Broadcasting subject to public censorship: Experts<\/p>\n
Kurniawan Hari, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta<\/p>\n
Public censorship of television or radio programs is much more
\neffective than any regulations enforced by government offices or
\nother institutions, broadcasting practitioners said.<\/p>\n
They suggested, therefore, that the government and legislators
\nrevise the controversial broadcasting bill, which retains the
\ncensor's scissors in the hands of the government.<\/p>\n
Ishadi S.K. of the Indonesian Television Association (ATVSI)
\ninsisted that control or evaluation over broadcast programs
\nshould be exercised only after those programs were aired.<\/p>\n
"Control over the content of programs before they go on the
\nair is considered a threat (to press freedom). An evaluation of a
\nprogram is normally carried out after it has been broadcast,"
\nIshadi, a former director general of radio, television and film,
\ntold a discussion here.<\/p>\n
Abdul Rachman of the Telecommunications Society (Mastel),
\nmeanwhile suggested that if evaluations were to be made
\ncompulsory, they should be carried out by the broadcasting
\ncommunity itself.<\/p>\n
Both practitioners were commenting on the provisions of the
\nwidely-criticized broadcasting bill, which gives the Indonesian
\nBroadcasting Commission (KPI) the power to determine the
\nstandard, quality, content, and classification of programs.<\/p>\n
The KPI is also authorized to draft regulations and codes of
\nconduct for broadcasters.<\/p>\n
The membership of the commission includes government
\nofficials.<\/p>\n
Leo S. Batubara, a staunch critic of the bill, suspected that
\nthe bill was designed to hamper press freedom.<\/p>\n
"With all these articles, the KPI takes over the roles of the
\nDirectorate for Radio, Television and Film, which acted like a
\nmonster," said Leo of the Indonesian Press and Broadcasting
\nSociety (MPPI).<\/p>\n
All the practitioners agreed that a better broadcasting bill
\nwas needed to protect television and radio stations from angry
\nmobs, possibly agitated by false report about the stations.<\/p>\n
Responding to the demands, legislator Djoko Susilo, who also
\nspoke at the discussion, acknowledged that he saw some
\nproblematic articles drafted by government officials.<\/p>\n
According to Djoko, he and fellow legislators rejected some
\narticles that gave the government the power to meddle in
\nbroadcasting affairs.<\/p>\n
"But what can I do when most of the legislators support the
\nrole of the government?" he asked.<\/p>\n
Legislators and government officials are currently promoting
\nthe controversial bill among the general public throughout the
\ncountry.<\/p>\n
They are making trips to a number of regional towns to hear
\nthe views of the people with a view to making revisions to the
\nbill.<\/p>\n
Despite all the promises, the chairman and members of the
\nHouse working committee have made it clear that further
\ndeliberation on the bill would not result in significant changes.<\/p>\n
Legitimate government intervention<\/p>\n
- Article 17: through regulations on the number and coverage of
\nlocal, regional, and national broadcasting
\nstations; in media cross-ownership<\/p>\n
- Article 28: in the issuance of licenses<\/p>\n
- Article 29: in guidance for broadcasters<\/p>\n
- Article 30: in networking<\/p>\n
- Article 31: in broadcasting equipment<\/p>\n
- Article 61: all these articles to be further provided for by
\ngovernment decree.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/broadcasting-subject-to-public-censorship-experts-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}