Balanced reporting

This is in response to John Hargreaves' July 24 letter.

Hargreaves misinterprets my previous letters as "not approving of western journalists." Let me state that I have the highest respect for all journalists who practice accuracy, balance and completeness. Also, I will not continue the air show discussion, not due to an inability to reply but because of my promise to end it.

That leaves the rest of his letter, namely his laudatory comments about the Australian-born, UK-based journalist John Pilger. Despite Pilger's relative fame (he is largely unknown in North America), I do not rate him worthy of much praise.

Pilger's sensational and tendentious reporting style has been criticized by his own journalistic peers. In response, Pilger has been known to issue legal writs on those parties questioning his reportorial abilities -- which I think is a reflection of the man's prickly character and sheer conceit.

John Pilger once wrote a story on 200,000 being sold into child slavery in Thailand. When his report was discredited by others, Pilger angrily sent off a reply to various news agencies, publications, and television stations. The man's need for publicity and wide press exposure was clear in his actions. No less than Derek Davies, the former editor of Far Eastern Economic Review -- a journalist regularly granted interviews by top political figures -- wrote that Pilger did not show (any) degree of fairness to Thailand. He also pointed out that Pilger, in a subsequent article, used the word (paid) "laborers" instead, indicating an earlier exaggeration and a shift of ground. Journalists use words to inform accurately, and that was clear journalistic distortion.

Davies wrote further that Pilger's work "illustrated the thoughtless harm that can be done by media in the West which publish inadequately researched articles on the Third World". Pilger liked to boast that his style was "risk journalism -- the very best kind," but it has been commented by others that Pilger was often "overblown and spiteful".

I have read Pilger's book, Distant Voices, including his chapter on East Timor. Despite the promotional blurb on the black cover, readers should realize that the book is the work of one man with an axe to grind, not holy writ. The whole tone of the book is accusatory and attention-grabbing, not balanced journalism. On East Timor, Pilger makes no attempt, like a good journalist would, to present any positive side of the province's integration into Indonesia.

John Pilger may be expressing his right to free speech whenever he engages in his journalistic vendettas, but some media people -- not to mention governments -- have criticized him harshly. Pilger tends to think in black-and-white terms on very complex issues, including this diverse nation and society called Indonesia.

Finally, unlike Mr. Hargreaves, I do not believe that John Pilger truly cares about "the sufferings of Indonesian citizens". The man does not really know this country. What Pilger really cares about, first and foremost, is journalistic glory. He has many detractors in the world, who do not quite put him on such a lofty pedestal.

FARID BASKORO

Jakarta