'TPI' should be more professional

'TPI' should be more professional

From Suara Karya

I was disappointed with the Special Dialog program aired by
private television station TPI on March 19. The topic was The
Memorandum of the House of Representatives regarding the alleged
involvement of the President in money scandals related to Bulog
and Sultan Brunei's financial gift. With Anas Urbaningrum as the
moderator, the discussion was participated in by an expert in
constitutional law, former justice and human rights minister
Yusril Ihza Mahendra, Jimly Asidiqie and Sri Sumantri. One got
the impression, however, that TPI intentionally invited experts
of the same camp.

As a result, they seemed to be in unison in their ideas about
the topic of discussion. Then tended to "attack" those
disagreeing with them. The dialog seemed to have justified the
ideas of only one party in viewing this matter, which still draws
pros and cons in the society.

To prove its professionalism and avoid any allegation that it
has been made use of to shape public opinion about the topic of
the dialog, TPI should have invited constitutional law experts
having different views from the three experts referred to above,
like Harun Al Rasyid for example.

If experts of different camps are involved, viewers can judge
for themselves which opinions are sound, objective and reasonable
and which are not. It is no longer the time now to direct the
community towards a particular political views.

I really like the Pro-and-Con program on TPI because people of
different backgrounds and opposite views are involved in a
balanced manner, which is a strong evidence of impartiality and
professionalism that TV viewers appreciate greatly.

MOCHTAR ISKANDAR

Tangerang, Banten