Journalists not mere scribes of events
BARE KNUCKLESPublished: Mar 2, 2001 12:14 AM | Updated: Jan 29, 2008 10:21 AM
A number of pieces last Sunday (Feb 27) in Malaysia's mainstream press, particularly the Sun on Sunday and the Sunday Star, made an interesting read. They generally examined the (sorry) state of the mainstream media under Malaysia's restrictive laws, and the consequent popularity of the alternative media among inquisitive and thinking Malaysians.
The Sun on Sunday was concerned about the legal constraints that not only affect the country's press freedom, but also the credibility of the mainstream media, which it considered very important.
The Sunday Star, in particular senior journalist Wong Chun Wai's piece, somewhat grudgingly acknowledged the important role that the alternative media such as malaysiakini play in a democracy because "There is room for alternative and dissenting views, even if we do not agree with it (sic)."
He also curiously implied that a balance of sorts is attained in the country's media, what with the existence of the alternative media (that are considered pro-opposition), on the one hand, and of the mainstream media (that are categorised as pro-establishment), on the other.
Such a binary opposition accorded to the media is fallacious and simplistic. To start with, the playing field isn't level. Whatever alternative media Malaysia has are not the same as the mainstream media in terms of, among others, publication frequency, financial muscle, and numbers.
Moreover, not all of the alternative media would like themselves to be seen as merely pro-opposition. A few of them, at least, would rather be, and perceived to be, independent of any political and social groups in the primary interest of protecting and promoting their own credibility.
Confounding statement
If past developments in the nation's mass media are anything to go by, the freedom to publish is very much restricted by the Printing Presses and Publications Act, which empowers the home minister to grant, deny or revoke publishing permits and printing licences for whatever reason.
This explains why the alternative media are relatively smaller in number, and even then this number is dwindling especially with the recent spate of bans on several publications such as popular tabloid Eksklusif, and critical magazines Detik and Al-Wasilah.
But what's even more disturbing about Wong's article is his final paragraph, which essentially grimly reminded all journalists in this land " that they are reporters - period. They are not crusaders, politicians or social activists."
What are we to make of this statement? That journalists, in their professional quest to report and publicise events and developments of the day, should not play an active, let alone advocacy, role for fear of losing their so-called professional objectivity and even neutrality?
Coming from someone like Wong who takes pride in working for a newspaper that supposedly shows its political stand, this assertion is certainly confounding to say the least.
Political, cultural baggage
Are we to believe that Malaysian journalists are, or should be, if at all possible, a passive, apolitical and disinterested lot, mere recorders of social developments and events? That what they select to report and the way they highlight certain issues are entirely done out of their own free will and in isolation of various social and institutional influences?
Moreover, how objective can an editor or journalist be when the paper she works for has already a certain bias built into its organisational philosophy as regards its relations with certain political parties, economic bodies, etc? In other words, wouldn't the political, economic/financial and social interests of the newspaper concerned by and large inform the selection and coverage of most news events? Surely the media do not work in a social vacuum.
At the personal level, wouldn't the political and cultural baggage that an editor, for instance, carries influence the kind of news stories that she assigns to the journalists on the news desk? And wouldn't these and other factors influence the way, for example, a story is covered in terms of the length of the news coverage, photograph used and the positioning of the news item itself?
For example, on that Sunday itself the Sunday Star published on page eight a news story, headlined 'Ex-DAP chief applies to join Keadilan', and was accompanied by a photo of a smiling Keadilan leader Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail and former Penang DAP chairperson Teoh Teik Huat shaking hands.
Would the newspaper concerned, given its political inclination towards MCA and BN, have bothered to publish this story if it involved instead former members of Umno or MCA joining Keadilan?
Sure, the story of former DAP member joining Keadilan is newsworthy in itself. But the manner in which it was covered by the newspaper concerned indicates to us that it isn't merely a matter of newsworthiness that it got the kind of coverage that it did. There is some political consideration involved, and seasoned journalists such as Wong wouldn't be so nave as not to notice this.
Compassion, truth and justice
Even a newspaper that strives to be independent has, as a media entity, its own political inclination and also a stand on certain issues. And in this case, its editors as well as journalists can only attempt to be as objective and fair as possible.
It is important, though, that the journalists are made aware of this institutional reality so that for one, they won't be nave, and also they would be intellectually and politically prepared to engage with this limitation if and when the situation arises.
Be that as it may, equally important and useful is for journalists in general to be passionate about questions of social justice, freedom and human rights. For these would be the driving motor that moves many journalists to try to bring to public attention, say, the exploitation of a group of factory workers, the unjust demolition of squatter houses, the displacement of a small community by gigantic development projects, etc.
At the end of the day, it is hoped that such reportage would help right the wrong in our society, a professional practice which should be part and parcel of a nation-building process.
And if such an inclination that prevails among certain journalists, especially the so-called idealistic, young journalists, is categorised by such names as 'social activism', 'crusade' or 'politics', so be it.
