Press freedom -- Good or bad?

The Indonesian press have enjoyed unprecedented freedom since the fall of the New Order administration in May. But after the initial euphoria wore off, press freedom has been constantly debated as to whether it causes more harm than good. The Jakarta Post's Edith Hartanto, Ahmad Junaedi, Kornelius Purba, Kosasih Daradjat, Silvia Gratia M. Nirang and Dwi Atmanta take a look at the issue.

JAKARTA (JP): The Indonesian press look destined to play an eternal tug of war with the government for the right to exercise freedom of expression.

After a brief honeymoon, in which the press celebrated their newfound freedom following the fall of the New Order regime in May, the fears of yesteryear are reappearing.

Government reaction to the press coverage on the violence- marred Special Session of the People's Consultative Assembly in mid November, a series of riots that had religious overtones and relentless student demonstrations recently came as a warning to the media that history could very well repeat itself.

The press hailed the end of the Old Order in 1966 and viewed it as a victory in regaining the freedom that eluded them during the seven-year-old Guided Democracy era. But then the New Order government banned Indonesia Raya daily in 1974.

That was the first blood drawn. And then it became obvious that the oppressive regime of president Soeharto tolerated only a "don't-touch-the-regime" type of journalism. So overwhelming was the government control that even the Indonesian Journalists Association pushed the press into a corner.

Fresh pressure was applied last month, with the media coming under fire for allegedly stirring up trouble with its "one-sided" and "antigovernment" reports.

While criticizing the trend of excessive coverage on antigovernment rallies, Djaffar Assegaff, chief editor of Media Indonesia daily, attributed the press' siding with the students to an emotional linkage between them.

"Many of our current media employ greenhorns who form close relationships with students. The young journalists have failed to keep a distance from the students," Djaffar said in an interview with RCTI on Friday.

Since Soeharto's resignation, the government has issued no less than 400 new publishing licenses.

A group of people representing a group calling itself the Islamic Committee for Press Monitoring rallied at SCTV's Jakarta office to demand the station apologize for its "biased coverage" of clashes between students and security personnel.

The rallies were staged amid reports that the government had forced state bank BBD to take over 52.5 percent of SCTV's shares held by two businessmen, Henry Pribadi and Sudwikatmono, a cousin of former president Soeharto.

SCTV has failed to settle its Rp 250 billion debt to BBD. The debt matured early this year.

The Jakarta Post joined the list of targeted media when it received telephoned bomb threats last month. It turned out to be a hoax, but the message was clear: a free press is considered dangerous.

At about the same time Minister of Information Muhamad Yunus asked the state-owned TV station TVRI and RRI radio station to be more selective in their news broadcasts to help cool down the political climate. Yunus did not say this, but it was clear that he was also taking aim at the national press in general.

"If anarchic demonstrations continue, national unity will be threatened and international confidence in our government will be undermined," he said.

President B.J. Habibie has also shown concern at the constant press coverage of the antigovernment movement and criticism of the government's sluggish investigation into former president Soeharto over charges of alleged corruption.

Tyranny

Speaking at an anniversary celebration of state news agency Antara on Saturday, Habibie warned the press against efforts to establish a tyrannical power that dictates public opinion.

"Freedom encompasses moral responsibility to promote human rights and the rule of law. The media should, therefore, abide by the objective principle in its reports so that it will not serve the interests of a certain group," he said.

Habibie insisted that the spirit of reform was not intended to allow a group of people to force their opinions on others through media campaigns.

Indeed, too much liberty is bound to have excesses and abuses. But, as noted author Albert Camus put it, without freedom the press will never be anything but bad.

A poll commissioned by the Post and conducted by the Resource Productivity Center on 1,050 respondents in Jakarta, Yogyakarta and Surabaya unveiled that people believe a free press brings more good than harm to society.

Ninok Leksono, managing editor of leading daily Kompas, defended the constant coverage of student rallies, saying that they were part of the ongoing process of democracy in the country.

But he is also fearful about the costs of the demonstrations which always involve huge crowds.

"Demonstrations are prone to creating chaos. But we cannot stop people airing their grievances or disappointment because it will retract our commitment to democracy," Ninok said.

He insisted that street rallies were just a means for people to exert their right to freedom of expression which also includes press freedom.

"There may be suspicion that the press have certain political interests by covering the student rallies. But I don't think so," he said.

Rev. Samuel Purwadisastra, the head of the Synod of Indonesian Christian Churches, underlines the need for a free press in terms of the right to tell the truth, particularly in revealing the reality of religious disharmony.

Disharmony

"It's 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.

He said in the past, the government glorified unity through slogans, but forgot that at the grassroots level religious harmony was really frail.

Mass communication expert M. Budyatna shares the same view, saying 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.

He also suggested that peer pressure can also ensure that the press uses its newly found freedom wisely.

"Failure to do so would not only undermine its credibility, but could be counterproductive and lead to the return of the old restrictive rules," he said.