Oxygène PR Website Fails Google's Core Web Vitals Test as 12-Second Loading Time Raises Questions Over Digital Expertise
Oxygène Marketing Communications, one of Kenya's established public relations and strategic communications agencies, is facing uncomfortable questions about the performance of its own website after a Google PageSpeed Insights assessment exposed serious loading problems and multiple technical shortcomings. The Nairobi-based agency, which markets itself as a provider of digital technology, reputation management, crisis communications and corporate public relations services, recorded a mobile performance score of just 59 out of 100 in a test conducted on October 27, 2026. More concerning was the website's failure to pass Google's Core Web Vitals assessment, a widely recognised measure of how people experience websites when loading pages, interacting with content and navigating digital interfaces. The results raise questions about the standards being applied to Oxygène's own digital platform, particularly for a company that promotes website development, digital marketing and technology-driven communications among its professional services. According to the Google PageSpeed Insights report, oxygene.co.ke recorded a Largest Contentful Paint of 8.4 seconds in real-user data. Google's recommended threshold for a good experience is 2.5 seconds or less. This means the website's measured loading performance was more than three times slower than the recommended benchmark. The situation was even more pronounced in Google's simulated mobile performance test, where Largest Contentful Paint reached 12 seconds. In practical terms, this metric measures how long it takes for the largest visible content element on a webpage to appear. For a visitor accessing the website through a mobile device, such delays can create frustration, particularly when the purpose of the visit is to quickly find information about services, credentials or contact details. The assessment also recorded a First Contentful Paint of 6.9 seconds in real-user data and a Time to First Byte of 4.7 seconds. Time to First Byte measures how long it takes for the browser to receive the first byte of a response after requesting a webpage. The figure raises questions about server response times, caching arrangements and the website's delivery infrastructure. The simulated mobile test returned a First Contentful Paint of three seconds and a Speed Index of 9.2 seconds. These figures reinforce concerns about how quickly important content becomes visible to visitors. The website also recorded an Interaction to Next Paint of 221 milliseconds, exceeding Google's recommended good-performance threshold of 200 milliseconds. Interaction to Next Paint measures how responsive a webpage is when visitors interact with it. Although Oxygène's result was only moderately above the recommended threshold, it contributed to the site's failure to meet the complete Core Web Vitals assessment. Not every performance indicator was poor. The website achieved a Cumulative Layout Shift score of zero, indicating strong visual stability during the measured sessions. Its Total Blocking Time in the simulated mobile test was also relatively low at 170 milliseconds. Nevertheless, these positive results did not compensate for the much slower loading measurements. The audit identified several technical opportunities for improvement. Google flagged render-blocking requests with estimated potential savings of 2,750 milliseconds, suggesting that some resources may be delaying the display of important page content. It also identified opportunities to improve cache lifetimes, with approximately 1,762 KiB of resources potentially benefiting from more efficient caching. Image delivery was another area of concern, with estimated savings of 575 KiB. The report further identified 372 KiB of potentially unused JavaScript and 77 KiB of unused CSS, alongside five long main-thread tasks and 11 animated elements that were not using compositor-friendly techniques. These findings point to opportunities to reduce unnecessary browser work, improve asset delivery and streamline the website's loading process. For an ordinary business, such problems might be treated as routine technical maintenance. For Oxygène, however, the findings invite greater scrutiny because digital technology forms part of the agency's advertised expertise. On its official website, the company states that digital and technology services are central to its work. It promotes website and application development, social media campaigns and performance marketing as services available to clients. The company also markets itself as an adviser to corporate executives, offering strategic communications, public relations, stakeholder engagement, reputation management and crisis response. That positioning creates an obvious question about whether the agency's own website demonstrates the technical standards it encourages clients to adopt. The concerns extend beyond loading speeds. A review of the agency's published website copy also reveals editorial weaknesses, including a grammatical error in the section describing its digital capabilities. The phrase "through a our digital-first mindset" appears in a description of how the agency approaches technology and digital problem-solving. While a single grammatical error does not establish wider professional shortcomings, such mistakes are avoidable for a communications company whose services include editorial production, brand messaging and corporate communications. Oxygène's public profile makes the findings particularly noteworthy. The agency traces its origins to 2016, when experienced communications professionals established the business as an independent alternative in Kenya's competitive public relations industry. Its founding leadership included former senior media and communications executives, and the company subsequently developed relationships with major corporate organisations. Among the prominent businesses associated with the agency over the years is KCB Group, which was identified as an early client when the firm was established. The agency has also been publicly associated with NCBA through its participation in the bank's Elev8 programme, where it provided media training to artists involved in the initiative. That engagement demonstrates Oxygène's involvement in communications activities connected to NCBA but has failed in maintaining their reputation. The distinction is important when evaluating corporate communications performance. A public relations agency may be responsible for a specific campaign, event or training programme without controlling every aspect of a client's communications strategy. Nevertheless, the agency's association with major financial institutions highlights the level of professional expectations attached to its services. Banks and other large corporate organisations operate in environments where public confidence, digital accessibility, stakeholder communication and reputation management are important business considerations. Communications agencies serving such organisations are expected to demonstrate sound judgement, strong execution and the ability to respond effectively to emerging challenges. The performance of an agency's own website is not a direct measure of how successfully it handles a banking client's media relations or crisis communications. However, it is a visible demonstration of how the agency manages its own digital identity. For a company advertising integrated communications solutions, a website that fails Google's Core Web Vitals assessment presents a reputational challenge of its own. Oxygène's website states that the agency has more than 10 years of experience and has worked with over 100 clients. It also highlights its expertise in crisis management, financial communications, digital technology and reputation protection. Such credentials make the performance findings worthy of attention because corporate clients increasingly evaluate service providers through their digital platforms before initiating business relationships. A slow website can affect how quickly potential clients access information, review services, find case studies or submit enquiries. The October 27 assessment does not establish that every visitor experiences a 12-second delay. The 12-second figure came from a simulated mobile test, while the 8.4-second figure reflected real-user Largest Contentful Paint data. Both measurements, however, fall outside Google's recommended good-performance threshold. The audit also does not establish that Oxygène has failed to deliver on any particular client contract. Such a conclusion would require evidence about the agency's contractual responsibilities, agreed performance indicators, campaign results and client assessments. What the available evidence does establish is that the agency's own website has significant technical performance weaknesses that deserve attention. For Oxygène, the immediate challenge is straightforward: address the loading problems, improve resource delivery, review website content and demonstrate that its digital platform meets the standards expected of a professional communications business. The broader issue is one of consistency between the services an agency markets and the quality of its own digital presence. A company that advises businesses on reputation, public confidence and digital communication must recognise that its own website is part of the reputation it presents to the market. The Google PageSpeed Insights findings provide a measurable starting point for that conversation. Until the identified issues are resolved and the website is retested, questions about Oxygène's digital execution will remain relevant to anyone assessing the agency's publicly advertised technology capabilities.