COMMENT | If a media council should ever come about, it must go beyond simply providing Malaysians an outlet for their complaints and outrage against the media.  It must be founded on a conviction that the state will have as little involvement as possible in the news making process.  

Self-regulation in the newsroom is the preferred way to lift journalism standards. This is assuming that our journalists - trained to think inside the box, respect authority and revere institutions - are educable on good media practices.

Which boils down to this: Will a media council have the power to foster good practices and prevent the bad from spreading in an industry that is segmented by vernacular and racial aspirations?

Language, race and religion have historically framed the Malaysian narrative, which is reflected in the media reportage.  Let’s look back at the Allah controversy.  The issue was politicised beyond reason and good faith.

The mainstream media rightly reported what the opposing sides said. But they failed to moderate the religious rancour. They failed to educate readers on what drove the relationship between Christianity and Islam.  

They failed in their public service when they did not attempt to scrutinise the political rhetoric, nor shed light on the historico-cultural contexts of the religious diatribe.

Muslims and Christians once walked on common grounds. Islam and Christianity share as many similarities as there are differences.

Quality journalism would have researched the theological basis of the Allah controversy, given the abundant literature on the sacred roots of both religions.

Media council’s roles

What can a media council do to prevent such bad practices from spreading? How can the council hold journalists to account for their under-informed and under-researched reporting of religious and racial issues?  

A comparative study of six press councils in Western Europe noted that: "A true press council … brings together and represents the people who own the power to inform, those who possess the talent to inform and those who have the right to be informed.

"It is a permanent institution that is democratic, independent, flexible, multifunctional, harmless, and its sole purpose is to improve media service to the public. It can afford to do more than just settle complaints.”

The literature shows that media councils in many countries are, however, generally viewed as toothless adjudicators of public complaints. The strongest judgement is to censure a publication and direct the editor to publish a rejoinder or apology.  

Media councils have no legal powers to penalise publications, editors or journalists for unethical reporting, nor are they required to come before the council to respond to public complaints.

An example I’m familiar with is the Australian Press Council, set up in 1976 as a press self-regulator to stave off government involvement.

The council deals with complaints against newspapers, not against individual journalists. Editors are responsible for what appears in their newspapers, and their journalists’ conduct.  

Public complaints, however, are first lodged with the editor. The council only adjudicates complaints that are unresolved with the editors.

A complaint that is subject to the possibility of legal proceedings is not heard unless the complainant signs a waiver of their right to such action.  

Adjudications, with the presence of the editor and complainant, are held behind closed doors. Legal representation is not allowed so as to prevent its proceedings from becoming legalistic.  

Complaints about general dissatisfaction with the media, and those that are factually inaccurate or pertain to TV and radio rather than print or online are usually dismissed.

Publisher council members from the newspaper industry fund the APC’s work, which is to ensure that the media adhere to the council’s principles, adjudicate over public complaints and issue statements on media policy matters.

Because the council has no regulatory power or censure authority over unethical reportage, publication of its adjudications in the newspapers is voluntary.

Media councils in many countries are also tasked with educating and raising citizens’ awareness of their right to lodge formal complaints of unethical reporting.  

A European Union-funded media accountability project in Southeast Europe and Turkey lists some of the steps to empower citizens to make use of press councils.  

Crucial questions

For an effective Malaysia media council to materialise, these crucial questions must be clarified: If the council is funded by the government and major publishers whose major shareholders are political parties, how will the publisher membership compromise the council’s independence?

How will the council ensure no conflict between public duty and private interests among its members?  

How will the council practically instruct newspapers to lift their standards in the public interest when they are found to have breached the council’s principles?

How will the council persuade newspapers to ‘submit’ to its adjudications?  And, what if the newspapers dispute the council’s judgement or ignore its recommendations?

The mechanism and structure of a Malaysia media council being considered must steer clear of Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s autocratic view of the media during the early days of his first prime ministership.  

Addressing the World Press Convention in Kuala Lumpur (September 18, 1985) he said:  “The ability of the journalist to influence the course of events is out of all proportion to his individual right as a citizen of a democratic society.  He is neither especially chosen for his moral superiority nor elected to his post.  

“A free press is as prone to corruption as are the other institutions of democracy.  Is this then to be the only institution of democracy to be completely unfettered?”

Yes, prime minister. An unfettered responsible media is indispensable for Malaysians to be fully informed of how they are governed and to hold to account those who govern.  

The transparency and accountability that quality journalism brings to events and issues - complemented by the vigilant work of a media council - will more likely stem the rot of corruption in the system than a state-controlled media.   

The notion that journalists are free to think what they like, but will not necessarily be allowed to say what they think, should now be a thing of the past.

ERIC LOO is a senior fellow (journalism) at the School of the Arts, English & Media, Faculty of Law Humanities & Arts, University of Wollongong. He is also the founding editor of Asia Pacific Media Educator.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.