Name Student number Course code Professors name

: Andhyta Firselly Utami : N1200283B : HA9307 Media and Politics : Dr. Goh Nguen Wah

Indonesian Press under the Politics of New Order: A Toothless Watchdog Held In an Iron Kennel? Indonesias current title as worlds largest Muslim democracy1 has not been there forever. Less than 15 years ago, the archipelagic country was still far from achieving freedom of expression, and instead struggled under a ruling authoritarian named Soehartothe same man who coined the term New Order (Orde Baru) to characterize his regime as he came into power in 1966. Indeed, todays Indonesia has been steadily enjoying a robust economic growth of 6.1%,2 and a relatively good press freedom index at 68,00.3 In 1998, however, Indonesia just hit the bottom of their record at -13.127%4, which was caused hugely by the worldwide monetary crisis, worsened by its domestic corruption and the fact that its people could not do anything to criticize nor advise the government about this condition. During this period, public opinion was a nearly impossible phrase, rebellious media were shut down, and news circulation was controlled immensely by the military. This essay aims to analyze the role of press in the New Order regime by embarking on a historical visit to the time when Indonesian journalists were silenced and had to live under the shadow.5 It further seeks to explain why the strong, 32-year-old regime was so afraid of freedom of press, and relate it to the relation between media and politics in the bigger picture. I. The Onset When the New Order first emerged, Indonesian people were delighted for what they were promised: complete freedom of speech alongside a full-speed growth. After Old Orders declining performance, the new regime was welcomed with a huge anticipation and, at the same time, expectation that it would improve Indonesias poor condition in various sectors politics, economy, as well as social. Gradually indeed, Soehartos leadership has proved itself to be capable of achieving these ambitious targets, although it also meant that Indonesia has to surrender before his military regime.

Calvin Sims, Indonesia: Gambling That Tolerance Will Trump Fear in New York Times (April 15th, 2007), accessed from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/15/weekinreview/15sims.html?_r=0 2 Geoffrey C. Gunn, Indonesia in 2012: An Electoral Democracy in Full Spate in Asian Survey, Vol. 53, No. 1 (University of California Press, February 2013), pp. 117-125, accessed from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/as.2013.53.1.117 3 Reporters without Borders, Worldwide Press Freedom Index 2011/12 (2012), accessed from http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/press_freedom.htm 4 Indonesia Real Growth Rate in Index Mundi, accessed form http://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/gdp_real_growth_rate.html 5 A phrase used by a senior editor of Tempo Magazine in one of his speeches regarding Medias Role in Energy Initiatives (November 2012).
1

Tragically for Indonesias press front, however, this also meant that they had to be (willingly or unwillingly) supportive to the regime while simultaneously suppressed by it. They could not, for example, publish reports or news that would criticize the government or induce negative remarks about them. Whenever such sentiments appeared in the media, the regime would not just approach and ask them nicely to stop doing so; they would threaten these journalists and, when needed, their family. In further legitimizing their control over the media, the New Order established the Ministry of Information (Departemen Penerangan), under which all sorts and kinds of news or insights circulating in the country were governed. Throughout that period, should any media entity wish to continue its press-related activities, they had to publish reports or news that supported the government; otherwise, the government would take necessary measures to shut their office down. One of the biggest measures against the press done by the New Order was Peristiwa Malari (the Malari Event), i.e. the banning of as many as 12 news offices, on January 15th 1974.6 Not only the office buildings were closed and destroyed, but also many people were killed and injuried in the process. The most tremendous one, however, was the revocation of press printing permit (surat izin penerbitan press) for plenty prominent mass media in the country, including Tempo magazine, Detik, as well as Editor. These three magazines were closed down on on June 21st 1994 for its activities that were considered as critical towards the government.7 This action was a response by the government toward the fact that they printed investigation reports about the corruption done by a couple of government officials. The incumbent Minister of Information, Harmoko, publicly announced this ban himself. Later, the government promoted what they called as Pers Pancasila (Pancasila Presspancasila is Indonesias five principles, including social justice for all the people of Indonesia), with its ground rule being free and responsible.8 In reality, what remained was stricter restrictions with no space for actual freedoma plethora of news offices were banned, and their permit to publish news was revoked.

As summarized from Vera W. Ardy, Sistem Pers dan Komunikasi Indonesia Pada Masa Orde Baru submitted as part of coursework in Communication Studies, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang (2008), accessed from http://disinijurnalvera.blogspot.sg/2008/12/sistem-persindonesia-masa-orde-baru.html 7 Aliansi Jurnalis Independen, Wartawan Independen, Sebuah Pertanggungjawaban (Jakarta: Aliansi Jurnalis Independen, 1995) 8 Sudirman Tebba, Jurnalistik Baru (Ciputat: Kalam Indonesia, 2005), page 22
6

