Communication and Media Centre International Conference 2024 COMETIC ‘24

Media Integrity: Reflections of Upholding Truth, Transparency, and Trust

Keynote Address

By Tan Johan Jaaffar

16^th October 2024

International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilisation (ISTEC),

International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM)

I must admit that this is one of the toughest  topics ever assigned  to me. I am supposed to talk about  media integrity with reference  to these key words – truth, transparency and trust . But more importantly is the verb “to uphold”   – upholding truth, transparency and trust.

In an imperfect world we are living in,  truth, transparency and trust are virtues that are fast dissipating, the discourse is therefore confined to these elegant walls of ISTAC, no further,  so to some quarters it is almost ironical  even talk about it.

But we must.

In a world where distrust of almost everything – government, the media, even the academia is overwhelming – it is about time to relook at ourselves, to quote Shakespeare in Julius Ceaser, “for the eye sees not itself,  by reflections…” 

We all know governments (all governments) are struggling to retain trust of citizens. That was the outcome of a global survey spanning 40 countries. It revealed how government ministers and officials are failing spectacularly to keep up with changes in the way voters get information and form opinions. Weakened and distrusted central government around the world have been incapable of responding to the Internet and social media. Everyone in the position of power is being defied by social media.

And there is also an  issue about the shifting dominance of social media platforms. At one time Facebook was the supremo, the platform used by billions, so one can imagine the influence. Then came Twitter (now X). A few years ago, TikTok took centre stage. And as we learned in 2022, our own general election was largely decided  by the power of TikTok especially among Undi-18.  The TikTokers ranged  from social media savvy ustazs and ustazahs to paid influencers that almost derailed the chances of Pakatan Harapan (PH) to win.

Since one of the key words here is trust, let us look at the world’s most and least trusted professions. 

This graphic shows doctors, scientists and teachers are on the top in terms of the world’s most and least trusted professions. One however must take note that this was a 2021 survey, but I believe nothing much has changed. The lowest on the chart are politicians  and government ministers.

Let’s take a look at Malaysia.

Yet gain,  doctors are top, followed by teachers, scientists, the armed forces personnel, judges, bankers (bankers?),  police and others. It is not too far different from the global findings on the right.

But look at the top bottom of the chart. Lawyers, business leaders, civil servants and journalists are at the bottom eight  of the chart. At least  politicians are three notches below journalists!

I am not trying to be apologetic here. We are not politicians. We are not in the business of becoming popular. Or to appease anybody. Or to make everyone feels good.  We are professionals first and last.  We acknowledged the fact that we  have been facing  a cynical and sceptical public, so the findings in the charts are not surprising. We have no issue with that. We have been given all kind of names and labels. We have to live with it. 

We are just doing our jobs. We are not taking advantage of other people’s miseries or misfortunes. We do not want our names on  the hall of fame just for exposing the misdeeds of our political masters or the scandals of corrupt personalities. Or the shenanigans and proclivities of entertainment personalities.

We don’t find pleasure in reporting what GISB Hildings have done to children under their care or the fact that an aide of a former minister has a “safe house” that is stashed with S$1.5 million. Or the divorce case of Fattah and Fazura

We bring news to your living rooms. Real news, not fake ones. Not deep fake.  We trend on unfamiliar and  dangerous terrains. We encounter dangerous people. We cover conflicts and wars. We play the role of the eyes and ears of the people. We bring people’s stories to you. And the  misdeeds of leaders: their transgressions, corruption, nepotism, or to quote a familiar phrase from the Indonesians, their cawe-cawe.

Journalists die in conflict areas bringing  wars and skirmishes to readers, listeners and viewers . Just remember how many of our brothers and sisters are killed or injured in Palestine right now, and in Lebanon. Or in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Sometimes armies  purposely targeted  journalists.  

Just to give you an idea this  is the  deadliest period for journalists in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict since 1992 and the deadliest conflict for journalists in the 21st century.

As of September 2024, the Committee to Protect Journalists reported that   116 journalists were killed (111 Palestinian, 2 Israeli and 3 Lebanese) so far. A July 2024 count by the Gaza government media office placed the number of Palestinian journalists killed at 160.

