Media and the vulnerable in Indonesia

146 Pages·2013·1.71 MB·English

Media and the
vulnerable in Indonesia:
Accounts from the
margins
Report Series
Engaging Media, Empowering Society:
Assessing Media Policy and Governance in Indonesia
through the Lens of Citizens’ Rights
Oleh A joint research project of
Yanuar Nugroho
Leonardus K. Nugraha
Shita Laksmi
Mirta Amalia
Dinita Andriani Putri Supported by
Dwitri Amalia

Media and the vulnerable in Indonesia: Accounts from the margins.
Published in Indonesia in 2013 by
Centre for Innovation Policy and Governance
Jl. Siaga Raya (Siaga Baru), Komp BAPPENAS No 43.
Pejaten Barat, Pasar Minggu , Jakarta Selatan 12130 Indonesia.
www.cipg.or.id
Cover designed by FOSTROM (www.fostrom.com); all rights reserved.
Except where otherwise noted, content on this report
is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License
Some rights reserved.
How to cite this report:
(Nugroho, et al., 2012) - Nugroho, Y., Nugraha, LK., Laksmi, S., Amalia, M., Putri, DA., Amalia, D., 2012.
Media and the vulnerable in Indonesia: Accounts from the margins. Report Series. Engaging Media,
Empowering Society: Assessing media policy and governance in Indonesia through the lens of citizens’
rights. Research collaboration of Centre for Innovation Policy and Governance and HIVOS Regional
Office Southeast Asia, funded by Ford Foundation. Jakarta: CIPG and HIVOS.
Centre for Innovation Policy and Governance i
Media and the vulnerable in Indonesia: Accounts from the margins

Acknowledgements
The research was funded by the Ford Foundation Indonesia Office and
undertaken by the Centre for Innovation Policy and Governance (CIPG), Jakarta and HIVOS Regional Office
Southeast Asia
Principal Investigator : Dr. Yanuar Nugroho, University of Manchester
Co-investigator (CIPG), Coordinator : Mirta Amalia
Co-investigator (HIVOS) : Shita Laksmi
Researchers (CIPG) : Leonardus Kristianto Nugraha
Dinita Andriani Putri
Dwitri Amalia
Academic Advisors : Dr. B. Herry-Priyono, STF Driyarkara, Jakarta
Throughout the research, the team received huge support and assistance from numerous Indonesian civil
society contacts and partners, and individuals who participated in our study through the survey, interviews,
focus group discussions and workshops. We particularly owe thanks and gratitude to Firdaus Mubarik,
Perkumpulan 6211, Karlina Supelli, Sri Agustine, Ardhanary Institute, Kristien Yuliarti (Misionaris Awam
Vincentian), Sapto Nugroho (Talenta), Ipung Purwanti, all participants of the CREAME (Critical Research
Methodology) training, and the intern at CIPG: Anindyah K. Putri, who has been a big help during the research.
Kathryn Morrison proofread and edited this report.
Centre for Innovation Policy and Governance iii
Media and the vulnerable in Indonesia: Accounts from the margins

