2022
J-19F41NairobiJournalist20 February 2022
J-20F26NairobiFormer Journalist21 February 2022
J-21M34NairobiFormer Journalist2 March 2022
J-22M36NairobiJournalist2 February 2022
* Aliases.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mudavadi, K.C.; Doll, M.E.; Shanahan, J. Kenyan Journalists’ Perceptions of Personal Media Channels for Professional Work. Journal. Media 2026, 7, 55. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia7010055

AMA Style

Mudavadi KC, Doll ME, Shanahan J. Kenyan Journalists’ Perceptions of Personal Media Channels for Professional Work. Journalism and Media. 2026; 7(1):55. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia7010055

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mudavadi, Kevin C., Meagan E. Doll, and James Shanahan. 2026. "Kenyan Journalists’ Perceptions of Personal Media Channels for Professional Work" Journalism and Media 7, no. 1: 55. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia7010055

APA Style

Mudavadi, K. C., Doll, M. E., & Shanahan, J. (2026). Kenyan Journalists’ Perceptions of Personal Media Channels for Professional Work. Journalism and Media, 7(1), 55. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia7010055

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop