TV talk is cheap

TV talk is cheap

Public confessions by adulterers, gigolos, prostitutes and
drug addicts -- favorite topics on many tawdry American TV talk
shows -- have now hit Indonesia, although they are packaged
differently. One is RCTI's Buah Bibir -- a weekly talk show
involving an anonymous offender, experts on the subject and the
audience; the other is Potret, an investigative journalistic
program by SCTV which examines the many dark sides of life.

Among the more controversial subjects that Potret has explored
include stories about "mall girls" and shop assistants who are
available for sex after work. Potret also invites confessors onto
the program with their identity obscured, and asks viewers at
home to phone in for comments.

Both Buah Bibir and Potret, which have gained popularity, are
in trouble after the influential Moslem group Muhammadiyah and
Minister of Information R. Hartono, who oversees the country's
television industry, blew the whistle.

Hartono's chief objection is that these programs are too
"graphic", such as when one of them showed a person injecting
himself with morphine.

Muhammadiyah's vice chairman Lukman Harun feels that both
programs are not fit for the general audience. He said that while
the problems they exposed exist, the problems are being blown out
of proportion, giving the impression that they are widespread in
society. He fears these programs may justify the behavior they
portray, and encourage viewers to be led astray.

Hartono and Lukman's arguments are valid, although scrapping
the programs altogether is not the right approach.

The programs raise subjects which were once considered taboo.
But with the advance in information technology, such subjects,
which for a long time were only discussed in limited circles of
mostly experts, can no longer be hidden from the public.
Indonesian viewers will learn about such subjects from foreign
media anyway. There is nothing worse than allowing foreign media,
with their biases and different set of values, to explore
problems in our society. Since the nation can no longer sweep
these subjects under the carpet, the best course therefore would
be to allow and encourage open discussions on the topics.

Television, because of its wide reach, is probably the best
medium to discuss these problems, if the intention is indeed to
encourage public participation. If we agree on this, then it is
only a matter of how we package a program that does not appear
vulgar and does not encourage others to pick up the habits in
question. This is the difficult part.

Despite rapid modernization, Indonesia has continued to retain
many of its traditional values, including those inculcated by the
major religions. Our society is not, and probably never will be,
ready for the full blown no-holds barred discussions of
controversial topics the way they are portrayed on some American
talk shows.

Lukman's fear that discussions on the problems could send the
wrong signals to viewers should be examined. If his assertion is
right, a new survey on adultery would probably be merited. In
1988, a Jakarta magazine's survey found that two out of three
married men in Jakarta were cheating on their wives. Going by
Lukman's theory, then a new survey would probably find that,
today, three in four husbands are unfaithful.

There is also the danger that such programs are leading to
stereotyping by society: that all "mall girls" are out for a good
time, and that all shop assistants are available for sex at the
right price after work.

It is up to television stations to package their programs so
they discuss the problems in the right proportion without sending
the wrong message to their audience. Unfortunately, judging by
the presentation of controversial subjects in Buah Bibir and
Potret, ratings, rather than a genuine concern of finding
solutions to society's problems, govern these programs.

The Indonesian television industry is still operating under a
series of government regulations. The Broadcasting Law passed by
the House of Representatives in December has not come into force
and therefore the broadcasting code of ethics, mandated by the
legislation, has not been drafted. It would be wrong for
television programmers to take advantage of this situation. If
they fail to instill self-discipline, they will have themselves
to blame if society, through the government, decides to impose
harsh rules on their activities.