Luna Maya and Infotainment

(published by The Jakarta Post on 30 Dec 2009. Click here)

Two TV programs that never allowed being on in my living room are Indonesian sinetron (soap opera) and infotainment. Webster’s Dictionary defines infotainment as “a television program that presents information (as news) in a manner intended to be entertaining”, while The Oxford Dictionary similarly says “broadcast material which is intended both to entertain and to inform.”

To entertain and to inform, this is the key phrase. Unfortunately, Indonesian infotainment today has gone too far. It does not just intend to inform people about (mainly) celebrities on positive sides (which offers benefits to the public), but has become amateur detective industry, which investigates and intrudes deeply into personal life. They have treated the celebrities unproportionally and do not respect the privacy, even impudently annoying relatives or families who have nothing to do with their “story”. The worst thing is that most cases that infotainment exposes and blatantly airs through television is not far from awkward personalities, sexual affairs, love triangles, divorce or some other rubbish from which we actually take no benefit at all.

If we know an actress does have affairs with an actor, so what? If we know an actor divorced with his wife, so what? If an actress or actor feels like being intimate and walks closely with someone, so what? What is the benefit of knowing other people’s personal lives? We may complain about infotainment but unfortunately there are some actresses and actors who too love being headline infotainment news.

These days we have the hot issue of actress Luna Maya. She was reported to police by infotainment journalists (backed by PWI — Indonesian Journalist Association) who felt offended by her twitter comments, which said infotainment journalists are worse than prostitutes and murderers.

Luna became infuriated with the journalists when she was hounded during a trip to the mall with Peterpan band front man Ariel and his daughter. When Luna was surrounded by the journalists, Ariel’s daughter’s head was accidentally knocked by a journalist’s camera causing the child to cry out. That incident was the reason for the “tweets” that day. However, infotainment media has repeatedly exposed intimacy between Luna and Ariel, and even published several gossip related pieces related to them.

Luna is lucky because this time she is not alone. She has support from the Press Council, Independent Journalist Alliance (AJI), a group of journalists who lambasted the infotainment program, and also the support of the public. Public support today is considered to be a frightening voice. No one should belittle the public’s power, it has proven itself a very important tool in winning battles. We should remember the publics support for the KPK deputies Bibit & Chandra and for Prita Mulyasari against Omni international hospital, Tangerang.

The Muslim community has also reacted to the case. Chairman of Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) Hasyim Muzadi declared infotainment programs haram (forbidden under Islamic law) because they contain gossip, character assassinations and relishes in family breakups. The Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) also echoed the same voice, so did the Religious Affairs Minister Suryadharma Ali who asked the infotainment to be discontinued.

The stance of both NU and MUI is good for society but it seems to be a little too late. The decision should have been made a long time before infotainment became a daily staple in our family rooms. We actually have so many other hazardous programs in television which have no educational value. Programs which contain magic, superstitions, sadism, tacky teenager dating shows and a bunch of sinetron that show a lifestyle full of absurdities have to be reviewed and kicked off our televisions.

Who should be responsible for this? We don’t see any real actions taken by Information and Communications Minister so far. Is the only dangerous thing for our society pornography?

We surely have concerns about television programs since television is the easiest, cheapest and most pervasive media that can reach our families and children in our homes. Most parents cannot control every minute of what their children are watching on television, can they? If we let such programs air on our TVs it is the same as letting rubbish scatter across and pollute our homes. Such dirty “pollution of the mind” is more dangerous than physical rubbish, because it contaminates our mind, our children’s minds, and ultimately damages our nation’s mind.

***
Serpong, 27 Dec 2009
Titus J.

Entering Hazy Days

(published by The Jakarta Post on 21 Dec 2009. Click here)


People do not have to be skeptic about Indonesia’s economic performance for 2010 as reliable experts expressed their optimism. Vice President Boediono once predicted Indonesia’s economy growth would be 5 percent, economy observer Aviliani said 5.5 percent, IMF predicted 4.5 percent and recently, noted economist Faisal Basri cited 6 percent.

We are optimistic about our track record after passing the worst of the global economic crisis, while developed countries suffered. Thanks to the duet the Boediono-Sri Mulyani, the key figures who managed our economy during that time.

But these days, when both economic stalwarts are in jeopardy over the Bank Century bailout case, our economic future will also be in jeopardy. In other words, the optimism about the 5 to 6 percent of growth in 2010 is now in question. Don’t we have other figures with the same reputation and capacity?

People may not realize the implications of removing the reform icons. In 2010, corruption will continue and much awaited justice will be lost. Justice is just a dream. Corruption is everywhere. So, we should avoid our country being managed by the wrong people.

No, it is not merely about Boediono or Sri Mulyani. Anyone who is considered a reform icon will face challenges from whoever disagrees with the reform agenda, loves corruption and dishonesty.

Our biggest challenge in 2010 is corruption. Transparency International currently issued the Corruption Perception Index 2009 and have Indonesia a 2.8 score out of 10, with 10 being least corrupt. This is shameful for such a large country. We rated worse than Nigeria, Gambia and Gabon with a 2.9 score and Zambia, Tonga and Senegal with a 3.0 score.

Reviewing the recent attempt to disgrace the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), we assume there are “ghosts” who try anything to weaken corruption fighters. Today they failed, but they will try again. Frankly, I doubt we can achieve a better score in 2010 if the reform icons lose the battle.

Apparently, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono will not enter 2010 smoothly. His 100-day program is a bitter pill. His speech ahead Dec. 9 on International Anti-Corruption Day revealed he is now under siege. Despite Yudhoyono’s coalition that controls the majority in the House of Representatives, its body is fragile. Do not ever forget about the “roadmap to 2014” project, which has been kicked-off by political parties.

Next year Yudhoyono and his administration cannot do their job as he will be busy with his opponents. Indonesian politics has good and bad guys, but it seems there are more bad guys.

***
Serpong, 15 Dec 2009
Titus J.

Coins to Redeem Prita

(published by The Jakarta Post on 15 Dec 2009. Click here)


Omni International Hospital at Alam Sutra, Tangerang, has dug its own grave by playing the game of elephant and ant. The elephant can topple a big tree but cannot step on the ant. Just see how the public fiercely defends Prita Mulyasari against the hospital. From the very beginning, the public saw her unjust treatment following her detention by Tangerang Prosecutor Office for a few weeks in May 2009.

Thanks to the media that reported the case attractively: That a woman, a mother of two children – one of whom was still a baby – had been detained she had allegedly defamed an international hospital, that because of the detainment, the mother was separated with her newborn baby who still needed breast-feeding. What a pathetic story.

Perhaps Omni management has forgotten that our people are very sensitive to what we consider “persecution” towards the weak by the strong. We can easily mention such cases where the “weak” always drags attention and sympathy from public. In this particular phenomenon, the public will judge the “weak” always right and the “strong” always pointed as the despot, no matter the actual circumstances and motive.

In Prita’s case, public outcry against Omni is understandable. Moreover, people who have experienced poor services by some hospitals as well as doctors would sing the same song and firmly support Prita. Just ask your neighbors or friends, some will share horrific experiences about illness, hospital, and doctors. This is reality and nobody denies it.

To be fair, though, there are still good doctors who treat patients humanely, sympathetically and responsibly. I have plenty of stories about qualified doctors who respect the code of ethics while doing their jobs.

In Prita’s case, the thing that actually triggered public anger was when Omni sued Prita just because she shared her experience through email to her friends. It’s very simple; therefore, many people denounced Omni’s actions. The public saw it was excessive and tyrannous against the ordinary people. Is sharing experience through email a criminal act? If Omni kept silent, the story would be different, because not all people consider news spread out through email to be a serious matter.

But the story has been going too far today, and in this particular situation, people would not think whether Prita, in her email, was telling the truth or conversely defaming Omni. People would not consider rude sentences used by Prita when she wrote that Omni management was a big liar and made a fool of people’s lives. People did not want to understand Electronic Information and Transaction (ITE) law that was used by prosecutors to charge Prita. And people do not even want to know what’s happening in the legal process because law enforcement is nothing but claptrap to provide justice.

When eventually Banten High Court ordered Prita to pay Rp. 204 million for defaming Omni, people across the country, from trash pickers to students, from housewives to public figures, collected coins to redeem her. As of today, the coins that have been collected reached more than Rp 500 million. When Omni is willing to drop its civil lawsuit against Prita, it will be too late because Prita has already stolen the show. Prita has snatched public sympathy although legally she may be defeated.

Do the abundant coins for Prita reflect justice, or is it just channeling public protest because we don’t know where to seek justice in this country?

***
Serpong, 12 Dec 2009
Titus J.