Executive Summary
The purpose of this research is to map the implication of the political economy dynamics of the media
on citizens’ right to media from the perspective of citizens, in particular those who are vulnerable and
weak(ened). By providing four case studies from vulnerable groups, we aim to map the bigger picture
on citizens’ right to media. In order to support a more democratic society, we believe that what is
needed today is the protection of citizens who have a limited area of freedom in media, such values
which are declared in ‘Article 19’ of the UDHR1.
Since the 1998 Reform, the Indonesian media business has grown rapidly and fifteen years later, media
oligopoly has occurred as an inevitable consequence of the capital interest that drives the development
of media industry in the country. Since the media policymaking processes are in favour of the media
businesses, rather than the public interest –and that the implementation of existing media policies
is not lawfully enforced— the interest of citizens who already owned a limited area of freedom in
media is reduced to its minimal level. The ‘marriage’ of the current media oligopoly and the poor
implementation of policies has endangered citizens’ rights to information since the citizens have been
left in the confinement of consumers’ seats, merely enjoying what is available in the media channel with
nearly no chance to engage and have active discourses. The severity of the condition has hampered the
dream of a ‘public sphere’ that supports public engagement in the context of democracy.
Our research finds that while the notion of equal access to telecommunication infrastructure has not
been met yet, the access to conventional media –printed media and television in particular– is still an
issue for citizens in the least developed and border areas. In terms of the vulnerable and minorities,
the effect of having limited access to media (both conventional and the Internet) has been multiplied by
the poor quality of representation. In this case, mainstream media tend to use single communication
rather than an interactive one that allows the citizens to co-create content and to actively engage in
discourse.
While the government seems to fail in guaranteeing the protection, enforcement, fulfillment and
advancement of human rights – as stated in the UU No. 39/1999 – the media are then expected
to provide the means to defend the rights of the minorities. Despite stories on how the media are
rigorously making such attempts, the general portrayal of minorities and the vulnerable seems to tell
the opposite story. In this regard, the poor access to the media has potentially bound the minorities
and the weak(ened) in their attempts to strive for their rights: in exercising the freedom of religion, in
terms of employment, in gaining education, in receiving proper treatment in health and public service,
amongst others.
One of our findings indicates the way media portrayed the violent case against Ahmadiyya: instead of
constructing a healthy public discourse on Ahmadiyya’s protection, it actually increased the severity of
the labelling of the community as a ‘deviant’ one. While the persecution is blatant and should be easy
to tackle in terms of law, the Ahmadiyya communities suffer from the poor understanding in the wider
society due to the ‘deviant’ labelling amplified by the media. The impacts are fatal. The Ahmadiyya
communities are struggling hard to exercise their basic rights in various sectors. In fact, today we
1 The Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “Everyone has the right to
freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek,
receive, and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
Centre for Innovation Policy and Governance v
Media and the vulnerable in Indonesia: Accounts from the margins
can still find the Ahmadis being prosecuted as criminals instead of being treated as victims of violent
conduct.
While Ahmadiyya suffers from such labelling, the Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender (LGBTs) are
suffering from controversial stereotyping – especially concerning moral and religious beliefs. Such
reproduction of unfavourable images hurts the dignity of LGBT and puts them at risk of insults
and defamatory views in the wider society. While there are various factors at play– for example the
perception that the LGBT seem afraid to ‘come out’ and the discriminatory regulations such sharia
perdas– the vicious circles are continued due to the reluctance of media to give an opportunity for LGBT
people to represent themselves properly in the media. The situation has a serious impact on how they
exercise their civil, political and social rights.
Similarly, the ‘diffable’ (those with ‘different abilities’) often suffer not only from unfair treatment in the
media, but also more importantly from poor representation and understanding in the wider society.
While the access to media becomes the very topic of diffability – due to their weaknesses, the diffable
do not have many options to access various media since each type of diffability needs a specific tool
to engage with such media. Media meanwhile continues to cover diffability issues only in the medical
sense. Such an approach creates a dichotomy regarding what is considered ‘normal’ or ‘abnormal’. In
some cases, such distinction creates discriminatory conduct towards the diffables.
Indonesian women and children are still being discriminated against on day-to-day basis in many sectors
such as education, employment and healthcare. To address this problem, the media are expected to
take a more active role in the construction of public discourse on women and children in Indonesia.
However, with some parts of media system biased towards a particular interest, the plea is seemingly
left unanswered. Instead of speaking up for this group, the media tend to exploit women and children
for business purposes by using them merely as commodities to attract common interest and women
and children suffer from unhealthy representation in the media, thus marginalising them in terms of
their access to media.
In terms of the poor media content, the implication for the vulnerable and weak(ened) communities/
groups is huge, since such stereotyping and misleading representation has raised concerns over the
idea of citizenship itself. Such representations – which imply ‘uniqueness’ for being different – endangers
the exercise of the rights of these groups in daily life, since the majority public tend to see them as
‘abnormal’, ‘ill’, ‘sinful’, or even ‘deviant’. This condition mournfully jeopardises the possibility of ‘shared
life’. The promise of a civilised society in which rights are guarded by state – and where each individual
is treated “equal in dignity and rights” (art. 1 UDHR) – now seems to be an empty utopia.
Our research suggests that it is necessary to provide space for different interpretations or narratives
to emerge. If the mainstream media cannot provide this, the Internet could provide the space. In order
to facilitate this, Internet infrastructure is obviously a prerequisite. When access is not available for
every citizen then equality in exercising media rights is far from reality. In addition, since the poor
representation of the vulnerable exists due to misunderstanding from a human rights perspective, it
is recommended that journalists or media industry staff check on the constitution in their practices, so
that the human rights perspective is discussed and hopefully implemented.
Access to information, is essential for self-determination, for social and political participation, and for
development. However, due to the effect of the contemporary political economy of media in Indonesia,
the premise of equal citizens’ right to media has not yet been met. Business-powered media tend to
prioritise the concerns of the majority over those of the minority. Since the existence of media remains
vital to the society, it is essential that the media (industry) should first serve the interests of society, in
particular in providing for the needs of minority groups and the vulnerable.
vi Centre for Innovation Policy and Governance
Media and the vulnerable in Indonesia: Accounts from the margins