By: Hason Mutunzi Bwambale 
In a recent opinion piece, Daniel Kalinaki, Editor-in-Chief of the Daily Monitor, criticized UBC (Uganda Broadcasting Corporation) for operating as a government mouthpiece and delivering subpar content. While his concerns about UBC's independence and accountability are valid, it is crucial to consider the broader context and implications. This article aims to explore the reasons why Kalinaki's arguments inadvertently support the case for government support and the need for a constructive dialogue with the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) to achieve a balanced media landscape.

Daniel Kalinaki rightly emphasizes the importance of a broadcaster that serves the public interest. UBC, as a public broadcaster, has a responsibility to provide diverse and reliable content that caters to the needs of the citizens. By routing all advertisements through UBC, the government aims to secure funding for public broadcasting, ensuring its ability to fulfill its public service mandate effectively.

Contrary to Kalinaki's opinion, increased government support can actually contribute to UBC's independence and accountability. Adequate financial backing would alleviate UBC's debt burden, enabling the broadcaster to operate more autonomously and foster professional integrity. Transparent mechanisms for oversight and monitoring, strengthened by collaboration with NAB, can ensure that UBC remains accountable to the public's interests.

Kalinaki asserts that UBC employees are poorly paid, poorly trained, and unmotivated. Investing in UBC's infrastructure and workforce by providing financial stability through government support would address these concerns. Adequate resources would allow for 
capacity-building initiatives, employee training, and improved remuneration, leading to a motivated and skilled workforce that can deliver high-quality content to the public.

While it is important to consider potential monopolistic tendencies, it is crucial not to hastily assume that the government's directive aims to make UBC the sole business partner in the media industry. A constructive dialogue between NAB and UBC can facilitate a balance between the public broadcaster and privately owned media houses. Collaboration, rather than antagonism, will help identify areas where UBC can provide unique content or services, while privately owned media outlets can thrive in their respective specialties.

To foster a symbiotic relationship between UBC and privately owned media houses, NAB and UBC can engage in meaningful dialogue, exchange ideas, and establish guidelines for fair competition. A joint effort to develop a content-sharing platform could help minimize duplication while capitalizing on UBC's vast resources and nationwide reach. Additionally, adherence to established advertising standards and ensuring equal opportunities for all media organizations will be crucial to building trust and rapport.

Daniel Kalinaki's critique of UBC highlights the importance of discussing the broadcaster's independence, accountability, and content quality. However, rather than opposing government support for UBC, a nuanced understanding reveals that increased investment can address these concerns effectively. Rather than seeing the government directive as an attempt to monopolize the media market, NAB should engage in dialogue to shape a media landscape that balances UBC's public service mandate with the strengths of privately owned media entities. Collaboration between the two can pave the way for a thriving and diverse media ecosystem in Uganda.