Careless with facts or deliberate in distortions?

by Eric Loo , fz.com

• 

  Were the media simply careless with the facts or deliberate in manufacturing consent to push their political agendas during GE13?

(May 19): A FRIEND emailed a photo story on May 3 of "foreign workers" arriving at the Low-Cost Carrier Terminal, KLIA, in Sepang. It said the workers were being brought in to vote for Barisan Nasional (BN). Phantom voters! 

I checked with a colleague if the story was accurate. "Utter nonsense," the veteran former editor said. I reverted to my friend who emailed the story. "What, you still have friends in the mainstream papers?" he quipped. "Don't trust them lah."

 

Indeed, it has been years since I referred to the mainstream papers. But, isolated from the campaign frenzy, I had to this time. User-generated speculation about the election was circulating in the social media network. Caustic commentaries were getting high hits in the alternative and mainstream news sites. 

 

I was appalled at the blatantly biased coverage. Were the media simply careless with the facts or deliberate in manufacturing consent to push their political agendas?

 

Yes, we are naturally biased in interpreting controversies. This inherent bias inevitably colours the work we do. Writers and journalists are no exception. However, as custodians of the public conscience, professional journalists should activate their in-built alarm system.

 

They are trained to step back when they feel their biases are eroding their capacity to report or comment accurately, fairly and "objectively". While Platonic objectivity is impractical, especially in covering elections reeking with racial, class and religious undertones, there is what we call the "fairness doctrine" that every professional journalist and writer ought to know. There are more than two sides to a controversial issue.

 

The lopsided political editorialising and commentaries during the campaign was alarming. Anti-BN stories were as blunt as anti-Pakatan reports were blatant. Malaysiakini ran these headlines in its column section: BN must be destroyed, Najib's zombie apocalypse, and GE is Pakatan's to lose (disclosure: I write an occasional column in Malaysiakini).

 

The New Straits Times had these: Anwar delusion fuelled by Western media hype, Pakatan's 5-year systemic sinking and PAS-DAP theatre of the absurd.

 

Of course, columnists and editors do indirectly endorse candidates and political parties. The real question is whether the content and contexts published throughout the campaign period provide an overall fair representation of the ground realities, particularly the people's aspirations. Evidently not.

 

From April 15 to May 7, Malaysiakini ran 20 columnist articles and NST, 35. An ad hoc reading of the narrative slants show these distribution: Malaysiakini (anti-government (13); somewhat neutral (7); pro-opposition (0); NST(anti-opposition (15); neutral (12); pro-government (8).

 

Here's how an NST writer worded his disdain for the opposition: "The Bersih organisers, in their myopic march to force electoral reforms, have either naively or idiotically lost their well-meaning plot to opportunistic politicians, allowing the voice of a tyrannical minority to dictate terms in the most brutish manner … 

 

Politicians like Anwar Ibrahim can be reliably counted on for disturbing machinations like Saturday's sordid outing: it is his justification to exist (he still nurses the fantasy that he can still become prime minister) but for the likes of Bersih and even the Bar Council, their constant parroting that they are neutral and non-partisan social activists borders on absurdity."

 

In one sweeping 97-word judgment, the writer used a string of hyperboles and negative descriptors to metaphorically lump Bersih, the Bar Council, Anwar and opposition supporters as living in fantasyland.

 

The same writer wrote in another commentary: "The Western media side-steps substantive voter groundswell lurching towards BN but even they must start thinking about Anwar's tangible hypocrisies, mirrored reflectively on his sleeping bedfellows, the DAP and PAS, each with their own set of Orwellian tendencies. 

 

Astoundingly, these profiles confirm a long-time suspicion: they will disregard Anwar's fakery, augment his victimology and enrich his aura/charisma only to create more supplicants to serve Anwar's foreign puppeteers."(NST).

 

'Substantive voter groundswell', 'tangible hypocrisies', 'sleeping bedfellows', 'Orwellian tendencies', 'fakery', 'victimology', 'foreign puppeteers'. The tautology aside, these specious buzzwords do trigger a negative recall of Anwar's past, and effectively send an implicit message that Anwar and Pakatan are untrustworthy chameleons, contrary to their reformasi agencies that their supporters believe.

 

Likewise, columnists in the alternative media are as scathing in their attacks on the government.

 

From Malaysiakini: "… I'm betting that the people are disgusted and determined enough to seize their long-awaited chance to make this May 5 their 'D-day'. 'D' for the destruction of the dumb, despotic, deceitful, double-dealing and altogether despicable BN regime; 'D' for the decent democracy most have dreamed of and been denied for decades. And will be denied for many more decades to come, if BN is ever again allowed to have its way."

 

And this by another writer: "Former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad's judicious selection of the ignoramus Mat Taib as menteri besar was not without good reason. He was aware that the appointment of smart and able men would have serious consequences. He knew that efficient men may covet the throne, whereas dolts are easily sated with money and women."

 

In a progressive democracy, it is the people who make up a successful society. The government manages the system. The media watch over the managers and monitor the democratic process to ensure its adherence to the constitution. The media's custodial role is especially crucial. They should maintain a sense of proportion in the frenzy of a polarising election campaign.

 

Instead of directing hatred and fomenting resentment, as in the preposterous racially- toned headline in Utusan Malaysia on May 7, the media should be proactive in facilitating the national conversation and season it with reasoned arguments rather than bake it in rhetorical platitudes.

 

By making slanderous attacks on particular candidates and dismissing the legitimacy of the opposition's reformist agenda or the spirit of the government's transformation programmes, journalists have failed their readers.

 

At this time of writing, stories of thousands at Pakatan's post-election protest rally in Kelana Jaya on May 8 are filling up my inbox. Anwar was reported as saying he would not quit "until we reach Putrajaya, until we expose all (fraud) and claim Putrajaya for the rakyat. They deserve it as we, Pakatan, won the popular vote".

 

To Pakatan supporters, "national reconciliation" is absolutely meaningless when the electoral outcome is not what they expect or will accept. A prolonged challenge against the results with, as yet, no hard evidence of electoral fraud could diminish Pakatan's public standing and paint Anwar as a self-interested sore loser obsessed with occupying Putrajaya at any cost.

 

If fraud is proven, it could then produce a stronger bloc of disillusioned voters comprising the Malays, Chinese and Indians to evolve, ironically, into a 1Malaysia hybrid polity in opposition working towards a real regime change in 2018.

 

Eric Loo teaches journalism at the University of Wollongong in New South Wales, Australia. He worked as a journalist and taught journalism in Malaysia from the late 1970s to 1986. This article was first published in The Edge Malaysia May 13-19 issue.