Media Integrity: Reflections of Upholding Truth, Transparency, and
Trust
Keynote Address
By Tan Johan Jaaffar
16th 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 2nd 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 (1st 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 19th
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
113th 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 20th 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 20th.
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 29th, 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.
.jpeg)
