Press faces growing threats to its freedom

Press faces growing threats to its freedom

Ati Nurbaiti, Chairperson, Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI),
Jakarta

Over the past few months, the media community have become
increasingly alarmed at the growing tendency, on the part of the
government, to regain control of the media. Experienced
journalists inside and outside the country note that this is to
be expected in the aftermath of a honeymoon period between the
government and the media, after an authoritarian regime has been
toppled -- all the more reason to watch out for the forms that
these efforts of media control will take.

The latest advice from President Megawati Soekarnoputri is
that the media should try to be "executors" once in a while,
instead of continuously raising baseless criticism. This would
only serve to further risk impartiality while the media must face
up to constant questioning on whose side it is on. "The statement
reflects that the government is reluctant to be criticized," said
one observer.

People become angry when they are only criticized without
being offered solutions. One wonders what media the President or
her advisors subscribe to, given the endless talk shows and
columns featuring a wide range of experts from which one could
select independent views and informed proposals.

The first indication of increasing media control was the
establishment of an information ministry in Megawati's Cabinet
(although suggestions that the honeymoon was over started
earlier, under the government of Abdurrahman Wahid who always
blamed the media for alleged misquotes).

Following expressions of disgust from those who thought that
the dark days of having a Big Brother, a government body to
control the flow of information, were over, State Minister of
Communications and Information Syamsul Mu'arif said within weeks
of his installation that he was to be in charge of telematika
(telecommunications, media and information).

Since this statement we have not received a clear explanation
as to what in fact this covers and what has been done about it. A
telecommunications expert interpreted the office of the state
minister's job as being in charge of the technical regulation of
telecommunications and the facilitation of wider access to the
media. Meanwhile, Syamsul said he would focus on facilitating
more equal access to information, particularly to the rural
population and that he would work on bridging different
perceptions within the upper and lower levels of government.

Then it became clear that State Minister Syamsul was not sure
of his job description. Citing feedback from legislators who said
that the media had gone too far, he raised suggestions to revise
the 1999 law on the media to include articles from the Criminal
Code to curb irresponsible coverage.

The media law is not perfect but it is the first legal
instrument to guarantee freedom of speech. While a new
constitution should include the statement "freedom of speech is
guaranteed", the existing 1945 Constitution only mentions that
such freedom "will be regulated by laws".

The point of the whole exercise in drawing up the law, mainly
by the media community, was to shout "Never again!" to efforts to
tighten controls of the media.

As this newspaper has pointed out, while there is such a thing
as a bad media and a good media, "in a controlled media regime,
you are only going to get a bad media, a media that indulges in
lies, or half-truths because it is prevented from telling the
whole truth".

That legislators do not grasp this only shows how remote they
are from efforts made by civil society toward reform.

A number of groups within the Coalition for the Law on Freedom
of Information are also anxiously monitoring whether
deliberations on this draft law will have a lower priority among
legislators compared to the draft law on state secrecy and the
draft law on antiterrorism -- both of which might run counter to
the struggle for the freedom of information.

The President has criticized the media quite a few times but
the new rule against "door-stop interviews" for the President and
Vice President Hamzah Haz have not helped. If the leaders
concerned would allocate time and sit down for a few minutes with
the media each time it is necessary for them to air their stance,
door-stop interviews, with dozens of microphones competing for
space around their faces, would not happen. But the leadership of
the country must remain easily accessible to the public by
answering to the media, who might prefer quoting them than their
conflicting ministers.

What subtle efforts to gain public support for media control
choose to ignore is that there are now many efforts within the
media and wider society to control the media themselves.

We have never had media watchdogs and now there are so many.
The public has only to discern which bodies live up to their
claims of representing the widespread concern that the media is
not using its newfound freedom in a responsible manner.

The struggle to have a law on freedom of information is of
course not only in the interest of journalists -- the coalition
of groups diligently working on the issue includes those working
on a better environment, those fighting against corruption and
advocators for consumer interests.

What must be pushed forward is not a reaction against a bad
media -- it is instead the strive for greater transparency and
accessibility to information for the public who would be
empowered to make more informed decisions and measures that
affect their lives.

To recognize otherwise is to repeat the assertion that father
(or mother) knows best and scrutinizes or covers up sensitive
information for his brawling children. This is what was done in
the past when ethnic, religious or racial differences were not to
be discussed -- landing the media in confusion when it suddenly
had to report bloodshed.

While the public is learning to deal with the power of media
freedom, a more informed public would learn to contest or ignore
irresponsible reporting, thus snuffing them out of the market.

And as the government has adopted the jargon of public
empowerment, it must also reinforce it in its mentality and put
an end to its habit of insulting public intelligence.