Press faces new enemies lurking on the horizon

Press faces new enemies lurking on the horizon

National Press Day will be celebrated this week. Sociologist
Ariel Heryanto recalls experiences of the Indonesian press and
looks at the challenges that lay ahead.

SALATIGA (JP): The Indonesian press has found itself under the
increasing threat of the ever-expanding power of electronic
media. Such pervasive fear is attested to by an upcoming seminar
in the Central Java town of Surakarta this Saturday.

Representatives from print and electronic media will discuss
what is viewed as the ill-fated press in the midst of an
electronic media boom.

While the nature of the threat is open to debate, the common
fear is in itself instructive. It marks a watershed in the
nation's political, economic and technological history. In the
greatest part of this century the Indonesian press saw itself as
a heroic figure, carrying out a mission of social liberation,
modernity and progress. Its strongly-held convictions were to
reveal the truth, educate the masses, and expose injustices. In
short, journalism was a political activism.

Such vision is not merely an empty illusion. Before the 1980s,
activism was still predominant in the work of Indonesian
journalism. What made some journalists more notable than others
was moral commitment, personal courage, integrity and charisma.
Professionalism or formal training and qualifications came much
later, as did enormous capital and huge profits.

The public's enchantment with the activist-cum-journalist was
considerably enhanced by severe state censorship that
characterized colonial societies before World War II, and the
Second and Third Worlds after the War. Information was not only
scarce, but limited and regulated. Truth was inaccessible to the
public, or too dangerous for public discussion.

That atmosphere was more a product of state monopoly of
information and suppression than technological shortcomings. The
notorious haatzaai artikelen (Dutch colonial penal codes that
prosecuted anyone for expressing disrespect, hatred or hostility
towards state agents in public) was designed and vigorously
reinforced specifically to target nationalistic journalists in
the East Indies.

Now that's all history. But the haatzaai artikelen is still
alive and kicking in today's Indonesia, although after 1973 its
main target shifted from journalists to student activists. Today
few journalists have any idea what haatzaai artikelen is. What is
responsible for the change and how?

The New Order is undoubtedly responsible for the sustained
growth of capitalism during the past three decades. Ironically,
its success has denied the state all-encompassing, monopolistic
power. Increasingly it must share power and rely on cooperation
with the emergent bourgeoisie and urban middle class
professionals. Privatization, deregulation, openness and
democratization have become new key words since the 1980s in lieu
of development, stability, order, defense and national
resilience.

The state has less and less power or interest in suppressing
information and banning news publications. When last banned
publications, it found it was no longer as easy to get away with
as it was during the first two decades of its rule. If anything
threatens the old-idealized personification of the Indonesian
press today, it may no longer be the Ministry of Information or
the Military Information Center.

In 1986 the state gave up its monopoly over television
stations. By 1995 the number of private television networks rose
to five. They all but made the state-owned television company
obsolete. With the launching of private television networks, the
state eased restrictions on televised commercials. More recently
it chose to ignore the as yet unlicensed, independently-produced
news items on private television and radio. In 1994 it announced
the most pro-market decree, allowing foreign capital to run
businesses in sensitive areas, including mass media.

Like everything else, no social change takes place without
twists and exceptions. The notorious June 1994 media ban can be
seen to run counter to the argument above. However, the same
event can be read to indicate the state's uncontrolled paranoia
in encountering its painful but inevitable decline.

If the state is no longer a sole threat to the contemporary
Indonesian press, what is? Greed is one. Competition among media
entities is another. Intermedia war will probably be more fierce
in the years to come. What is at stake is not simply a slice of
advertisement revenues, but new authority of producing and
narrating truth. Global Internet has compounded the whole
situation, making the battle more chaotic.

The writer is a sociologist based in Salatiga.