Media and democracy

The House of Representatives this week began debating the long-awaited Bill on Broadcasting, a bill this nation urgently needs to provide a legal framework for the broadcasting industry. The document was drafted by the government, and as Minister of Information Harmoko told the House's plenary session when he introduced the bill on Monday, it is the result of extensive discussions with mass media experts as well as representatives of the broadcasting industry.

So much has changed in these last five to 10 years that reviewing the current legislations as well as the various government rules affecting the broadcasting industry has indeed become imperative. For one, we have witnessed the introduction of commercial television in Indonesia, in a medium which has long been the monopoly of the government with TVRI. There is a growing number of foreign stations beaming their programs straight into Indonesian living rooms. And then there is the arrival of the Internet, a new phenomenon which is still baffling regulators around the world.

In more advanced countries, radio, television, and the print media are widely recognized as important democratic institutions. The legislative document now in the hands of House members implicitly recognizes this factor when it states, in the opening paragraph, that "radio and television as electronic communication media have a formidable ability to influence people's opinions, attitudes and behavior."

Having recognized their influence over public opinion, the bill then fails to address this theme in full. Instead, the 58 chapters of the 39-page document concentrate on regulation of the industry, mostly through the licensing mechanism.

One of the most pressing issues in Indonesia's broadcasting industry is ending the monopoly that TVRI and its sister station, radio network RRI have over news broadcasting. While TVRI and RRI deserve praise for bringing the news to millions of households across Indonesia every day for all these years, most people agree that a choice of news sources is essential in any democracy. Before the bill was unveiled, there was a growing expectation that commercial stations would soon be providing viewers with a wider choice of news sources.

Sadly, the bill does not propose ending the government's monopoly; indeed, on this matter, it is rather vague. A single chapter is devoted to this issue, and it only states that private networks may broadcast news only "with the consent of the government".

This reminds us uncomfortably of the 1982 Press Law which subjects newspapers to the same treatment, requiring the print press to obtain a publishing license from the government. While the press law is ironically more explicit than the Bill on Broadcasting in recognizing newspapers' role in democracy, this has not stopped the government from revoking licenses by invoking the 1984 Minister of Information Decree that gives the government that power. How many newspapers and magazines have been abruptly shut down this way, when the government could have taken legal action, which is permitted by the 1982 Press Law ? Many would consider this a better way to go about things, as it gives newspapers a chance to defend themselves.

Given that the broadcasting bill was drafted by the Ministry of Information which oversees the country's entire media industry, it is of course understandable that it should be more concerned about regulating the industry. The growing public unease about pornography and violence on television, and the current debate about the dubbing of all foreign programs into Indonesian, in the name of cultural pride, underpin this attitude.

Yet a law should not simply give a list of don'ts. It should also provide guarantees to those affected by the law: in this case, both the broadcasting industry and the public.

Regulation and licensing are necessary to ensure order, but House members should not lose sight of the bigger picture. This bill could do our nation a greater service by allowing television and radio to play their part in our democracy. The government might also draw some lessons from the press law, and avoid the pitfalls that led to the closures of some newspapers and magazines.