Abuse of public space
Economist Faisal Basri concluded SBY-Kalla failed to deliver most of their 2004 campaign promises. SBY's claim of success is considered an "empty jargon". Unfortunately, Kompas published the article in 15th page, not in front page. Meanwhile Independent Journalist Association (AJI) suspected "media owners' intervention" for full-23 minutes of SBY's speech aired by TV stations on April 16.
Economist Faisal Basri concluded SBY-Kalla failed to deliver most of their 2004 campaign promises. SBY's claim of success is considered an "empty jargon". Unfortunately, Kompas published the article in 15th page, not in front page. Meanwhile Independent Journalist Association (AJI) suspected "media owners' intervention" for full-23 minutes of SBY's speech aired by TV stations on April 16.
Basri pointed to the failures of SBY-Kalla in meeting most of macro-economic targets for 2004-2009 in economic growth, unemployment level, poverty rate, tax ratio, and economic disparity. We're not going to discuss the missed targets, because we've already argued similarly in our previous articles. We're more interested in the placement of the article by Kompas in Page 15.
Those who are familiar with media politics know exactly different magnitude of articles published in front page and page 15. Why Kompas published the critical article in page 15 is something to do with the newspaper's political standings.
Bisnis Indonesia, interestingly, published in front page today an article from political observer Yudi Latif who basically said that it is too early to claim a victory (for SBY) and too early to concede (for SBY's competitors).
In the meantime, a letter to editors sent by Wahyu Dhyatmika, chairman of Jakarta Chapter of AJI, deserved attention, especially for the future of Indonesian democracy. Dhyatmika criticized Indonesian media, especially TV stations, for a full-23 minutes of SBY's speech aired on April 16, 2009.
Dhyatmika said verification by AJI Jakarta found strong indication of pressures from TV owners on the board of editors to air in full SBY's speech defending his innocence in the election flaws and frauds alleged by several political parties.
AJI urges Indonesian Broadcasting Commission (KPI) to investigate the alleged intervention. "Based on Broadcasting Law, KPI is obliged to assure that public spaces (frequency) are not abused for certain group's interests," AJI argued.
Well, the issue of public space in broadcasting has been the subject of debates in most advanced democracies for many decades now. Historically, political debates used to take place in political parties, rostrums, or the parliament. But with the growth of mass media, the public space has changed from bars, squares, and clubs to TV or Internet.
Face-to-face contact is replaced by other ways of communication, which sometimes better (they could reach more people) and worse (because of one-way communication, personal relationships between politicians and the mass are weakened).
Like in other democracies, there are cases of excessive abuse of public spaces, especially in TV broadcasting, by its owners for certain political or business interests. Soeharto regime is known for editorial intervention through minister of information where editors were asked not to publish something. In the West, media magnate Rupert Murdoch is known for such editorial intervention.
After Soeharto's downfall, Indonesian media gained its "freedom", but only from the authoritarian ruler, not from the owners. As a matter of fact, intervention from media owners have increased significantly in the past few years, mainly for "business interest", i.e. to maintain the big spenders (advertisement) or "political protection" from the ruling elite.
So, we're not surprised to read AJI's complaints of editorial intervention by television media owners. We have at least 11 national TV stations which "control" the public frequencies.
1) TVRI: State-owned TV station. Even though government promised to give "freedom", this TV station is pretty much controlled by government.
2) RCTI, TPI, MNC TV, Global TV: Controlled by PT Media Nusantara Citra (MNCN) Tbk, a listed company. MNCN is controlled by Bhakti Group (Tanoesoedibjo family). This is the largest TV broadcasting group. The group's interest varies from stock trading to property and manufacturing.
3) SCTV & O-Channel: Controlled by PT Surya Citra Media (SCMA) Tbk, a listed company at Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX). SCMA is controlled by EMTEK Group (Sariaatmadja family), which has interests in other businesses, including the supply of IT for state-owned banks. Fofo Sariaatmadja is seen in various occasions on board with president SBY.
4) Indosiar: Controlled by Salim Group, one of Indonesia's biggest conglomerations with interests in manufacturing, property, finance, etc.
5) Trans TV & Trans-7: These stations are controlled by Para Group (Chaerul Tandjung), which also has interests in banking, finance, property, etc. Tandjung is a business partner of Kalla Group (controlled by VP Kalla, now a president candidate). Tandjung is also known as business partner of Salim Group. But Tanjung played crucial role in brokering PKS-Demokrat dispute on VP for SBY.
6) ANTV and TV-One: Controlled by Vivanews Group (Bakrie family), which has interests in mining, oil and gas, property, infrastructure, etc. Aburizal Bakrie, leader of the group, is a cabinet minister, close to both Kalla and SBY.
7) Metro-TV: Controlled by Media Group (Surya Paloh) with interests in media, mining, property, and energy sector. Paloh is also the chairman of Golkar Party's advisory board.
With the recent political developments, the break-up of SBY-Kalla, intensified pressures on government in relation to election laws and frauds, it is interesting to see with whom the media owners will aligning to. And, since these media owners have various business interests, it's just so easy for them to "intervene" the board of editors for the sake of "protection" of their own interests. They actually don't care whether the frequency awarded to them is public goods or not. They would easily call their own interest as public interest.
