Laman Webantu KM2A1: 2229 File Size: 6.4 Kb * |
Freedom Of Press Or Freedom To Press? - MGG Pilllai By web aNtu 21/1/2000 9:39 am Fri |
Freedom Of The Press Or Freedom To Press?
The abrupt departure this week of Dato' Kadir Jasin as the New Straits
Times' editor-in-chief has little to do with press freedom; he is a
human sacrifice the Prime Minister offered, in place of himself, to cool
down internal convulsions within his political party, UMNO, after the
general elections focussed attention once again on the damage Dato' Seri
Anwar did to it. The governing National Front coalition, which UMNO
led, romped home with a three-quarters majority but with sharply
declining support within the Malay ground, especially in the Malay
heartland. Dato' Kadir as a political appointee of a newspaper it
controls walked perpetually on a greasy tightrope during the 12 years he
was editor-in-chief and, like his immediate predecessors, slipped and
fell not because he was incompetent or disloyal (he was neither) but he
edited a newspaper in his last 18 months with both hands tied. He would
have gone no matter what, the only surprise the timing. The Anwar
imbroglio has claimed another victim. The mainstream newspapers UMNO
controls -- the Utusan, New Straits Times, Berita Harian groups -- lose
circulation as they become virtual party newspapers as readers demand
fairer coverage. To shore up the government's image vis-a-vis Anwar, the
Prime Minister promised financial help when editors complained of
declining circulations because of their open hostility to the ousted
deputy prime minister and slavish, often unthinking, support for the
government. One NST former editor-in-chief, dismissed as Dato' Kadir
was this week, was bluntly told his "100 per cent" loyalty to the Prime
Minister proved his disloyalty; at least "150 per cent" was expected.
In the Mahathir years, the NST has had as many editors-in-chief as he
has had deputy prime ministers. So, the Kadir Jasin affair should not be viewed only within the
narrow prism of press freedom. Press freedom cannot exist in a vaccuum,
especially if its practitioners are uninterested. A year ago, local
journalists who, in response to a UNESCO project, stirringly demanded
for more press freedom, with the media in hand to record the
government's enthusiastic acceptance of it. These journalists decided,
in this instance, to keep quiet about the fate of the editors of the New
Straits Times and Harakah, the latter charged with sedition. Both the
government and the journalist fraternity in Malaysia ignore press
freedom, jumping to its defence only when journalists in Ougadougou are
hounded. So, freedom of the press has become the freedom to press. The
government once regularly threatened journalists with restricting press
freedom if they misused it, often "misused" means fairer reporting of
opposition views. The Malaysian press is a convenient target of attack
when the Malay cultural heartland rebels. May 13 riots, the 1988
crackdown, the 1999 post-election blues all came with it attacks on the
media. But within the 30 years, the Malay becomes culturally confident,
well-educated, prepared to challenge the status quo if he thinks it
wrong. The UMNO-led coalition government, however, does not accept
this, and believes they are misled by anti-national rascals like He Who
Must Be Destroyed At All Cost. It does not understand, nor come to
terms with, the tremendous mental changes within the Malay, and talk
down to him. He resents it. And deserts the government.
By contrast, the opposition PAS newspaper, Harakah, is in trouble
precisely because it judged the mood correctly. From 70,000 a year ago,
it now sells 300,000. Readers want comment as well as news. And
Harakah provided it. Its editor is charged with sedition for carrying
a view it would not have accepted in its pages only two years ago. His
conviction could lead to its ban. And to the government's discomfiture,
it reacted to these pressures by taking the government's challenge to it
to be a daily newspaper. A daily newspaper raises the ante. It makes
nonsense of the government's insistence that party newspapers could only
be sold to party members. The government amended the laws over the
years to restrict the opposition party's avenues to spread their
message. So they moved into the Internet to spread their message out of
official control. With the pressure on Harakah, it expanded its
Internet version to a daily. If the paper should be banned, but the
Internet version continues, as it certainly would, it damages the
government even further. The government must accept that times have
changed, and people want to be able to make up their own minds and be
exposed to differing points of view Does one have to be a party member to understand what it party
thinks? Why should not a citizen of no political leaning make up his
own mind by buying whatever newspaper is on offer to find out for
himself what the issues are? Does this mean that one has to be a member
of every political party in Malaysia to get to know what they think?
Can the government now refuse PAS a licence for a daily newspaper, to be
called, I understand, not Harakah but Purnima? When mainstream
newspapers cannot compete with a twice-weekly party rag, something
seriously is amiss. What then, if it becomes a daily? But this
confusion shows how nervous and jittery the government is. Dato' Kadir
engineered a revamp of the New Straits Times to make its form and
substance like US Today, which covers the world as television news
would. But without the wherewithal to pull it off, it becomes even more
condescending than ever. Since he is also a key figure in the
government's media policy, he became a convenient target. He did not
understand the conflicting demands of backing the government implicity
right or wrong and of editing a national newspaper; that freedom of the
press is not the freedom to press. Now the Prime Minister is ready to
act against officials in his party, beginning with the secretary-general
himself. M.G.G. Pillai
|