Every time a Kenyan journalist spends a stint in police detention, the whole of Nairobi goes crazy.

Fellow newsmen and women rush to Ground Zero to show solidarity. Human rights organizations and other groups come out of the woodwork, for a chance to exhibit what they claim is their undaunted support and commitment to the cause of democracy. Politicians, some with questionable human rights records, abandon their activities and run to the police station for the photo opportunity. The more dramatic they act, the higher the likelihood of their pictures ending up on the front page. They scream at and scold police officers, who in most cases are only following orders. They kick the gates open in clear violation of the protocol they demand the government use in summoning the press. They try any and everything that would earn them notoriety in the press - anything.

In the midst of the madness, Kenyans forget the values of fairness and accuracy that the news media always claim to be upholding. Before you slap a label of "government apologist" on me, let me make one thing clear: I'm a journalist. I staunchly support all freedoms, not just that of the media.

What I despise greatly is irresponsible use of that liberty. I confess deep repugnance for journalists who act negligently under the banner of freedom of the press. They have turned the principle into a buzz phrase, only invoked when journalists have blundered. Take, for instance, the Monday article about the Arturs, which led to the subpoenas and eventual detention of editors and bosses of The Standard. Never in my career have I seen a story that better fits to be branded the epitome of reckless journalism.

The Standard took a "confession" of some deranged, attention-craving couple of thugs and "authoritatively revealed" it without investigating. What the newspaper tells us is that if someone confesses, it must be true. In the "Standard Team's" own words: "Although Margaryan's claims are outrageous, The Standard has decided to publish them because the whole story of the Arturs is confounding."

Confounding? Yes.

But should a story's ability to shock be the gauge journalists use to evaluate its credibility? If a man walks into my newsroom and says he knows a government minister involved in funding, arming, and training the militias unleashing terror in Mt. Elgon, but declines to give a name. Should I run with the story without checking it out? The Standard tells me I should.

No wonder politicians can go around claiming to be targets of assassination plots and end up on the front page without anyone challenging them to provide evidence. Or call the Arturs mercenaries hired by the government without the media asking where they got the dossier. Journalists are supposed to be a skeptical bunch that does not take anything at face value. They should - with zeal - investigate claims by a source and if they can't verify them kill the story.

The press should be held to the same high standards it expects of the government. It should not demand integrity, while engaging in corruption and propaganda. How can we, the government watchdog, rush to publish information we can't prove, but require that the same government follow the law when conducting its business? How can we take bribes, but assail the police when they do?

Kenyans are too blind to see that The Standard and some politicians are taking them for a joyride. I'm almost certain that in the days following the confrontation with the government, the paper sold out. Our country's citizens also have a moral obligation here. They are being drawn into a fight they don't need to be in. Lest we think that the media are righteous and don't need scrutiny. Citizens can and should ask the press questions.

For example, last year when the Arturs were deported from Kenya, the media reported that the two had forged travel documents and that they were not who they claimed to be. The names Sarkissyan Arman and Karkissyan Artak appeared on some of their passports. If The Standard now believes them, why isn't the paper asking and revealing what their real identities are?

By allowing ourselves to be duped into supporting the media's propaganda in the name of guarding freedom and democracy, we are doing our country an injustice that may over time become irreversible. If you can control information, you can manipulate people's minds. Currently, The Standard has that power. Its editors and publishers have an advantage over their opponents. They can make lopsided claims in the front pages, knowing those they accuse have no outlet to rebut them.

No one is disputing that the Arturs' scandal is worth probing. It is even possible that some government officials were involved in criminal activities with the duo. But we shouldn't solely rely on "confessions" of suspects whose motive is probably to sell the book they are allegedly writing. The leaders we elect are human beings like us. Any rumors going around, whether they turn out to be false, can damage a person's reputation. Let's refrain from the lazy way of opposing everything. It is possible to find good in people you don't agree with.

It is incumbent upon us to accord those who don't share our views the same respect we would expect if we were in their positions, for - as we have seen in the past - things change.