Anyone covering the Vietnam War, Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Rwanda, South Africa, Sudan, Somalia, Syria, Palestine and now Lebanon  knew the risks.

I was in Afghanistan in the Spring of 1989, somewhere in the Kunar province, not too far from Jalalabad covering the civil war there. I knew what it was like. I experienced first hand the situation on the ground. The so labelled rag-tag army (the Mujahiddins), never formally trained, who made up of farmers and labourers, and ranging from age 14 to 80, fighting the second most powerful army in the modern world. I knew why they won. I have seen them battling the well-equipped Russian soldiers. Sadly after chasing away the Russians they fought among themselves. And they still do. I was in Bosnia-Herzegovina, South Africa, Somalia, Sri Lanka and other places.   

 It was not the adrenaline that propelled us, nor was it fame and fortune. Again, we were just doing our jobs. Don’t blame us for that.

Perhaps we are indeed doing a thankless job. But we are professionals. We go to jail, we got hurt, some of us died. Occupational hazards you may say. But we do what we are supposed to do. Forget about the notion of the romance of journalism or the movies you watched about brave journalists covering wars and coming back to their love ones. Happy ending guaranteed despite the odds and challenges. 

Journalism is more than that. 

I have my fair share of adventures meeting some of the most interesting personalities the world have ever known. Some of them even labelled as terrorists, not just terrorists but one of them is the most wanted person  by the Americans even this day. But they were freedom fighters before.

I met Gulkbuddin Hekmateyar in the spring of 1989. He was leading Hizbi Islami, the biggest and the most organised Afghan organisation back then. He was fighting the Russians who invaded his  country in in 1979. Together with others like Ahmad Shah Massoud, better known as the Lion of Panjshir Valley; Burhanuddin Rabani, the President of the interim government of Afghanistan in exile and tribal lords  like Abdul Rashid Dastum of Mazar-i-Sharif, they gave the Russians and their puppet President, Najibullah  a hard time.

They were hailed as heroes and  epitomised in Hollywood movies. Remember the character Rambo in the film where he fought alongside the Mujahiddins? “Beware the venom of the cobra and the vengeance of the Afghans.”

It took the attack on New York in September 2001 and suddenly every Mujahiddin in Afghanistan became a terrorist,  Gulbuddin Hekmateyar included. What a linguistic twist can do to a people and a nation. Ironically not one who were allegedly involved in 9/11 incident was an Afghan.  

Political leaderships almost everywhere in the world have not been kind nor fair to journalists in most cases. Malaysia has a chequered history in relation to journalists. Like me, many Utusan Melayu editors lost their jobs. I wasn’t alone, joining the ranks of the late Tan Sri Zainuddin Maidin and his predecessors, Tan Sri Mazlan Nordin and Tan Sri Melan Abdullah. We carried that badge of honour in being fired as editors. Perhaps it’s true what they say, that good soldiers don’t die, they fade away, whereas good editors don’t fade away, they get fired.

I would like to believe that we were all collateral damage in the grand political chess game involving some of the most refined and consummate conspirators and political operators ever to roam the land.

Technically I “resigned” in July 1998, some three months before Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was fired on 2^nd September 1998. They had to “clean-up” the Utusan Melayu and Berita Harian groups and TV3 from “Anwar’s friends” in the media, as these were powerful platforms before the advent of social media. 

I was fortunate, my predecessor Said Zahari was incarcerated for 17 years. Another journalist, the legendary Tan Sri Samad Ismail was in prison three times, twice under the British colonial rule. Sadly it was during the reign of his fellow compatriots that he was in prison for five long years. The country owes an apology to Said Zahari, Tan Sri Samad Ismail, Ishak Haji Muhamad (Pak Sako)  and many others for placing them as enemies of the state. In actual fact  enemies to some powerful personalities running the state.

Now you have a better idea of what truth, transparency and trust is all about. It is a matter of definition for the ruling elite. For us, those are sacrosanct. We abide by those principles. We believe in those principles.  

