Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The document analyzes how Kenyan voters accessed information during the 2013 elections, finding that while media is highly trusted, personal discussions with close associates are the most powerful drivers of political persuasion. It highlights the limited impact of social media and the role of televised presidential debates in forming opinions, while noting that most voters' choices are based on long-standing party identification tied to specific leaders rather than party platforms.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The media is among the most trusted public institutions in Kenya, with private television channels being the only institution trusted by a majority of the population (51%).
  • Despite high trust, the media faced criticism for over-emphasizing the two main presidential candidates and practicing self-censorship to prevent violence, which led to the avoidance of reporting on certain protests and violence.
  • Personal discussions, particularly with spouses or partners, are the most influential sources of political persuasion, often outweighing the impact of the media.
  • Traditional media had significantly more reach than new technologies; only 13% of respondents used computers or mobile devices for election information, and social media did not significantly sway political choices.
  • Televised presidential debates were a positive development that helped a significant minority of voters form opinions, though they were more frequently watched by urban, educated, and male voters.
  • Political identification in Kenya is primarily based on individual leaders or candidates rather than party platforms, and 69% of voters had decided on their candidate long before the election.
  • Direct contact between the two largest coalitions (CORD and the Jubilee Alliance) and voters was limited, with both reaching only 12-13% of respondents, primarily in person.

Cite the original document

APA
Schulz-Herzenberg, C., Aling’o, P., & Gatimu, S. (2015). Voter information in Kenya’s 2013 election. Institute for Security Studies. https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/PolBrief75V3.pdf
Chicago
Schulz-Herzenberg, Collette, Peter Aling’o, and Sebastian Gatimu. Voter information in Kenya’s 2013 election. Institute for Security Studies, 2015. https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/PolBrief75V3.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |last1=Schulz-Herzenberg |first1=Collette |last2=Aling’o |first2=Peter |last3=Gatimu |first3=Sebastian |title=Voter information in Kenya’s 2013 election |publisher=Institute for Security Studies |date=February 2015 |url=https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/PolBrief75V3.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{schulzherzenberg2015voter, author = {Schulz-Herzenberg, Collette and Aling’o, Peter and Gatimu, Sebastian}, title = {{Voter information in Kenya’s 2013 election}}, institution = {Institute for Security Studies}, year = {2015}, month = feb, url = {https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/PolBrief75V3.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated