Malaysian satire now a bigger minefield

KUALA LUMPUR: It seems that even clearly satirical news outlets are no longer safe from the wrath of Putrajaya’s watchdogs, as the latest amendments to the Sedition Act has turned the media landscape into a veritable minefield.

Satire and jokes are now under heavier scrutiny, with websites such as Fake Malaysia News (FMN) now forced to tone down stories and find other, more cautious ways of lampooning politicians and governmental bodies.

“We try not to put our words directly into a politician’s mouth now to do a comedy bit,” said the FMN founder, who only wants to be known as Adam, in a report by the Malaysian Insider.

“Instead, we now have more anonymous or fictional ‘spokesmen’ making comments and jokes to get the same point across, which hopefully saves us from suits.”

Adam added that content publishers definitely have to be more responsible for their posts nowadays, saying that FMN now has disclaimers placed all over which they hope should reassure the authorities that they have no intention to make more than just a “few silly jokes”.

Race and religion is now off the books for FMN, along with some other subjects, as they try to center more on the absurd things public figures say.

“Real tragedy is also very hard to satirise in good taste, so we wrote only a little about last year’s air disasters,” said Adam.

The amendments empower courts to prohibit the circulation of publications deemed seditious, and forbid, among others, publications that are likely to lead to bodily injury or damage to property or appear to be promoting ill-will, hostility, hatred between different races on grounds of religion, or that are seditious in tendency.

The court can also order an officer authorised under the Communications and Multimedia Act to remove online seditious materials put up by persons who could not be identified.

“The threshold of what is seditious is low, and this is sufficient for the court to allow applications by government lawyers,” said civil rights lawyer Syahredzan Johan, one of many lawyers and Opposition politicians who have censured the amendments as being a “serious attack” on free speech and expression in a democratic society.

“If they are shut or curtailed, it would limit the venues for people to vent their views and may lead to disinterest in the political process,” said Ibrahim Suffian of Malaysian opinion research firm Merdeka Center.

“If such laws are used to shut or pressure them, it would ultimately convey the message that the government is insecure and lacks the ability to argue its position on issues intelligently. In the long run, it may win such skirmishes but lose the war for the people’s hearts and minds.”