'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