II. The Press Fights Back Despite this strict control put out by the government, a number of news offices actually still fought against the politics and policies of the New Order. One of the most impressive media struggles was done by Tempo, the most prominent and important weekly, political magazine in the country. Its editor-in-chief, Goenawan Mohammad, was a respected intellectual in the country. His main philosophywhich later became the spirit of Tempowas that criticism was an essential part of journalism. Two of the main strategies that were used by Tempo in its war against the New Order are: 1) semanticschange of active sentences to passive ones to hide real intentions, 2) mouth-to-mouth publication as part of their marketing. These two tricks had played an important role in ensuring the independence and openness of Tempo. The high tension and pressure from the government could not stop them. Even after the revocation of their printing permit, Tempo still tries to fight the government back and issue underground bulletins or flyers in order to keep the people informed about the real issues that are going on as their guerilla effort to fight back. Additionally, they also establish Tempo Interaktif as well as ISAI (Flow of Information Study Institute-Institut Studi Arus Informasi) in the 1995.9 In addition to Tempo, there were also several other independent journalist alliances whose histories were not recorded and much exposed compared to Tempo. III. Post-1998 Later on October 6th 1998 after the New Order regime was toppled down, Tempo was reestablished and further rose as one of the biggest and most prominent political magazine in Indonesia today. From then on, the relationship between Indonesias media and government was enhanced. Within just a decade, Indonesia has managed to increase their press freedom index by Reporters Without Borders and ranked 100th with a very high score of 28.50 (per 2009).10 Today, Indonesian media play various role: 1) agenda setting, 2) trial by the media, 3) investigative reporting and, to a certain extent, 4) privacy intrusion.11 For what its worth, the government still runs their national television station, but they allow many talkshows and news updates to criticize and give inputs to the government.

Sudirman Tebba, Op. Cit. Reporters without Borders, 2011-2012 World Press Freedom Index (Paris, 2012), page 9, accessed from http://en.rsf.org/IMG/CLASSEMENT_2012/C_GENERAL_ANG.pdf 11 Dr. Goh Nguen Wah,Government and Media Relations Lecture 1 slides.
9 10

Lately in 2012, however, this stable number had to face major fallout of 29 places from the previous year.12 Reasoned largely to the killing, kidnapping, and assault cases in West Papua last year, Indonesia ranked 146th for 2011 which was a drop of 29 places from 117th in 2010. Additionally, a corrupt judiciary that is too easily influenced by politicians and pressure groups and government attempts to control the media and Internet have prevented the development of a freer press. 13 Indonesias overall score has also gotten progressively worse, from 28.50 (2009) to 35.83 (2010) and 68.00 (2012).14 IV. What It Means This part of the essay will further deal with three different layers of questions: 1) how Indonesian press plays a role in the national politics of the New Order, 2) why the strong, 32-year-old regime was so afraid of freedom of press, and 3) what is the relation between media and politics in the bigger picture. First, under the Ministry of Information and control of Press Council, the New Order had successfully turned the function of media, mainly into an instrument for the regime to maintain their power and support from the people. This also means, however, that media cannot function its other ideal roles, which include reporting the truth and criticizing the government where necessary. Instead, the public only received selected news, particularly ones that actually showed only the good sides of the government. Second, the previous explanation has demonstrated how the New Order did realize that media had a big influence in shaping Indonesian peoples opinions and support towards the government. In their effort to ensure political security and maintain stability, the regime decided to put their hands upon the work of the media. In other words, the press was an instrumental tool for the New Order to sustain its power. From one side, this could mean that the media was forced to give up their role as the peoples channel to the government. To see it differently, however, one might argue that the situation also taught us that control over the press is very essential in maintaining peace and orderespecially under a corrupt regime where the officials were chosen largely on kinship bases. This means that Indonesia in the New Order period feared that the fourth estate might stimulate political instability, induced by the power behind the media and the information they might provide.

Anita Rackman, Indonesia Falls 29 Places in World Index of Press Freedom in The Jakarta Post (January 26th 2012) accessed from http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/media/indonesia-falls-29-places-in-world-index-ofpress-freedom/493691 13 Reporters without Borders, 2011-2012 World Press Freedom Index (Paris, 2012), page 9, accessed from http://en.rsf.org/IMG/CLASSEMENT_2012/C_GENERAL_ANG.pdf 14 Anita Rackman, Op. Cit.
12

Having learned from Singapores phenomenal book OB Markers, however, one might argue that the government knows best what is good for the people, and they want to protect the people from bad influence, especially from the outside.15 In fact, this argument has been supported partly by the United Nations resolution: The right of information may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary: a) for respect of the rights or reputations of others; b) for the protection of national security or of public order, or of public health or morals.16 However, what has been done by the New Order regime was hardly necessary measures for the protection of national security or of public order, or of public health or morals. Instead, it was the way for the government to hide the several failures of their policies as well as their corrupt officials. Additionally, the media had also been used to solicit support for Golongan Karya, the ruling party under Soekarno. This means that, all the overwhelming control that made Indonesian media a toothless watchdog in an iron kennel was not aimed to achieve political and economic stability per se, but also to protect the presidents personal interest to sustain his power for 32 years. In the bigger picture, one could not find the most ideal relationship between media and the government during the New Order regime. I believe that the government should not, at any cost, scare the media of reporting facts that they have to reportthe government should not keep media as their dog and turn them toothless. What they should do, instead, is building a sustainable relationship so that media can support the governments policies when they are indeed good, but at the same time let the media help the government to stay alert when their policies have not been working well and the people aspire for a change. Because in the end, both media and the government cannot function optimally without each other being completely independent and work effectively.

15 16

Cheong Yip Seng, OB Markers, as presented in the Guest Lecture on March 28th 2013. Frank La Rue, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression (The United Nations, May 16th, 2011), accessed from http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/17session/a.hrc.17.27_en.pdf