Facets of memes: The bad, the ugly and the hilarious

 A few years ago, a chubby little schoolboy from Ghana became an Internet sensation after his picture went online and consequently viral for wearing a serious facial expression. The boy, named Jake, became a favourite meme subject representing all manner of characters — from a grumpy driving instructor to an unimpressed security guard.

According to the BBC, Jake became famous accidentally: Cameraman Carlos Cortes, reports the BBC, had travelled to Ghana in 2015 to make a documentary about Solomon Adufah, an artist returning home from the US. The picture of Jake, then four, was one of hundreds taken by Cortes while Adufah taught art and creative studies to children.

“I just caught Jake in the moment of his teaching,” Cortes, of Chicago, told the BBC. “He definitely has a pensive look on his face.”

The two men then returned to the US, and the schoolboy’s picture began doing the rounds after Adufah shared it on his Instagram account. When he first realised it had gone viral, he was unsure of how to react to the posts, worried they were making fun of Jake.

“But then I remember a moment when I thought, what if all these ‘Likes’ turned into actual funds to help? I remember one day we spent 20 minutes just trying to make sure we had enough pencils for all the kids,” Cortes said.

Comic relief

So Adufah set up a fundraising campaign, hoping Jake would inspire people to turn their Likes into cash to help pay for his education and that of other children in the village. Within 24 hours, it had raised Sh200,000. The serious Ghanaian boy helped a whole community, thanks to a meme.

As prayer is to worshippers, memes are a culture of the Internet. The culture has grown as a way of having fun online and is popularly used on platforms like Facebook, YouTube, Reddit and 4Chan.

Memes have brought great comic relief even during crises such as the current Covid-19 pandemic. But it’s not all fun and games for the subjects of the memes. Many are trolled by them and their fundamental rights and freedoms breached as netizens have fun at their expense.

In Kenya, President Uhuru Kenyatta, Deputy President William Ruto, West Pokot Governor John Lonyangapuo, Health Cabinet Secretary Mutahi Kagwe and controversial preacher James Ng’ang’a are some of the most popular meme subjects for their words and physical gestures. Being public figures, these men are fair game for meme makers.

Not so for private citizens leading their quiet lives, and more so children, who are too young to understand why they are (in)famous. With cynicism, mockery and parody, Kenyans’ ability to crack relatable jokes is legendary. It follows times and trends, including even tragic events. For instance, Mr Kagwe’s warning on Covid-19, where he constantly warns that “anybody can get it” has been turned into a song.

But amid the fun, children have been caught up, with moral and legal questions about exposing minors to the online madness and its underlying dangers.

Recently, a four-year-old child from Baringo stunned Kenyans with her captivating pose in traditional attire with a Coca-Cola soft drink. Kenyans jumped on it and circulated it widely, going as far as making it a favourite sticker for WhatsApp.

Luckily, the Baringo girl Joy Chebiwott, has — so far — largely been met with love and admiration. In fact, the beverage maker was put under pressure to make Joy a brand ambassador.

Then there was a video of a young girl with a heavy Meru accent reporting how the dog ate her Big G, of course with the prompting of the person recording the video.

“Mbingijii imekulwa na ndongi,” she said.

This line ended up as a chorus of one of the now famous Gengetone songs while her image trended on social media. While the release of both the pictures and the video were consented to by the parents, the sensation they have caused online not only infringes on the privacy of the girls, but also jeopardises their safety, according to experts.

Ivy Kathungu, a family lawyer with Judy Thongori & Company Advocates, worries that parents tend to underestimate the dangers that such exposure causes.

“People don’t usually realise the seriousness of protecting a child’s privacy and dignity when using them in a context of a joke or comedy. You increase the risk of abduction or any other harm because, from their photos, they are recognisable,” says the advocate.

“It all starts with parents who share images of their children with the rest of the world. They’re breaching their right to privacy. Even if they don’t need to ask for consent, they should sit back and think about the decision to open their child to scrutiny, cyber-bullying and nasty comments,” she adds.

