Does patriotic journalism really exist?

Ignatius Haryanto, Vice Executive Director, Institute for Press and Development Studies (LSPP), Jakarta

Can journalism be categorized as patriotic or unpatriotic? Media is an information tool, and is provided by people who must serve their readers, or viewers with information.

It is not the journalists' problem, whether the news they write or air will benefit one party or many. Since each has his or her own interests, the media itself cannot satisfy all.

The main problem we face here is the kind of relationship that should exist between the military the and media during wartime. Although the military have a special program called embedded journalists, the military cannot claim that every media enterprise, domestic or foreign, will support them in Aceh. What we have seen so far is a restriction of media coverage, and intimidation of journalists by both the military, GAM and "unidentified parties", and also investigation of journalists critical of the warring sides.

The military has asked journalists to support "national integrity above press freedom", and State Minister of Communications and Information Syamsul Mu'arif said that the media had to work "within the framework of the unitary state of the Indonesian Republic."

A legislator representing the Indonesian Military (TNI), Maj. Gen. Slamet Supriyadi, echoed military colleagues, saying "there should be no `coverage of both sides' for the sake of national interests".

Any demand to undermine a journalist's ethics is like persuading someone to betray his or her own profession. Covering both sides of an issue is a principle held sacred in journalism, as sacred as the facts that a journalist finds in the field. Likewise, can we force the military to reveal its strategy during war?

Asking journalists to betray their own ethics is an indication of the low level of confidence on the part of both warring parties in their ability to win over the Acehnese people's minds and hearts. If the government really has the conviction that it can settle the Aceh problem, it should not worry too much about the media.

To win the minds and hearts of the Acehnese, the government and the TNI should prove they are qualified and professional in settling the Aceh problem, not only with their military approach but also by giving peace a chance, and conducting the humanitarian operation as promised.

Agreeing to implement "patriotic journalism" would mean, in extreme cases, the possibility of journalists lying to their readers or viewers. And when the public feels that the media cannot be trusted any longer, the media itself will lose its credibility in the eyes of the public. Without a trustworthy media to air its policies, the government will also lose its credibility.

The warring sides would be better advised to air their views using their own media. The military, for instance, once had the dailies Berita Yudha and Angkatan Bersenjata at the national level, apart from radio stations. Journalists would appreciate the military if they were accessible, for explaining their military operation, and how they are able to capture GAM members and supporters in a professional way who have mixed with the civilian population.

In a situation of war we can learn from the experience of the New York Times during the Vietnam war in the 1960s. David Halberstam, a Times reporter, was sent to Vietnam and lived there from 1962 to 1964. He approached local people and got different perspectives -- but his reporting made President J.F. Kennedy unhappy. Kennedy contacted Times' publisher, Arthur Ochs "Punch" Sulzberger and demanded that Halberstam be sent home.

Interestingly, Sulzberger rejected Kennedy's demand. For him the problem was not about whether U.S. policy on Vietnam was right or wrong, but whether the U.S. government had the right to tell what the media to do.

Vietnam became a scandal in American history, but Halberstam was awarded the Pulitzer in 1964 for international reporting. Was Halberstam being unpatriotic when he covered the war through the eyes of the Vietnamese people? Or did reports like his become an early warning for the U.S. government regarding its failed policy on Vietnam?

History will tell us, whether the current military operation in Aceh will really win the hearts and minds of the Acehnese. History will also judge the media, whether mere jargon like "national integrity" or "unitary state" can really help educate the general public, the media itself and decision makers on the issue.