Facing a possible legal suit, EACC has just thrown nation under the bus. The CEO denies they ever talked to the Nation. EACC only requested for the governor's bank statement yesterday. The bank statement Nation were alluding to did not come from EACC. It was a river-road statement and only Nation can tell us where it came from.

Just like it takes great men to build empires, James mwangi of Equity or Michael Joseph for safaricom, it takes a special breed of losers to take a brand like Nation and turn it into gutter press within a decade.

What you meant to write was 'dyed-in-the-wool' ...
I have read the article linked and I do not see anything written there that leaves NMG exposed to a loss in the case of a libel suit...its all he-said, we-have-seen ..its weasel words top to bottom.
The other thing to note is that you are a self-declared shill for NASA, whatever you say invites skepticism. If you are accusing NMG of something because they hit a guy in your camp, you could also be equally guilty of trying to neuter what could be valid claims of embezzlement. You do not have the moral capital to attack the newspaper my fren

This presidential debate is a such a disaster!
All the media combined are blaming the candidates for not turning up but when all fail to turn up then maybe, just maybe the problem is the media...

............The reasons the two candidates’ representatives gave were very similar and very valid.

First, is the issue of the setting up of DBL itself as a private sector initiative, ready to do business by organising presidential debates on live television which will, without doubt, make some substantial money from advertising.

DBL itself may, or may not, benefit tremendously from the advertising cash earned but the stations will definitely get something handsome. The TV stations are unlikely to be getting into this business as missionaries; that is unlikely to be their newfound contribution to philanthropy at election time.

Politicians know that election time is when there is a high premium to adverstise and the media falls into good times in such moments. Bring popular politicians on the screen for a verbal duel and all their supporters and detractors will no doubt be glued. Advertisers will no doubt scramble for space, definitely at a premium price. Now, begin following my trend of thought if you are still wondering where I am going.

Second, which politician will, therefore, like to be used “opportunistically” as Raphael Tuju put it? To begin with, a participant in the debate such as President Uhuru and Raila would need full disclosure about DBL: Its directors, the purpose for which the firm was set up and whether any other political entity — locally or abroad — has some interest or influence on it. These are pertinent issues that cannot be swept under the rug. DBL should be aware that sections of the public are asking these questions. Kenyans have become much more aware of their “need to know” than ever before.

Third, both Raila and Uhuru are themselves “walking television stations.” In other words, wherever they are, the media will run after them looking for news. They sell. But they have never asked any media owner to pay them royalties although they make money for them. They get something in return which is difficult to quantify — publicity. Ask yourself now, why would Raila and Uhuru risk getting some publicity whose content they are not sure of, when they know fully well that just by staying away from the debate that will itself be news? I may sound like a cynic but the question is worth asking. Swallow that and I will tell you another.

Fourth, I have talked about content, let me elaborate. In the US, where such debates have become an accepted tradition, there are some procedures that are always followed, and which are well known to both the candidates and the debate organisers. In fact, these procedures were worked on quite some time ago to the extent that they have become part of the political culture in that country. In our case, these procedures still exist in the heads, or perhaps the files, of institutions such as DBL. Advertising these procedures in the newspapers and assuming that presidential candidates will read and agree with them automatically is perhaps presumptive at best and naive at worst.