Public enemy
BARE KNUCKLESPublished: Feb 25, 2001 1:10 AM | Updated: Jan 29, 2008 10:21 AM
It was certainly an unprecedented move. On May 3, World Press Freedom Day, a group of journalists from Malaysia's mainstream media handed over a petition to Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, urging for the repeal of the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA).
The petition, signed by more than 560 mainstream journalists from 11 mainstream print organisations, stated: "There is a growing feeling among the public that the local media cannot be trusted, that it is controlled by the government.
"We call on you to repeal the Act in order for the mainstream media to regain its independence and credibility in the eyes of the public."
A day before the petition was handed over to the Deputy Prime Minister, the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) named Mahathir Mohamad, along with Slobodan Milosevic and Jiang Zemin, on its list of "Enemies of the Press".
All this comes barely after a year of political crisis and economic uncertainty in Malaysia. A year during which the reporting of events by the mainstream media had plunged to unbelievably low depths and Malaysians, who had hitherto not questioned the media coverage of events, began to wonder if mainstream journalists were nothing more than government propagandists.
Thus, for many Malaysians, the petition was seen as a tiny flicker amidst the darkness that had descended on this country. Could it be, some wondered, that mainstream journalists was finally sick of toeing the line?
Was this a sign, others asked, that after months -- nay, years -- of walking around, hunched, due to all the "kow-towing" they had to do that mainstream journalists finally felt that they needed to regain some self-respect as professionals?
Or was it just another ploy, during this period of crisis, cynics sneered, to convince the rakyat that Malaysian journalists were not hacks but were, instead, sincere professionals who craved independence and freedom but were, unfortunately, stifled by repressive laws?
Whatever the motive, it is abundantly clear that a repeal of the PPPA alone would do very little to improve the sorry state of the mainstream media. It would certainly be a step in the right direction, but for genuine media reform to come about, a repeal of the PPPA would need to be part of a wider, more concerted set of policy and structural reforms.
Many may ask why all the fuss surrounding the media? Some may even suggest that because the mainstream media has lost so much credibility over this past year or so, nobody believes in them anyway.
However, it is erroneous to hold that the media plays no important role in Malaysian society. While the media may seem to have lost much credibility, ignoring them will not improve matters.
Instead, it will enable the stories they produce to remain unchallenged and unquestioned. It seals off any possibility of rebuttal, any possibility of debate, and, hence, any possibility of democratic exchange.
The media, Malaysian or otherwise, plays a pivotal role in defining the social reality for the majority of the public. This role becomes more important in the absence of alternative mass channels of information and explanation, and in the absence of alternative spaces for public discourse.
The onus is therefore on us all to demand for a fairer, more vigilant and more representative media, and, once this has been attained, for us to ensure that the media remains the same.
Denied media representation
To turn this issue on its head, we may well ask: are the mainstream Malaysian media really wanting? And in what ways? Indeed, what is really wrong with the mainstream media?
There are at least three important and related elements at issue here - access, regulation, and representation. Simply put, because of undemocratic legal and political regulation of the wider environment, legitimate groups and individuals in Malaysia are currently denied access to the mainstream media, resulting in their views, and they themselves, being denied representation in and by the mainstream media.
We are essentially talking about a couple of scenarios here. First, it is about the ability of different groups of Malaysians - for example, pensioners, businessmen, workers, women, and political parties -- to have a say in the mainstream media and to be allowed to express their opinions on to the public agenda via the mainstream media.
It is quite obvious that presently only the views of a small number of groups -- political, cultural, religious -- are represented by the media. Indeed, as the 1999 general elections draws nearer, we see the same pattern repeated -- the mainstream media being blatantly abused to relay one-sided information totally supporting the incumbent Barisan Nasional.
Other legitimate parties, such as the Barisan Alternatif component parties of the Democratic Action Party (DAP), Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM), Parti Keadilan and PAS, are constantly kept out of the media.
This lack of access afforded to certain legal and legitimate groups clearly goes against the principles of democracy. Second, it is about access to the actual running of the various media organisations; it relates to the question of who is actually allowed to own and operate Malaysian media organisations.
Questions of media ownership and control in the context of Malaysia were often dismissed by the Barisan Nasional government. And as opposition groups are allowed to operate their own party newspapers, this somehow signifies that democracy in Malaysia is alive and kicking.
This assertion is, of course, nonsensical. Mass circulation mainstream dailies, such as Utusan Malaysia and the New Straits Times, have large full-time staff, bureaus nationwide and a well-oiled distribution network.
