Neutering “Guard Dogs”

The article prohibiting the broadcast of investigative coverage in the Broadcasting Bill has the potential to castrate the press as a "watchdog".

SUPRIYANTO

Illustration

The House of Representatives is currently drafting the Broadcasting Bill. The draft amendment of the Broadcasting Law is partly good, but there are also many rules that hold the potential for problems if they are passed into law.

Among a number of problematic articles, one of them mentions the prohibition on broadcasting exclusively investigative journalism, namely Article 50B Paragraph 2 point C. The inclusion of this prohibited point needs to be opposed because it will castrate the duties and responsibilities the press as a monitor of power in the democratic process.

The role of the press is likened to a "guard dog" (watchdog), meaning a dog that protects residents as homeowners from those who want to do evil. Because loyalty is given only to the public, the press is obliged to protect the public from corruptors, human rights violators and other criminals who harm the public, steal and disturb the comfort of life of every citizen.

We know that the practice of investigative journalism has made many public officials, public figures, from businessmen to those in power uncomfortable. The 37th President of the United States Richard Nixon resigned from office after a series of investigative reports by journalist duo Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward were reported in the Washington Post.

The search for the two journalists was carried out from the trial of document theft at the Democratic Party office at Watergate in mid-1972 until Nixon's announcement of resignation on August 8 1974. The uncovering of the Watergate scandal became one example. investigative journalism best practices.

Also read: Broadcasting Bill Considered Threatening Press Freedom

Public trust in President Joseph "Erap" Estrada in the Philippines plummeted after a number of journalists who were members of the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalists (PCIJ) exposed the wealth of the president's family to the public. PCIJ's investigative report led by female journalist Sheila S Coronel uncovered the network of 66 companies, buildings and securities owned by the president, suspected of being obtained through corrupt practices and bribery. In 2001, the Philippine Senate impeached Erap from his position as president on charges of corruption.

In Indonesia, investigative journalist Kompas's 2021 report regarding the breach of millions of personal data originating from the Social Security Administering Agency (BPJS) revealed the weak security of citizens' digital data by public bodies. In the digital era, where almost the entire population is connected and active via the internet, protecting personal data has become one of the government's priority responsibilities and obligations.

Several years earlier, TempoMetta Dharmasaputra magazine journalist successfully uncovered a case of tax evasion worth IDR 2.5 trillion by the Asian Agri company. Taxes are important state income to fund development, such as providing roads and transportation, financing public health and schools for every poor child in Indonesia.

Kompas

The government, along with the parliament, plans to revise Law Number 32 Year 2002 regarding Broadcasting. This plan has entered the stage of finalizing the revision draft of the Broadcasting Law. However, there are several articles that are considered a threat to press freedom, including the ban on exclusive broadcasting of investigative journalism in the draft of the Broadcasting Bill.

"viral" journalistic content

Along with the penetration of the internet and digital platforms, journalistic works that apply in-depth and investigative reporting are growing. Journalism coverage is no longer monopolized by large media industries.

Now residents can witness in-depth investigative reports that reveal evidence of private companies seizing land belonging to indigenous communities, video evidence of human rights violations involving law enforcement and security officers, deviations in the healthcare industry, and misappropriation of public funds in the construction of roads and schools carried out by public officials through digital platforms and social media. Some of these investigative reports are not produced by well-known and large national media companies.

Documentary films such as Dirty Vote (2024) and Sexy Killers (2019) are the result of the initiative of a group of citizens who collaborated with small media and non-governmental organizations to finance and cover production costs. This journalistic work reveals the dirty political practices of public officials regarding their policies and actions that are detrimental to the public.

Participation and rationality can only be achieved if the public can access media that provides quality and accurate information.

Amazingly, regardless of the pros and cons among the public, the two documentary shows went viral and were watched by millions of netizens via digital platforms. In a short time, the documentary Dirty Vote, which was released ahead of the 2024 election, has been watched by more than 9 million netizens.

Through this documentary work, citizens actually gain political literacy and education as voters in general elections as a means of preserving a healthy democratic system. According to McNair (2018), a healthy democracy requires participation, rationality in elections, and a constitution.

Participation and rationality can only be achieved if the public has access to media that provides high-quality and accurate information, so the public can evaluate and choose wise and best leadership candidates during the electoral process.

Illustration

Maintain public accountability

Returning to the clause on the prohibition of exclusive broadcast of investigative reports in the Broadcasting Bill, this ban contradicts the spirit and mandate of the government to encourage quality journalism through Presidential Regulation No. 32 of 2024. This regulation protects and promotes the efforts of the press to be protected from economic injustice and unhealthy business competition against aggressive digital platform companies that attract information consumers and seize advertisements.

Furthermore, this protection is certainly provided by the government to encourage the press company in improving the quality of journalistic work that educates the public as well as monitors public officials. The contribution of the press in educating and enlightening the public is in line with the mandate of the Press Law Number 40 of 1999.

However, many press industries are having difficulties in practicing investigative journalism. The reason is that investigative reporting is not easy and cheap. The investigative reporting process often requires expensive resources and costs due to the cases being investigated across islands and even different countries.

Even to obtain evidence such as archive documents, testimonies, and recordings of events and criminal practices, journalists need days to gather. Not to mention the risk of legal action if the report is broadcast to the public.

Also read: Investigating the Desires of Media Audiences

In the investigative coverage guidelines published by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Hunter (2007) highlighted the issues that should be raised in the practice of investigative journalism. The coverage must concern public interests, such as corruption, human rights violations, ecosystem and environmental destruction, and other crimes that harm the public.

The actors behind crimes that harm the public are generally those who hold power. Power in politics, economics, social issues, as well as power in policies and laws. Abuse of power should be seen as an important problem that hinders the development and progress of the nation's goals. Therefore, the goal of the press to broadcast investigative reports is to maintain accountability and credibility of government institutions and private bodies towards the public.

The airing of investigative reports aims to correct deviations so that public trust in institutions that provide public services, in regional heads and public officials can be maintained. This includes restoring public trust in representatives of the people in the parliament (DPR).

If the clause prohibiting the airing of investigations in the Broadcasting Bill is approved, it is not impossible that the people will lose more trust in their representatives in the DPR.

Samiaji Bintang N, Journalism Lecturer and Head of the Journalism Study Program at Multimedia Nusantara University