Let me give you a bit of context on the company that used to work for back in the 90s. Utusan Melayu, the newspaper company was set up in 1939, 86 years ago to be exact.  But what is important to note is the role played by the jawi paper at the height of Malay national consciousness and political awareness prior to and after Merdeka (Independence). Utusan Melayu was an audacious daily that dared to take risks. Utusan Melayu became a formidable force that was credible and threatening to them.

Even after Merdeka, Utusan Melayu was a thorn in the side of the Malay ruling elite who believed that Utusan  Melayu was influenced by the “Leftists” (mereka yang berfaham kiri). That was a good enough excuse for UMNO to wrestle editorial control of Utusan Melayu in 1961. The journalists were up in arms. Equipped with only determination and commitment, they fought back. They launched a strike that lasted 90 days. They lost. As I have mentioned earlier Said Zahari, the editor at the time, was taken under the Internal Security Act (ISA) and was in jail for 17 years.

The way I see it, what happened in 1961 was a defining moment in the history of newspapering in this country. Press freedom died at that moment, never to be recovered, perhaps forever. The fiercely independent journalists of Utusan Melayu paid dearly for their convictions. 

Those are my reflections on how I position media integrity within that context of upholding truth, transparency and trust. And this if even tougher for me to talk about when the industry that I am in, for more than five decades, are in a state of despair. Here I am sharing with you, an industry that is bleak and with an uncertain future.

I was crowned Tokoh Wartawan Negara by my peers in May 2018, presented in an eventful and historic night organised by the Malaysia Press Institute (MPI). While I was proud to be among a handful recipients over the years, all are or were great names in the world of journalism. Legends all.

There is also another frequently asked question asked to veteran journalists. Was I  the “Hang Tuah” who placed loyalty above all else. I can’t speak for others. But history will judge me for what I did, for the exposès I made, for the leaders (including UMNO leaders) who I held accountable for their actions.  I lost my job eventually but that had been due to the grand tussle involving the then Prime Minister, Tun Mahathir Mohamad and his deputy, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim  in 1998 (who is the current Prime Minister).

There are people who have been asking me, why talk about press freedom when there is none? Is it true that the Malaysian press has been kowtimed into believing that they have a role to play as “agents of change” in the process of pembangunan (development) and kemajuan (progress)?  Are they being timid or silenced into submission? Or were they merely unapologetic cheerleaders for whoever was at the helm, now Pakatan Harapan, before that UMNO and Barisan Nasional?      

Those are relevant questions. We have been asking those questions too as we went along. Were we complicit to some of the ills and injustices inflicted upon individuals or even our society over the years? Were we merely looking elsewhere when misdeeds became full-fledged scandals and these scandals later became international disgrace? Sincerely we asked those questions too.

But to be honest, many of us tried our level best to ensure we played the roles as expected of us. We did our best under such circumstances. There were times when we were not proud of what we did. But we believed we had tried our level best.

We made mistakes too. We are not supposed to take sides, but we did. In one of my pieces for The Star (1^st October 2018) I asked the question that everyone of us ought to be asking: Are we complicit in the 1MDB scandal? “Why did most of us fail to voice out concerns when the 1MDB scandal was unfolding?”

My contention was that, too many people, including the mainstream media contributed to the problem by ignoring the red flags and choosing not to question  the official line.

In my piece I wrote:

1MDB is a slap on the face of a cowering media.

1MDB is a wake up call for the local media.

Docility sucks. 

Never again, that should happen. We must learn something from what happened in those years leading up the full-fledged expose by Sarawak Report and other news portals.

The truth is, there is no ultimate press freedom anywhere in the world. Even in the US, the so-labelled liberal press is being pitted against the conservative ones – it is like The Rest vs Fox News or The Rest vs President Donald Trump. Someone famously said, freedom of the press belongs only to those who own it.

Yet the war of attrition against journalists is getting new traction. If Donald Trump wins the presidency again (which I am not surprised) journalists  are in for a more troubling times.

The United States of America is supposed to be a beacon of democracy and free press. Trump has called “the fake news media” enemy of the people. Trump’s rhetoric is dangerous for it incites more than just distrust and hatred towards the media.