Party papers like the Rocket of DAP and Harakah of PAS, on the other hand, are essentially limited circulation party pamphlets run largely by part-time staff, and lacking a professional and efficient distribution network nationwide.
To say this represents increasing freedom of the press in Malaysia is to disregard the legal and economic constraints under which the Rocket and Harakah operate. This perception also ignores the provision under the PPPA in which the home minister has the power to grant or withdraw the print licences of the domestic newspapers which have to be renewed annually.
The situation within the broadcast media is even more stifling. At the helm of the broadcast media are apologists for the regime who appear to believe that to tell a half-truth is not tantamount to telling a lie. Sticking diligently to this belief, these stations continue to act as propaganda machines for the regime in power, churning out message after message extolling the regime's imagined virtues and generally ignoring legitimate alternative viewpoints.
Broadcasting organisations, such as RTM and TV3 have never pretended to aspire towards impartiality or neutrality. Unlike their print counterparts, the broadcast media have never bothered to apologise or make excuses for their partiality. And any criticisms levelled at these broadcasting organisations regarding their political partiality have thus far fallen on deaf ears. Indeed, it would seem that they revel in their role as the regime's propagandists.
Media reform
It is clear, therefore, that Malaysian media reform is necessary if we genuinely wish to make ours a more democratic and representative society. It is not good enough to assert that new information technology -- of which Malaysiakini, for is a product -- will lead us to this democratic utopia.
What really needs to be addressed is the democratisation of the already-existing mass media -- both press and broadcasting. The process is certainly going to take some time. But we should all take heart with positive developments in neighbouring countries like Indonesia (where the new government has abolished the Ministry of Information) and Thailand (where legislation akin to a Freedom of Information Act has been introduced), and assure ourselves that such change can and will come about in Malaysia.
The first step, of course, is to convince ourselves that change is possible and desirable. Next, we would need to understand that we, as professional journalists, academics, ordinary citizens, must be the agents of peaceful change.
This, of course, does not mean merely putting our marks on ballot papers during general elections. It means a continuous and concerted effort at lobbying opposition and government politicians through various channels.
It means empowering and mobilising ourselves as members of civil society, as concerned and responsible citizens and groups, and pressuring the powers that be, whatever their political ideologies, to serve us democratically.
The potential benefits are self-evident. The alternative to such change is, of course, continuity. A continuance of an increasingly inane and mediocre situation where lies and half-truths masquerade as news and where professional journalists contend with earning a living from being mouthpieces of the existing regimes.
The petition, signed by more than 560 mainstream journalists from 11 mainstream print organisations, stated: "There is a growing feeling among the public that the local media cannot be trusted, that it is controlled by the government.
"We call on you to repeal the Act in order for the mainstream media to regain its independence and credibility in the eyes of the public."
A day before the petition was handed over to the Deputy Prime Minister, the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) named Mahathir Mohamad, along with Slobodan Milosevic and Jiang Zemin, on its list of "Enemies of the Press".
All this comes barely after a year of political crisis and economic uncertainty in Malaysia. A year during which the reporting of events by the mainstream media had plunged to unbelievably low depths and Malaysians, who had hitherto not questioned the media coverage of events, began to wonder if mainstream journalists were nothing more than government propagandists.
Thus, for many Malaysians, the petition was seen as a tiny flicker amidst the darkness that had descended on this country. Could it be, some wondered, that mainstream journalists was finally sick of toeing the line?
Was this a sign, others asked, that after months -- nay, years -- of walking around, hunched, due to all the "kow-towing" they had to do that mainstream journalists finally felt that they needed to regain some self-respect as professionals?
Or was it just another ploy, during this period of crisis, cynics sneered, to convince the rakyat that Malaysian journalists were not hacks but were, instead, sincere professionals who craved independence and freedom but were, unfortunately, stifled by repressive laws?
Whatever the motive, it is abundantly clear that a repeal of the PPPA alone would do very little to improve the sorry state of the mainstream media. It would certainly be a step in the right direction, but for genuine media reform to come about, a repeal of the PPPA would need to be part of a wider, more concerted set of policy and structural reforms.
Many may ask why all the fuss surrounding the media? Some may even suggest that because the mainstream media has lost so much credibility over this past year or so, nobody believes in them anyway.
However, it is erroneous to hold that the media plays no important role in Malaysian society. While the media may seem to have lost much credibility, ignoring them will not improve matters.
Instead, it will enable the stories they produce to remain unchallenged and unquestioned. It seals off any possibility of rebuttal, any possibility of debate, and, hence, any possibility of democratic exchange.
