Ideology is more than just a mouthful of rice

Budiman S. Hartoyo, General Chairman, Reformed Association of Indonesian Journalists (PWI Reformasi), Jakarta

Today's press freedom is the most significant outcome of the reform movement. The press should be grateful to the young, university students and the public, who have waged their struggle against the New Order regime.

The public is increasingly aware of its civil rights, including the right to gain access to information, and the right to express opinions freely.

Today, any citizen may publish a media publication without first having to obtain a license from the government. The look of publications, their news content and their editorial policies are also very varied. Some feel so "free" in the way they manage the media that their "products" no longer serve to channel public aspirations and interests, but only cater to the interests of an influential few.

Unsurprisingly, lately some officials and legislators have complained that the press has "gone too far". No less than State Minister of Communications and Information Syamsul Muarif earlier suggested revising Press Law No. 40/1999 to accommodate clauses of the Criminal Code into the act. This is so far the only piece of legislation that guarantees freedom of the press.

If "going too far" is understood in terms of criticism leveled at the powers that be, then the allegation is wrongly addressed. If this refers to the style of "yellow papers" (mainly featuring sex, violence and gossip) in the print and electronic media, such style will exist anywhere and at any time. Of course, yellow paper style cannot be used as the standard in evaluating the development of the press.

One must differentiate between the content of print publications such as Kompas, Suara Pembaruan, Sinar Harapan, Jawa Pos, Republika, Media Indonesia, Koran TEMPO, Serambi Indonesia, Waspada, Analisa, Suara Merdeka and many others.

The content of the diverse media today more or less reflects the mission of their owners and publishers, including those only in the business for profit and those swept away by the euphoria of new-found freedom.

Indeed, the position and role of the media are at least determined by the owners and chief editors. However, in a society trying to reach a democracy, the position of the press depends on public trust. A media that no longer enjoys public trust will be abandoned by its audience.

An intelligent public needs a media that prioritizes the public interest, not the political interests of capital owners or the personal concerns of chief editors. Therefore, the press must be free from political interests, especially conflicting ones.

To ensure that press publications assume an independent attitude, they must achieve independence, in either their economic or managerial aspects, and prioritize integrity.

A professionally managed press may grow into an economically strong industry, and even into a conglomeration powerful enough to shape public opinion. Such power must be understood as a responsibility to educate and enlighten the public. A chief editor is not "an intellectual dictator" but an editor who, with his editorials, sides with truth, justice, common sense and ordinary, downtrodden people.

Despite such tall expectations the media still often forgets the public's stake in press freedom -- as if it were only the concern of the industry, capital owners, chief editors or journalists.

To cater to this public trust the media can only support the process of the development of an intelligent civil society through independence and through its ability to weigh up situations with common sense. Guidance on integrity, or fidelity to moral principles and honesty (according to the Webster dictionary) is found in the Indonesian Journalists' Code of Conduct. This is the press worker's "ideology", one that is tested by time, particularly when interests clash with powerful parties -- leading to various attempts to influence the press, including bribery.

Ideally, no matter how small a journalists' salary, he should not sell his integrity for a mouthful of rice. But in this country, that is far easier said than done.