Press Council: Civil Society Watch On Media

February 22, 2002
Source: ALERT Magazine Dec 2001 - Jan 2002

As if a pendulum, the Indonesian press swings from one extreme - fully controlled - to the other - unlimited freedom.

When the Indonesian press was under the claws of the authoritarian Soeharto Regime, many journalists and non-government organisations (NGO) campaigned actively for press freedom, and eventually reached its goal in May 1998 when President Soeharto finally stepped down. But as time flows, a handful of the same campaigners now turn course, demanding the press to limit itself, not to harvest reporting that could trigger violence.

Journalists and the press are often scrutinised and become target of anger by the Indonesian society. The press is often accused of being the cause of crisis and unwinding conflict. The finger pointing had come from politicians, media observers as well as the common public. Attacks on the press suddenly become common. However, people’s anger towards the press is often not because of the news contents, but for the whole range of problems the society face, presented by the press as it is.

The society demonstratively “controls” the press through seizing and destroying media offices, reflecting the low level of public tolerant on press freedom.

So hard to achieve, freedom of the press ironically becomes a threat to some parts of the society. The press becomes an enemy, a threat, because it is perceived to have such a powerful position and effect – something that is rather mythical.

For more than 30 years under Soeharto, the Indonesian press was oppressed, leaving little chance to organise professionally. For the past three years, hundreds of new publications flourished, only to close down several months later. Hundreds of journalists jumped on the street, hunting news, but a few months later, they were jobless, their media went bankrupt. As Indonesia struggles during the transitional period to democracy, the press also finds itself learning to implement its freedom, learning to be responsible. The process was also followed by civil society’s responses in assisting the process.

First, there was the formation of the Independent Press Council, established on April 19, 2000, to replace the old state-sponsored Press Council which functioned more as the state’s propaganda tool. The Council consists of nine members, representing journalist organisations, press enterprises and community leaders. The formation of the Independent Press Council was based on the objective of the Press Regulation. Acting as mediator between society and the press, the Press Council has tackled and solved at least 80 conflict cases.

Second was the formation of 22 media watch agencies by ex-journalists and NGO activists. At least 11 of them have been actively monitoring and publishing their work and research. These media monitoring bodies have variation in their objectives, aims, work strategies and methods.

One category of such body is a media watch that monitors academically through contents, discourses, and frame analysis researches. This body does not place itself as media police that would determine the quality of news, rather it relates to the society’s demand for the media to present its information accurately, fairly and factually.

Then second category is a media watch that has a duty to advocate for media consumers who felt they are being harmed by particular press reporting. This type calls itself the “external research and development division of mass media”, accommodating both criticisms and appreciations for the media.

The last category is a watchdog body that can also be a critic of the press, recording and pointing mistakes and weaknesses in reporting. Monitoring in this way is essential since most Indonesian press still lacks in elementary aspects – accuracy, impartiality and failure in differentiating facts and opinion.

Members of the community who felt deprived by press reporting have started to respond, using their rights to answer, straightening news mistakes. Through the Press Council and media watch bodies, people can seek advice and opinion on media reporting. The result has been positive, since attacks on media offices had dropped for the past year. The Press Council and media watch bodies have set up an early warning system for the press. On the other hand, realising that they have a whole lot of people watching their backs, newspapers and magazines have now set up their own internal press ombudsman.