This article is taken from Yosefardi.com.
READ MORE!!!
Economist Faisal Basri concluded SBY-Kalla failed to deliver most of their 2004 campaign promises. SBY's claim of success is considered an "empty jargon". Unfortunately, Kompas published the article in 15th page, not in front page. Meanwhile Independent Journalist Association (AJI) suspected "media owners' intervention" for full-23 minutes of SBY's speech aired by TV stations on April 16.
Basri pointed to the failures of SBY-Kalla in meeting most of macro-economic targets for 2004-2009 in economic growth, unemployment level, poverty rate, tax ratio, and economic disparity. We're not going to discuss the missed targets, because we've already argued similarly in our previous articles. We're more interested in the placement of the article by Kompas in Page 15.
Those who are familiar with media politics know exactly different magnitude of articles published in front page and page 15. Why Kompas published the critical article in page 15 is something to do with the newspaper's political standings.
Bisnis Indonesia, interestingly, published in front page today an article from political observer Yudi Latif who basically said that it is too early to claim a victory (for SBY) and too early to concede (for SBY's competitors).
In the meantime, a letter to editors sent by Wahyu Dhyatmika, chairman of Jakarta Chapter of AJI, deserved attention, especially for the future of Indonesian democracy. Dhyatmika criticized Indonesian media, especially TV stations, for a full-23 minutes of SBY's speech aired on April 16, 2009.
Dhyatmika said verification by AJI Jakarta found strong indication of pressures from TV owners on the board of editors to air in full SBY's speech defending his innocence in the election flaws and frauds alleged by several political parties.
AJI urges Indonesian Broadcasting Commission (KPI) to investigate the alleged intervention. "Based on Broadcasting Law, KPI is obliged to assure that public spaces (frequency) are not abused for certain group's interests," AJI argued.
Well, the issue of public space in broadcasting has been the subject of debates in most advanced democracies for many decades now. Historically, political debates used to take place in political parties, rostrums, or the parliament. But with the growth of mass media, the public space has changed from bars, squares, and clubs to TV or Internet.
Face-to-face contact is replaced by other ways of communication, which sometimes better (they could reach more people) and worse (because of one-way communication, personal relationships between politicians and the mass are weakened).
Like in other democracies, there are cases of excessive abuse of public spaces, especially in TV broadcasting, by its owners for certain political or business interests. Soeharto regime is known for editorial intervention through minister of information where editors were asked not to publish something. In the West, media magnate Rupert Murdoch is known for such editorial intervention.
After Soeharto's downfall, Indonesian media gained its "freedom", but only from the authoritarian ruler, not from the owners. As a matter of fact, intervention from media owners have increased significantly in the past few years, mainly for "business interest", i.e. to maintain the big spenders (advertisement) or "political protection" from the ruling elite.
So, we're not surprised to read AJI's complaints of editorial intervention by television media owners. We have at least 11 national TV stations which "control" the public frequencies.
1) TVRI: State-owned TV station. Even though government promised to give "freedom", this TV station is pretty much controlled by government.
2) RCTI, TPI, MNC TV, Global TV: Controlled by PT Media Nusantara Citra (MNCN) Tbk, a listed company. MNCN is controlled by Bhakti Group (Tanoesoedibjo family). This is the largest TV broadcasting group. The group's interest varies from stock trading to property and manufacturing.
3) SCTV & O-Channel: Controlled by PT Surya Citra Media (SCMA) Tbk, a listed company at Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX). SCMA is controlled by EMTEK Group (Sariaatmadja family), which has interests in other businesses, including the supply of IT for state-owned banks. Fofo Sariaatmadja is seen in various occasions on board with president SBY.
4) Indosiar: Controlled by Salim Group, one of Indonesia's biggest conglomerations with interests in manufacturing, property, finance, etc.
5) Trans TV & Trans-7: These stations are controlled by Para Group (Chaerul Tandjung), which also has interests in banking, finance, property, etc. Tandjung is a business partner of Kalla Group (controlled by VP Kalla, now a president candidate). Tandjung is also known as business partner of Salim Group. But Tanjung played crucial role in brokering PKS-Demokrat dispute on VP for SBY.
6) ANTV and TV-One: Controlled by Vivanews Group (Bakrie family), which has interests in mining, oil and gas, property, infrastructure, etc. Aburizal Bakrie, leader of the group, is a cabinet minister, close to both Kalla and SBY.
7) Metro-TV: Controlled by Media Group (Surya Paloh) with interests in media, mining, property, and energy sector. Paloh is also the chairman of Golkar Party's advisory board.
With the recent political developments, the break-up of SBY-Kalla, intensified pressures on government in relation to election laws and frauds, it is interesting to see with whom the media owners will aligning to. And, since these media owners have various business interests, it's just so easy for them to "intervene" the board of editors for the sake of "protection" of their own interests. They actually don't care whether the frequency awarded to them is public goods or not. They would easily call their own interest as public interest.
This article is taken from Yosefardi.com.
READ MORE!!!
posted by yosef at 1:56 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home