Broadcasting subject to public censorship: Experts
Kurniawan Hari, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta
Public censorship of television or radio programs is much more effective than any regulations enforced by government offices or other institutions, broadcasting practitioners said.
They suggested, therefore, that the government and legislators revise the controversial broadcasting bill, which retains the censor's scissors in the hands of the government.
Ishadi S.K. of the Indonesian Television Association (ATVSI) insisted that control or evaluation over broadcast programs should be exercised only after those programs were aired.
"Control over the content of programs before they go on the air is considered a threat (to press freedom). An evaluation of a program is normally carried out after it has been broadcast," Ishadi, a former director general of radio, television and film, told a discussion here.
Abdul Rachman of the Telecommunications Society (Mastel), meanwhile suggested that if evaluations were to be made compulsory, they should be carried out by the broadcasting community itself.
Both practitioners were commenting on the provisions of the widely-criticized broadcasting bill, which gives the Indonesian Broadcasting Commission (KPI) the power to determine the standard, quality, content, and classification of programs.
The KPI is also authorized to draft regulations and codes of conduct for broadcasters.
The membership of the commission includes government officials.
Leo S. Batubara, a staunch critic of the bill, suspected that the bill was designed to hamper press freedom.
"With all these articles, the KPI takes over the roles of the Directorate for Radio, Television and Film, which acted like a monster," said Leo of the Indonesian Press and Broadcasting Society (MPPI).
All the practitioners agreed that a better broadcasting bill was needed to protect television and radio stations from angry mobs, possibly agitated by false report about the stations.
Responding to the demands, legislator Djoko Susilo, who also spoke at the discussion, acknowledged that he saw some problematic articles drafted by government officials.
According to Djoko, he and fellow legislators rejected some articles that gave the government the power to meddle in broadcasting affairs.
"But what can I do when most of the legislators support the role of the government?" he asked.
Legislators and government officials are currently promoting the controversial bill among the general public throughout the country.
They are making trips to a number of regional towns to hear the views of the people with a view to making revisions to the bill.
Despite all the promises, the chairman and members of the House working committee have made it clear that further deliberation on the bill would not result in significant changes.
Legitimate government intervention
- Article 17: through regulations on the number and coverage of local, regional, and national broadcasting stations; in media cross-ownership
- Article 28: in the issuance of licenses
- Article 29: in guidance for broadcasters
- Article 30: in networking
- Article 31: in broadcasting equipment
- Article 61: all these articles to be further provided for by government decree.