Newspapers have been dying in slow-motion for a decade or so already, some would argue. There is no future in the newspaper business. It can’t be saved, even with the best of intentions. Media companies are facing losses. I am not talking about only Utusan Melayu; even the mighty Media Prima group, the Star Publications and Astro  are facing difficulties.

Even Malaysiakini, the loudest voice of reason online is having problems.  

We have to accept the fact that the newspaper is more than just about the enterprise of newspapering. It is not only about the conversation on raucous chauvinism or unapologetic political correctness. Or about sex, lies and democracy, the three things that sell newspapers, they say.

It is also about quality, not just what the readers want. It is about our responsibility to do our best as journalists. It is about the role of the Fourth Estate. It is about accountability and fairness.

And about bringing sanity to a reading public that is obsessed with film stars, celebrities and more film stars and celebrities. It is about not relegating ourselves to prurient journalism fixated with telling the official truth and avoiding dubious journalistic methods.

We need to recognise the important fact that newspapers and the media as a whole are, first and foremost, business ventures. They are about money. About resources. About profit. About the bottom line. Why would quality newspapers fold? Why is it that even notoriously explicit and salaciously sensational papers are suffering?

Back then, editors were reminded of a famous but anonymous 19^th Century verse about Fleet Street:

 

Tickle the public, make ‘em grin

The more you tickle, the more you’ll win

Teach the public, you’ll never get rich

You’ll live like a beggar and die in the ditch.

We were not just editors. We learned fast to make adaptations. We made money for our companies. Our companies prospered. Back then, when I was at the helm of Utusan Melayu, the total advertisement spending for Malaysia was about RM3.5 billion, 60 per cent of that was for the newspapers, the rest for TV. People advertised in our papers. Our papers were influential and a money-making venture.

That was before the Internet, before the whole enterprise of digital revolution disrupted our business. In fact we labelled the onslaught as “disruptive technologies” with a hint of sarcasm.  We thought we were formidable. Many of the newspaper companies in Malaysia were forging ahead with lots of confidence into the digital world in the early 1990s. We thought technology would propel us to greater heights.

It did, at least for a while.

I have seen it all, from typewriters to old-styled newsroom and the old printing machines. Later the  newsroom became fully computerised. Back then the Internet was still in its infancy. Gone were the days when reporters were calling from phone booths and the layout of pages was done manually. We were excited. Handphones came, then short message system or SMS. WhatsApp, Twitter and Instagram were a decade away. The digital revolution was a sure thing, but for us, we sincerely believed that it would help us more than it would disrupt, destruct or even deconstruct us.

How wrong we were. We were literally caught with our pants down. What we once believed as “unthinkable” became “inevitable”. It affected us, our business, the entire discipline of journalism and perhaps the future of the newspaper and media. Journalism was being hollowed out by massive structural shifts, readers’ preferences, latest trends and the cost of the newspaper business.

To say that all newspaper companies are affected is an understatement. There are naysayers who believe that in the next five years, almost all newspapers in the world will cease to exist in their traditional form. The tide can’t be changed. The die is cast. It is just a matter of time. If at all, the end is to be delayed, not halted.

Then companies in Malaysia and elsewhere are shifting their ad spend to social media and digital platforms. Media companies have a lot to complain about the Big Four - Apple, Amazon, Facebook and Google. They have every reason to be unhappy. Many believed that these companies are the new imperialists of the Internet era. They are the new colonisers of today’s world. Their imperial ambitions know no bounds, some argue. 

There is a raging  debate out there on how  “harmful” the powers are in the hands of  these tech titans. There are arguments about how online platforms have used their power in destructive and harmful way in order to expand.

They carry our news, but they don’t pay. In fact they make money from our hard work. That isn’t fair.

But we have to accept the reality that  news business  is not the exclusive right of media companies. Anyone can be a reporter. Backpack journalism is the in-thing, whatever that means. But social media is real time. A nasty road accident outside ISTAC now will be on YouTube real-time or on any of the social media platforms. There is no need to wait for the news bulletin update on Astro Awani or for TV3’s Buletin Utama at 8.00 pm tonight.

