RI's media: Freedom or professionalism?

Keith Loveard, News Editor, www.laksamana.net, Publisher, www.asiamad.com, Jakarta

There is likely to be a hue and cry among the Indonesian media over statements by Syamsul Muarif, the State Minister for Information and Communication, that the Indonesian media is to be brought to order with the amendment of the Press Law with 37 new articles.

The minister said that the amendments were required to prevent "excessive freedom of the press".

Apart from a likely attack from the strong lobby for freedom of speech, there will be many who will see that Syamsul and the government are well within reason to step in to stem reporting that has become a slather of gossip that often verges into malicious libel.

While details of the proposed amendments have yet to be released, Syamsul's comments suggest that the essence will be in strengthening the role of the police and the courts in judging whether journalists have overstepped the line of the law.

The law on criminal defamation already presents the clearest boundary to media excess and, here, foreign examples are pertinent. The second amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees freedom of speech. This amendment has been tested by publishers such as Larry Flint, with the Supreme Court itself ruling in the favor of the creator of Hustler. So far freedom of speech in the U.S. has stood the test of time, giving America one of the freest media industries in the world.

A new major test of the right to a free media is emerging in the U.S. in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, with administration officials appearing regrettably keen to stifle the media.

In Britain and Australia, the media has long been constrained by strong defamation laws. In one case in Australia, a journalist was jailed for criminal defamation, producing great alarm in the industry at the time that there, too, freedom of speech was in danger.

The courts in both countries have ruled that truth is not necessarily a defense.

Take a case where an entrepreneur is reported in the media to have conducted an unpleasant act. That entrepreneur (or more correctly, his lawyers) will argue that while he may have engaged in such an act, publicity about his behavior materially damaged a business reputation that was in no way connected to the behavior.

Result: The publication pays up big.

Defamation is big business in the developed world, and a more stringent Press Law that throws the onus of proof on the courts will provide in Indonesia, as it has done elsewhere, a new license to print money. No lesser figure than Soeharto has tried to cash in, in his case against Time, but found his argument rejected. Abdurrahman Wahid consistently ranted and threatened to sue media outlets.

In Indonesia, the added risk of political motivation for prosecution adds a different element. Time will tell whether the Megawati government will use the revised legislation as a political tool to silence the media.

Under the tight hand of State Secretary Bambang Kesowo, the Megawati palace has become even more leak proof than the Soeharto regime. Senior staff take great care in talking to journalists, well aware that every contact with the media is monitored and likely to be held against them.

Lack of information does not necessarily equate with political harassment.

Nevertheless, the changes to the Law will, at the least, put in place the mechanism where such harassment will be possible at any time.

The new Police bill (endorsed by the House of Representatives on Monday) also throws complete authority into the hands of an institution yet to have proved either its efficiency or its commitment to reform, but which retains the collective memory of the days when, not so long ago, it was an active arm of state repression.

The Indonesian media industry has much to do to justify its demand for unfettered freedom. The end of control by the information ministry and a reduction in the "telephone culture" from the military saw a remarkable blossoming of freedom of speech that in too many cases was abused by the industry for commercial gain.

Industry training standards, measured by those of developed nations and close neighbors such as Thailand and the Philippines, are pathetic. New recruits are sent out into the field with a tape recorder and nothing else.

The sight of a gaggle of young Indonesian journalists massed around a source when only one or two have any idea of what to ask, and who have done their research, the rest following blindly on, is stark evidence of the lack of empowerment of keen young workers.

Indonesia is not without its products of excellence.

Tempo magazine has since its foundations followed the most honorable standards of journalism. It has been attacked not because of its lack of professionalism or ethical standards, but because of its biting reporting.

From Tempo to the backstreet of the irregular tabloids is indeed a long way. In many cases, these backstreet operations are little more than a license to demand money from sources and from public relations professionals.

Regrettably, the culture of giving bribes to such "journalists" also remains alive and well, encouraging what are little more than standover tactics.

The Press Council, under-funded and under-staffed, is comprised of a body of respected journalists, but has been inadequately vocal at a time the media industry has been undergoing a boom and a severe test of its ethical standards. The Indonesian Journalists Association (PWI) has also been mute, and the one-time liberal Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI) is riven with factionalism.

The Indonesian media can only boost its ability to withstand politically motivated attacks through the courts if it raises its standards.

Professional, objective reporting is a primary defense in itself against curtailment of freedom of expression.