Before one clicks a send button, Ms Kathungu advises, one should ask oneself what one aims to achieve, for the gratification may be temporary but with long-term detrimental effects.

Section 19 of the Children Act provides that “every child shall have a right to privacy subject to parental guidance.”

Unlawful interference

This agrees with Article 10 of the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, stating that children have a right to privacy. Article 16 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of a Child says “no child shall be subject to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, or to unlawful attacks on his or her honour and reputation”.

In 2017, a petitioner at the High Court of Kenya won a case against the Norwegian Refugee Council for circulating photographs of minors in a pamphlet without their consent. In his ruling, Justice J A Okwany declared that the publication of the petitioner’s photograph and that of the minors by the respondent was unlawful, unconstitutional and a violation of their fundamental rights and freedoms under Articles 28 and 31 of the Constitution.

“An order of compensation in the global sum of Sh210,000 being general damages to be distributed at Sh70,000 for each of the claimants/petitioners herein,” said the judge of the Constitutional and Human Rights Division.

Instances have been reported where strangers take pictures of minors without any consent and circulate them on the Internet. Aided by loopholes in law, people continue to share such images, which could haunt the youngsters for the rest of their lives.

A good example is Chemutai, a 16-year-old girl from Baringo, whose photos were taken by a stranger and circulated online a month ago. It wasn’t the instant fame that bothered her, but the sexualisation of the image of her carrying a jerrican of water through a flooded section of Lake Baringo. The photo broke the Internet, with men analysing her physique and dressing. Others went to the extent of juxtaposing her against popular socialites and asking netizens to state their preference.

When the Saturday Nation visited Chemutai’s home in Kampi Samaki recently, she had burnt the white top and flowered skirt she was caught on camera wearing. They brought her unpleasant memories, she says.

“The man who took my photo was new around. He was dark, tall and well-built,” she recalls.

The day her friends showed her the pictures and the comments by strangers from far and wide, she couldn’t get sleep at night.

Her mother, Janet, is equally worried as her daughter, a Form One student, has become the centre of attention, to the extent that even opportunistic local politicians have been coming around for photo ops with the minor to boost their online presence.

Dignity and safety

“An aspirant for the position of MCA came and took pictures of her, promising to pay her school fees for the whole year and build us a permanent house, among other goodies. We are yet to hear from him since he sent out the pictures,” says the mother.

Ms Kathungu says the dignity and safety of children being exploited for jokes points to a society in need of redemption.

Kenya prohibits photography of people without consent. While that is a plus, the country lacks definitive laws on personality and image rights.

“We have a lacuna in the law because we are dealing with a new dispensation,” says Ms Kathungu. “The Children Act came in 2001, before social media became big. Phones and cameras were not widespread. We never anticipated what we’re grappling with now. It is upon all of us to accord children maximum protection.”

There have also been concerns about parents involving children in their vlogs (video blogs) and to what extent they should expose them. According to the Ann Craft Trust, an organisation that safeguards the rights of children, any photo of a child posted online could leave them vulnerable to grooming — a form of abuse that involves manipulating someone until they’re isolated, dependent, and more vulnerable to exploitation.

“Grooming itself is not listed as one of the 10 categories of harm in the Care Act. But many of the types of harm listed, including modern slavery, physical, sexual and financial abuse, can happen as a result of grooming. The risk is greater if the photo is shared along with information that makes the child identifiable —such as a school uniform,” the trust says on its website.

“Images may be shared online by would-be abusers. Anyone can copy, download, screenshot or share any image. And with image-editing software, even a perfectly innocuous picture can be transformed into something totally inappropriate,” it warns.

Parents are also advised to check the terms of service on the social platforms they use as some indicate that any images shared on their sites become the property of the network, which they could sell to third parties or used for commercial purposes without them realising it. 

You also need to consider your child’s public image. Any image of them posted online could haunt them for the rest of their life. Certain images could even harm their chances of getting a job, says Ms Kathungu.

[email protected]