But is serious journalism  at stake?

But at least there are people out there who still believed that the mainstream media remains the true main source of information, a platform that must continue to be trusted. Datuk A. Kadir Jasin, a veteran newsman himself and former editor of the New Straits Times, who was   the media and communication adviser to the Prime Minister Tun Mahathir Mohamad when he became PM the second time, argued that the mainstream media industry comprised trained and licensed professionals bounds by ethics and laws in their pursuit of true and verified information.

According to Kadir, “It differs from social media, which is not news, but a social medium that can be used by anyone and everyone to say whatever they want, just like in the coffeeshops.”

“So, we don’t have to get muddled with what social media offers, as correct information can only be obtained from the newspapers, radio, websites and television,” he said.

 I am sure many would disagree with Kadir. It is for us, comforting to hear that.  

But we all agree that the Internet is a cowboy realm. No country in the world can control social media. The advancement in telecommunication technology has disrupted humanity in many ways – the way we communicate, govern, education, family, you name it. Humans have been control of their creations since the invention of the wheel. But not this one. We are losing control of the Internet, the social media and all that is associated with it. 

Digital technology is a monster unleash. Communication technology today is heralded as the totem pole of freedom and free speech. Yes, we agree, information must be free, unedited, uncensored, and available to all. But today with digitalisation we are looking at a frightening new meaning of the word freedom.

Social media can easily be a weapon of mass destruction. Anyone can say anything. Anyone can spread lies. While it is a democratic tool it is a scrouge when its misuse is rampant and irresponsible. The finger is mightier dan a thumb drive which is mightier than the sword. Just look at the vitriol, the hatred, the lies in the social media.

Little wonder misinformation is a huge global humanitarian crisis! Fake news is the rule of the game.   

The truth is, the social media revolution is changing everything. Social media platforms care little about “truth”. Truth is elusive. Who cares where we get our news from or whether such news are true or fake. The way I look at it, the whole notion of “news” needs reviewing.

But there is also a silver lining. What the mainstream media can’t do fast and effectively, the social media can.

Having said all that, do I still believe in freedom of the press? An unequivocal yes for me. But freedom has its responsibilities.  

Just take a look at Indonesia.

There are  accusations that the government of President Joko Widodo (Jokowi) is trying to curtail press freedom and freedom of expression.  The truth is, Jokowi himself is being vilified by certain quarters of the media. Accusation that he is creating a political dynasty is  one of the hottest debates in the media during the presidential election or pilihanraya presiden (pilpres) 2024) in February this year.

Over the years Indonesia’s press freedom is not something to be proud of.  In 2023, it is ranked 108 out of 180 countries according to Reporters Without Borders (RSF). In 2021 Indonesia was in  113^th position while in 2022 it drops to 117.

Within that scenario many people are sceptical that the press will enjoy unrestricted freedom during  pilpres 2024 and the coming regional and district  elections or pemilihan kepala  daerah (pilkada) and election for governors or pemilihan umum gabenur (pilgup) in November.

One must remember the election this time is not  fought just on the  airwaves and the print media but more so in the social media. There is a new generation of Indonesians who are not familiar at all with traditional media. These are the Generation  Z and the millennials. According to Indonesia’s statistics department, those born between 1997 and 2002 are the dominant demographics in Indonesia today. There are currently 74.9  million of them or 27.9 per cent of the population. At least 70 per cent of them have breached the voting age of 17 years old.

So one can imagine the power of this group.

YouTube channels are providing the space for open  discussions. Every TV station and major newspapers  have its own offerings on YouTube.  On the airwaves TV stations are competing to get the attention of  viewers by putting up  talk shows that are extremely opiniated, even  contentious and controversial. There is always “the other side” to allow free flow of discussion by all sides and pendukung (supporters).

