No real information when press is repressed<\/p>\n
The Indonesian press has been accused of having the tendency
\nto blow up superficial issues and failing to dig into the real
\nissues. Media analyst Daniel Dhakidae links these practices to
\nthe fear of being banned.<\/p>\n
Question: Some say the press is only able to present shallow
\nreports on given issues, rather than digging into the gist of the
\nissues. Your comments?<\/p>\n
Answer: That's obvious. Why? Because both the business and
\neditorial activities of the print media are very much dependent
\non a publishing license, a SIUPP (which can be easily canceled).<\/p>\n
The Indonesian press, therefore, works within a very narrow
\ncorridor. There are so many prohibitions and restrictions they
\nmust pay attention to. It's understandable if they look for
\nsomething \"safer\" to write. However, I don't think it's a
\nmistake.<\/p>\n
Q: Why do you say that?<\/p>\n
A: The people wish the press were courageous in their
\nreporting. It's a misplaced wish. The problem is not whether the
\npress is daring or not. Besides, they have already proven
\nthemselves gutsy. Since the 1970s, there have been 18
\npublications banned without any legal process. How can people say
\nthey are not courageous?<\/p>\n
The problem is, there is no \"institutional linkage\" which
\nmakes it possible for the press to work in a natural way. This is
\nthe most basic reason why the press can't report the substance of
\nan issue. There are so many serious questions behind an issue.
\nHowever, they only write on the superficial ones.<\/p>\n
There are some possibilities why it is so. First, the real
\nissue cannot be published. Second, they are not allowed to cover
\nit. Third, they are not able to do so.<\/p>\n
Having such a narrow journalistic space to work within, they
\nare forced to avoid writing about real issues. Once they reveal a
\nreal issue, some consequence -- it could be anything -- awaits
\nthem.<\/p>\n
Q: Why are they afraid of taking the risk of revealing a real
\nissue?<\/p>\n
A: Once they take the risk, no one will support them. Some may
\nhave great concern about them, but it's not an effective concern.
\nIt's not an institutional one.<\/p>\n
Take the case of Tempo magazine, which was banned in 1994.
\nPublic support and sympathy conveyed to the magazine only
\nrevealed that we had nothing effective to stop such a thing from
\nhappening. If we had, there would have been no need for Tempo to
\ndie before it went to court. The decision to close or ban a
\npublication should only be made by a court.<\/p>\n
What I'm trying to say is, there is no guarantee that a local
\npublication won't be banned without legal process. If there was
\nsuch a guarantee, I'm quite sure the Indonesian press would be
\ncapable of reporting on real issues. Thus, they write on non-
\nissues just for fun.<\/p>\n
Q: What can we do to get such a guarantee?<\/p>\n
A: It's already beyond the press' domain. It's political in
\nthe meaning that the institutional linkage among mass and
\ngovernment institutions as a whole, including the House of
\nRepresentatives, the judicial institutions, the Supreme Court,
\netc., doesn't work well. These institutions don't have the guts
\nto say that something is not right. They are not capable of
\nmaking a fair judgment.<\/p>\n
In the case concerning the banning of Tempo magazine, for
\nexample, the House of Representatives could have said the banning
\nwas wrong and suggested (that the government should be) suing the
\nmagazine instead.<\/p>\n
By so doing (taking the magazine to court), they would have
\nforced the respective institutions to bind themselves into a
\nsystem. This is what I refer to as an \"institutional linkage\".<\/p>\n
Q; What about the freedom of the press, which is always
\nparroted by government officials?<\/p>\n
A: The government doesn't use the term \"freedom of the press\",
\nbut \"free and responsible press\". This is unique and funny to me.<\/p>\n
The word freedom implies responsibility. Freedom is
\nresponsibility. Responsibility is freedom, from another point of
\nview. The two words are the two sides of the same coin. It's
\nthose who have freedom who are capable of being responsible.
\nEvery freedom is restricted with responsibility. Responsibility
\nmeans immersing oneself in a political and economics process and
\nrefusing to view a political process as a political fate.<\/p>\n
Expressing explicitly a \"free and responsible press\",
\ntherefore, is only saying the obvious.<\/p>\n
Q: Does it mean there is no need to restrict the freedom of
\npress?<\/p>\n
A: Every government would surely like their press to write
\nthings just as they want. But we have to realize that what
\nactually happens to us is often beyond our control. And as far as
\nI am concerned, our press is responsible enough in doing their
\njob. They exercise their freedom well. Only a few of them cross
\n\"the line\".<\/p>\n
Q: Some say we always have our own definition on anything,
\nincluding freedom of the press, in defiance against its universal
\nmeaning. Your comment?<\/p>\n
A: It happens not only in Indonesia. But the important thing
\nis that the press should be given enough space to seize the real
\nissue.<\/p>\n
The lack of the chance for the press to do so will render it
\nincapable of differentiating the real issues from the non-issues.
\nThis can bring damage to the whole country. Every one in the
\ncountry will suffer from that. No one will get the real
\ninformation. This will, in turn, lead us all to a wrong judgment,
\na wrong decision.<\/p>\n
We will be swimming in a pool of bubbles. It's very dangerous.
\nWe'll never know how thick the layer of foam is. Anything heavy
\nwill easily make us drown.<\/p>\n
Q; What should we do to prevent such a thing from happening?<\/p>\n
A: Set up the institutional linkage. The concrete way of doing
\nit is stop banning the press. Secondly, never think that issuing
\na new license for a banned press will solve the real problem. A
\nhalt to bannings of the press is not a dream. It's constitutional
\nto do so and practical too. (swa)<\/p>\n
Daniel Dhakidae is senior researcher at the Research and
\nDevelopment Department of the Kompas daily.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/no-real-information-when-press-is-repressed-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}