Media union need not be seen as confrontational<\/p>\n
Ati Nurbaiti, Chairperson Alliance of Independent Journalist (AJI),
\nJakarta<\/p>\n
An intriguing feature of Indonesian journalism, to outsiders
\nin particular, is the \"envelope culture\". It is an extension of
\npervasive corruption, with the similar principal of \"you rub my
\nback and I rub yours\" -- but with the greater risk of affecting
\nnot only those who have their backs rubbed, but the public.<\/p>\n
We are told that since the \"envelope\" is a cultural thing,
\nthere is little that can be done about it. Senior journalists,
\nhowever, shake their heads saying they did not see such a massive
\nscale of this \"culture\" in their days. Along with rising
\nconsumerism in the 1970s, journalists, with their humble label of
\nkuli tinta (laborers of ink), became caught up in the growing
\nacceptance of press workers receiving an expression of gratitude
\nor friendship from sources.<\/p>\n
In time, \"bribery\" became unclear, especially when sources
\nwould tell young journalists in an imposing way that they had no
\nother intention than giving a small token of fatherly love, and
\nthat it would be impudent to reject such gifts.<\/p>\n
Despite journalists' code of ethics which do not allow the
\nacceptance of cash or gifts, or similar other things, it is
\nlargely the journalist's management which influences the strict
\napplication of the code.<\/p>\n
So far it has been the established large media organizations
\nwhich have managed this in a fairly consistent way, which also
\nmeans that their journalists have far less of an excuse to accept
\n\"envelopes\".<\/p>\n
However, the majority of the country's journalists work in
\nmedia organizations which pay them indecent wages; last year the
\nAlliance of Independent Journalists noted that in the country's
\nsecond largest city of Surabaya there were journalists still paid
\nRp 100,000 a month; and in Manado, North Sulawesi where the
\nminimum wage was then Rp 500,000, there were journalists paid Rp
\n300,000.<\/p>\n
No one can hope for a benevolent employer forever thinking of
\nemployees' welfare, as some journalists think. When journalists
\nthemselves rise higher in the management ranks, they also need to
\nthink of the long-term needs of the corporation than they
\npreviously would.<\/p>\n
One then needs to look further into one factor that so far
\nfeatures less in the debate of the envelope culture, which
\nrelates to inadequate wages -- the press union.<\/p>\n
The nature of the press union is still debatable here,
\nparticularly with journalists striving for a 20 percent share in
\nthe media ownership. But the alternatives do not make sense --
\njournalists relying more on their news sources than their
\nmanagement for more income, or employers trying to manage any
\nsign of unrest through \"family-like\" approaches to journalists
\nwhile their organizations get so big that the \"children\" don't
\nknow each other.<\/p>\n
Working in the press for some time gives you an idea of how
\ncolleagues can work for so many years on a persistently small
\nwage, though they try to seek other, more promising media
\norganizations.<\/p>\n
In one typical day on a particular beat, the journalist meets
\nnew and old sources, all of which he or she cultivates good
\nrelations with. While the office may pose an uncaring face when
\nit comes to journalists' welfare, the sources are sympathetic of
\nhis or her hard and long hours. No source will complain of
\nextortion when extending some help to such friends.<\/p>\n
The problem is of course that the journalist also works for
\nthe public through the broadcasting or publication of his work,
\nwhich may be slanted to the benefit of his friend -- unless this
\nis noticed by the editor.<\/p>\n
However the decades-long rhetoric of stopping the \"envelope
\nculture\" will go nowhere as long as journalists prefer not to
\nappear to confront their employers, when they can ensure
\nmedication for sick children or tuition for a daughter's
\neducation through a much better, congenial network of their
\nsources.<\/p>\n
Public access to products of better journalism would be better
\nensured if journalists were independent, as people suppose they
\nare. But independence does not come about only through rhetoric.<\/p>\n
In the media industry the natural relation of employers and
\nemployees needs to be recognized -- the often differing
\ninterests of one seeking more income and the other seeking more
\nprofit.<\/p>\n
Indeed this seemingly confrontational image of unions is a
\nconstraint largely avoided in the press industry. Problems of
\nwelfare can afford to go under the carpet because employees do
\nnot demand much of their employers, unlike in the factory.<\/p>\n
Journalists also do not like to think of themselves as
\nworkers; former minister of information Harmoko said we were
\nprofessionals not entitled to set up unions, while the law says
\nthat anyone receiving a wage is an employee. Only the Indonesian
\nword is the revolutionary sounding buruh, which under the New
\nOrder was associated with revolt and its sister of that time,
\ncommunism.<\/p>\n
Hence the allergy to activism including among journalists
\ndespite their own need of association.<\/p>\n
The days of rebellion may be gone without the obvious sight of
\na ruler thirsty for press control. Nowadays, a union need not be
\nseen in the light of confrontation, but as a natural part of the
\nmedia industry, as a means to bridge differing interests of
\nmanagement and employees -- while colleagues can issue the
\nmorning paper in the conviction that they are beholden only to
\nthe public interest.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/media-union-need-not-be-seen-as-confrontational-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}