Free press a must in a democratic society

Free press a must in a democratic society

JAKARTA (JP): The reform movement has brought unprecedented
freedom to the nation's press.

In a demonstration of its commitment to the spirit of reform,
the government revoked a 1984 ruling which gave it the right to
revoke press publication licenses shortly after it came to power.
Despite this, few believe that the present government will move
swiftly to introduce further reforms in the information sector.

However, there are hopes that the government will allow the
press to play a much more constructive and professional role in
the country's everyday life, and work free from the specter of
state interference.

We asked a number of people, including experts and those
active in the media, what they thought of Indonesia's newfound
press freedom.

Chatib Basri, a lecturer at the University of Indonesia's
School of Economics:

I welcome the new press freedom. It's a bit like in 1967 and
1968, when people could say anything they wanted, although there
are still some constraints.

For example, newspapers have had lawsuits brought against
them. People have the right to answer back to articles published
in newspapers.

I don't think it is necessary to have publishing permits
(SIUPP) any longer. There is no need for us to limit the number
of publications on the market.

It would be better to let public judge the quality of
newspapers. People will not buy poor quality publications.

Journalism here is far from ideal. Only a few publications are
accustomed to verifying their reports and this must change.

If there are complaints, publishers should act on them and not
just remain aloof.

Daddy Heryono Gunawan, chief editor of the new political and
economic tabloid Indikator:

Thanks to the reform movement, the government has loosened
controls on the press. This should allow publications here to
compete on equal terms.

I agree that readers will choose their own publications, so
there is no need to limit the number of magazines and journals
available to the general public.

It took us less than one month to get our publishing permit,
something that would never have happened in the past.

I hope that this press freedom will last forever and I hope
that journalists will not abuse it.

Atmakusumah Astraatmadja, director of the Dr. Soetomo Press
Institute in Jakarta:

The press have struggled against political and economic
repression since the time of the Dutch colonial rule and they
will carry on with this struggle even after Indonesia becomes a
democratic country.

In modern, democratic countries, press freedom is
occasionally impinged upon, but the public's right to information
is guarantied by law.

In Indonesia, people who have disagreed with certain news
reports have staged demonstrations. That too is an impingement on
press freedom, and as such is a form of repression.

There is no need to attempt to restrict the number of
publications in the country. Let the readers judge what is good
and bad for themselves.

The press will need to listen to people's opinions if they
want readers.

It is better to allow a free press to keep the public properly
informed rather than to return to relying upon the rumor mill
which existed under a strictly controlled press.

Self-censorship should be practiced by journalists using their
experience and wisdom rather than by suppression.

Press organizations, of which there are currently about a
dozen, need to establish a confederation to maintain their
solidarity.

M. Budyatna, a mass communications expert from the University
of Indonesia:

The Indonesian press has to learn the art of advocacy.

The government deserves support from the press if it protects
the individuals' rights, but equally, the press must criticize
the government if it fails in this duty.

Many publications did not report the recent attack on a church
in Ujungpandang, South Sulawesi, because they were afraid.

The press should remain alert at all times and provide
objective and balanced reports on newsworthy events.

The press does not need to practice self-censorship when
dealing with racial, ethnic or religious issues, as long as it
maintains an objective stance and avoids one-sided coverage.

Haris Jauhari, chairman of the Indonesian Television
Journalists Association: At present, Indonesian press is still
learning how to fully utilize the freedom of the press. And the
readers are also in the process of learning how to accept and to
react to the press freedom.

During the process, some people who disagree with certain news
reports raise their critics and the press do not ignore those
critics. Instead, they introspect. So at the moment, both the
press and the community are having somekind of a dialog.

We can't say whether the press freedom is right or wrong, or
whether it has negative impact before the dialog gets to a point,
where both the press and the readers will reach an unwritten
agreement of their own. And I think it will take between one to
two years until both the press and the readers reach such an
agreement.

So, in my opinion, there is nothing to worry about the press
freedom at the moment. It is still normal and there's nothing to
fear of. There might be several media which forget the ethical
code. But the readers will decide. It is the readers who will
make the choice.

Rev. Samuel Purwadisastra, the head of the Synod of Indonesian
Christian Churches:

I agree that the press should print news about the reality of
religious disharmony, yet the press should be sensitive to the
people's comprehension and level of education.

I think it is good that the disharmony is printed in the open,
but not through vulgar exposure. Even though we are not sure
whether the recent unrest was a spontaneous consequence of the
repression of the New Order era, we realize that in the past
religious issues were used to compartmentalize society.

In the past, we glorified unity through slogans, while
forgetting that at the grassroots level religious harmony is
really frail.

We have to remember that religious harmony could not occur
merely through lip service but through a well-laid out program.
The accord should not only be limited to the leaders but also
extended to the grass roots.

So, although printing such news is beneficial to expose
different existing perspectives, we have to realize the grass
roots' reading nature, and their level of comprehension.

Sadistic and bombastic headlines undoubtedly attract them.
With a limited education, these people will have trouble sorting
out news.

With such a vulgar approach, the news will only agitate them.
(jun/kod/ste/46)