The media, Malaysian or otherwise, plays a pivotal role in defining the social reality for the majority of the public. This role becomes more important in the absence of alternative mass channels of information and explanation, and in the absence of alternative spaces for public discourse.
The onus is therefore on us all to demand for a fairer, more vigilant and more representative media, and, once this has been attained, for us to ensure that the media remains the same.
Denied media representation
To turn this issue on its head, we may well ask: are the mainstream Malaysian media really wanting? And in what ways? Indeed, what is really wrong with the mainstream media?
There are at least three important and related elements at issue here - access, regulation, and representation. Simply put, because of undemocratic legal and political regulation of the wider environment, legitimate groups and individuals in Malaysia are currently denied access to the mainstream media, resulting in their views, and they themselves, being denied representation in and by the mainstream media.
We are essentially talking about a couple of scenarios here. First, it is about the ability of different groups of Malaysians - for example, pensioners, businessmen, workers, women, and political parties -- to have a say in the mainstream media and to be allowed to express their opinions on to the public agenda via the mainstream media.
It is quite obvious that presently only the views of a small number of groups -- political, cultural, religious -- are represented by the media. Indeed, as the 1999 general elections draws nearer, we see the same pattern repeated -- the mainstream media being blatantly abused to relay one-sided information totally supporting the incumbent Barisan Nasional.
Other legitimate parties, such as the Barisan Alternatif component parties of the Democratic Action Party (DAP), Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM), Parti Keadilan and PAS, are constantly kept out of the media.
This lack of access afforded to certain legal and legitimate groups clearly goes against the principles of democracy. Second, it is about access to the actual running of the various media organisations; it relates to the question of who is actually allowed to own and operate Malaysian media organisations.
Questions of media ownership and control in the context of Malaysia were often dismissed by the Barisan Nasional government. And as opposition groups are allowed to operate their own party newspapers, this somehow signifies that democracy in Malaysia is alive and kicking.
This assertion is, of course, nonsensical. Mass circulation mainstream dailies, such as Utusan Malaysia and the New Straits Times, have large full-time staff, bureaus nationwide and a well-oiled distribution network.
Party papers like the Rocket of DAP and Harakah of PAS, on the other hand, are essentially limited circulation party pamphlets run largely by part-time staff, and lacking a professional and efficient distribution network nationwide.
To say this represents increasing freedom of the press in Malaysia is to disregard the legal and economic constraints under which the Rocket and Harakah operate. This perception also ignores the provision under the PPPA in which the home minister has the power to grant or withdraw the print licences of the domestic newspapers which have to be renewed annually.
The situation within the broadcast media is even more stifling. At the helm of the broadcast media are apologists for the regime who appear to believe that to tell a half-truth is not tantamount to telling a lie. Sticking diligently to this belief, these stations continue to act as propaganda machines for the regime in power, churning out message after message extolling the regime's imagined virtues and generally ignoring legitimate alternative viewpoints.
Broadcasting organisations, such as RTM and TV3 have never pretended to aspire towards impartiality or neutrality. Unlike their print counterparts, the broadcast media have never bothered to apologise or make excuses for their partiality. And any criticisms levelled at these broadcasting organisations regarding their political partiality have thus far fallen on deaf ears. Indeed, it would seem that they revel in their role as the regime's propagandists.
Media reform
It is clear, therefore, that Malaysian media reform is necessary if we genuinely wish to make ours a more democratic and representative society. It is not good enough to assert that new information technology -- of which Malaysiakini, for is a product -- will lead us to this democratic utopia.
What really needs to be addressed is the democratisation of the already-existing mass media -- both press and broadcasting. The process is certainly going to take some time. But we should all take heart with positive developments in neighbouring countries like Indonesia (where the new government has abolished the Ministry of Information) and Thailand (where legislation akin to a Freedom of Information Act has been introduced), and assure ourselves that such change can and will come about in Malaysia.
The first step, of course, is to convince ourselves that change is possible and desirable. Next, we would need to understand that we, as professional journalists, academics, ordinary citizens, must be the agents of peaceful change.
This, of course, does not mean merely putting our marks on ballot papers during general elections. It means a continuous and concerted effort at lobbying opposition and government politicians through various channels.
It means empowering and mobilising ourselves as members of civil society, as concerned and responsible citizens and groups, and pressuring the powers that be, whatever their political ideologies, to serve us democratically.
The potential benefits are self-evident. The alternative to such change is, of course, continuity. A continuance of an increasingly inane and mediocre situation where lies and half-truths masquerade as news and where professional journalists contend with earning a living from being mouthpieces of the existing regimes.
View Comments0