Some of the  talk show are hugely  popular and watched with interest beyond the shores of Indonesia via YouTube and other social media platforms. Some of the popular ones are Rosi, Panggung Demokrasi, Kontroversi, Q&A, Mata Najwa, Catatan Demokrasi and Indonesia Lawyers Club. Even the former head of Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (their anti-graft outfit), Abraham  Samad has his own podcast, Abraham Samad Speak Up. Another popular political podcaster is Hersubeno Arief on Forum News Network (FNN). They are many others like them.

These talk shows and podcasts  are redefining the rules of engagement  for its openness.  The debates are mostly civil despite its ferocity and harshness. Indonesians are good at laughing off heated debates.

I believe Indonesian society have  matured politically. I have seen a more robust press in a handful of  Asean countries when it comes to election but Indonesia deserves full credit this time.  While it is true that many politicians and oligarchs  are still owning media organisations in the country but as the whole, the press is free and open.

For me, the true winner of this pemilu is the free press.

We need probably another 10 years to reach that level.  

And then there is the Fufufafa debacle. It was an  old online postings that  appeared on an online forum, “Kaskus”.  Kaskus was created in November 1999 as  an informal forum for Indonesians students abroad. It later evolved into   the country’s  best, largest and the most popular online community.

There was an account registered as “Fufufafa” in Kaskus. Just like any other accounts, Fufufafa was critical of certain individuals, making fun of others, explicitly showing adoration of certain celebrities, at time even funny and mentioning body parts of certain female artistes, and linked to sensitive content like pornographic site sign-ups. The  owner of the account sounds conceited, crass, disrespectful, even brutal. He is also a  misogynist, racist and  sexist.

But the account comes to haunt the person 10 years later in  a shocking and dramatic way. This account is the biggest single Internet debacle in the history of Indonesia.

This is the case allegedly involving  the deputy president-elect,  Gibran Rakabuming Raka, the eldest son of President Joko Widodo (Jokowi). He is to be sworn in office on  October 20^th after winning the presidential election partnering Prabowo Subianto. The  account is sadly  redefining a  presidential partnership in Indonesia.

So, why is the postings of a 26-year old at the time matters now?  For one, he is to be the next vice president of the Republic of Indonesia. There is an issue of integrity, conduct  and behaviour of a leader. Gibran is the second most powerful person in Indonesia on October 20^th. If anything happened to the 72-year old Prabowo, Gibran is the next president.

But what about the future?

It is time that media practitioners look hard and deep into themselves. Things are changing. Media practitioners need to make adjustments. And adaptations. Or they will perish.

But for me, the most important thing to ensure that a free and responsible press is the pillar of a vibrant, working democracy. I applaud the government of Datuk  Seri  Najib Tun Razak to designate a date as National Journalists’ Day or Hari Wartawan Negara (Hawana). The date chosen is May 29^th, the day  Utusan Melayu was born in 1939.  Hawana is about the nation’s recognition of the role of journalists as a whole. They are the unsung heroes  in the country’s narratives.

Nothing has changed regarding the need for independence of journalists working anywhere in the world today, especially in developing countries. But Indonesia has shown how a free and vibrant media is playing a positive role in nation building.

And yes, freedom of the press must come with responsibility. So it is incumbent upon the journalists fraternity to prove its worth. Politicians come and go, journalists stay. That has been my advice to the younger generation of journalists.  They are judged by their adherence to the code of ethics and the acceptable standard of accountability that is expected of them. Not by their loyalty to the political masters. The demand for fairness and independence is louder now than  ever before.

I understand the love-hate relationship or the hate-hate relationship between the press and the public and the press and the ruling elite. No one really like us – politicians, the business tycoons, the oligarchs, and more so the corrupt and the crooked politicians, technocrats  and businessmen and women.

But my brothers and sisters in the press will strengthen their resolve to play the critical role in society. But more importantly the government of the day must  allow us to work under a conducive atmosphere without fear and favour. They must review, repeal an abolish archaic laws that have lost its relevance.

The last thing we expect is the freedom and the independence of the press to be trampled in anyway for various political needs, through laws that will stifle the journalists and the state apparatuses to control free press.

Only then, an unrepentant orang surat khabar lama like me  believe, that media integrity will be achieved  and truth, transparency and trust can be uphold.

Thank you.