Besides, the credibility of a media organisation not only hinges on bare facts and figures, but also on news that has the elements of human compassion, truth, and justice. That is, the kind of coverage that is people-friendly, that also unravels human sufferings, despairs and hopes of the ordinary people, especially the underclass.
The Sun on Sunday was concerned about the legal constraints that not only affect the country's press freedom, but also the credibility of the mainstream media, which it considered very important.
The Sunday Star, in particular senior journalist Wong Chun Wai's piece, somewhat grudgingly acknowledged the important role that the alternative media such as malaysiakini play in a democracy because "There is room for alternative and dissenting views, even if we do not agree with it (sic)."
He also curiously implied that a balance of sorts is attained in the country's media, what with the existence of the alternative media (that are considered pro-opposition), on the one hand, and of the mainstream media (that are categorised as pro-establishment), on the other.
Such a binary opposition accorded to the media is fallacious and simplistic. To start with, the playing field isn't level. Whatever alternative media Malaysia has are not the same as the mainstream media in terms of, among others, publication frequency, financial muscle, and numbers.
Moreover, not all of the alternative media would like themselves to be seen as merely pro-opposition. A few of them, at least, would rather be, and perceived to be, independent of any political and social groups in the primary interest of protecting and promoting their own credibility.
Confounding statement
If past developments in the nation's mass media are anything to go by, the freedom to publish is very much restricted by the Printing Presses and Publications Act, which empowers the home minister to grant, deny or revoke publishing permits and printing licences for whatever reason.
This explains why the alternative media are relatively smaller in number, and even then this number is dwindling especially with the recent spate of bans on several publications such as popular tabloid Eksklusif, and critical magazines Detik and Al-Wasilah.
But what's even more disturbing about Wong's article is his final paragraph, which essentially grimly reminded all journalists in this land " that they are reporters - period. They are not crusaders, politicians or social activists."
What are we to make of this statement? That journalists, in their professional quest to report and publicise events and developments of the day, should not play an active, let alone advocacy, role for fear of losing their so-called professional objectivity and even neutrality?
Coming from someone like Wong who takes pride in working for a newspaper that supposedly shows its political stand, this assertion is certainly confounding to say the least.
Political, cultural baggage
Are we to believe that Malaysian journalists are, or should be, if at all possible, a passive, apolitical and disinterested lot, mere recorders of social developments and events? That what they select to report and the way they highlight certain issues are entirely done out of their own free will and in isolation of various social and institutional influences?
Moreover, how objective can an editor or journalist be when the paper she works for has already a certain bias built into its organisational philosophy as regards its relations with certain political parties, economic bodies, etc? In other words, wouldn't the political, economic/financial and social interests of the newspaper concerned by and large inform the selection and coverage of most news events? Surely the media do not work in a social vacuum.
At the personal level, wouldn't the political and cultural baggage that an editor, for instance, carries influence the kind of news stories that she assigns to the journalists on the news desk? And wouldn't these and other factors influence the way, for example, a story is covered in terms of the length of the news coverage, photograph used and the positioning of the news item itself?
For example, on that Sunday itself the Sunday Star published on page eight a news story, headlined 'Ex-DAP chief applies to join Keadilan', and was accompanied by a photo of a smiling Keadilan leader Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail and former Penang DAP chairperson Teoh Teik Huat shaking hands.
Would the newspaper concerned, given its political inclination towards MCA and BN, have bothered to publish this story if it involved instead former members of Umno or MCA joining Keadilan?
Sure, the story of former DAP member joining Keadilan is newsworthy in itself. But the manner in which it was covered by the newspaper concerned indicates to us that it isn't merely a matter of newsworthiness that it got the kind of coverage that it did. There is some political consideration involved, and seasoned journalists such as Wong wouldn't be so nave as not to notice this.
Compassion, truth and justice
Even a newspaper that strives to be independent has, as a media entity, its own political inclination and also a stand on certain issues. And in this case, its editors as well as journalists can only attempt to be as objective and fair as possible.
It is important, though, that the journalists are made aware of this institutional reality so that for one, they won't be nave, and also they would be intellectually and politically prepared to engage with this limitation if and when the situation arises.
Be that as it may, equally important and useful is for journalists in general to be passionate about questions of social justice, freedom and human rights. For these would be the driving motor that moves many journalists to try to bring to public attention, say, the exploitation of a group of factory workers, the unjust demolition of squatter houses, the displacement of a small community by gigantic development projects, etc.
At the end of the day, it is hoped that such reportage would help right the wrong in our society, a professional practice which should be part and parcel of a nation-building process.
And if such an inclination that prevails among certain journalists, especially the so-called idealistic, young journalists, is categorised by such names as 'social activism', 'crusade' or 'politics', so be it.
Besides, the credibility of a media organisation not only hinges on bare facts and figures, but also on news that has the elements of human compassion, truth, and justice. That is, the kind of coverage that is people-friendly, that also unravels human sufferings, despairs and hopes of the ordinary people, especially the underclass.
View Comments0