A few weeks ago, our country woke up to news of a purported whistleblower behind video clips alleging corruption involving several assemblymen from Sabah.
The person claimed that he had video evidence about the allegedly corrupt politicians, and sought protection from the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and even the prime minister himself.
The witness is said to have released some teaser video clips about what might be interpreted as corruption, but has not released clear evidence to the MACC.
When I heard the news, I was extremely cautious: we clearly know the witness has opted to take a trial-by-media approach by releasing what he calls evidence.
Why would he let people know who he is and why make the clips public before any investigation can be made?
Although I do not usually write or comment on corruption, this particular case touches on matters of political intentions, mass communication and the fate of our society.
Some media organisations made a huge deal of this case which, as I feared, led many people to make their own simplistic conclusions and verdicts as to the guilt of politicians, of the unity government and also about the MACC.
As I see it, the tragedy of the 21st century is not about Islamic State extremists blowing up stadiums and nightclubs killing hundreds of innocent lives; the danger is of the people lapping up populist news articles and passing judgment without any sense of justice, investigation or real evidence.
Just the slight whiff of corruption and bad mouthing of certain leaders sends the media into a frenzy of “reporting” and the people start making judgment upon judgment when neither party has a conscious right to do so.
This is the ticking time bomb of our society: of online media battling for survival against social media influencers and an ignorant and vengeful public ready to condemn, accuse and viralise.
In the first place we must understand what a whistleblower is supposed to be. A whistleblower was supposed to be an innocent person caught in a web of corruption or crime who wishes to clear his or her conscience as well as save the nation by reporting and turning in evidence willingly without any hope of a reward but who expects some protection from the accused party.
The MACC in this regard obviously must do everything to protect the whistleblower’s identity and make the person as safe as possible to continue his or her life.
But there is another kind of “whistleblower” who may have taken part in the crime or the alleged corruption but now seeks to negotiate a better deal in terms of punishment and who is willing to divulge evidence to punish a much bigger party, in this instance.
The MACC, as I understand it, would have to decide on the merit of the evidence in comparison to the scale of the witness being part of the affair.
Now, in some cases, a whistleblower may be a major player, perhaps the one who offered the bribes, who then threatens to turn in evidence of the crime as leverage against the bribe takers when they go back on their word.
That would be a complicated issue for the MACC, in deciding whether to allow protection. It is understood that the MACC must tread carefully so as not to be a tool by a purported whistleblower seeking to blackmail allegedly corrupt politicians and civil servants in order to do his or her bidding.
On our part, we the rakyat must practise more critical thinking and patience and not go off half-cocked on any issue blown up by the social media as well as online media.
Although online media has a more responsible and legal risk in their business than social influencers, at the moment, I understand that these online media are fighting for their very survival when influencers have taken a huge chunk of advertising money away from them.
I am not faulting the media for their over-sensationalism but we the viewers and readers must be more responsible in making snap judgments when the truth of any issue is yet to be clear.
Just like the issue with the KK Mart stocking affair, when an irresponsible influencer virilised images of stockings bearing the word Allah leading to news reports in the media – and lo and behold, people were throwing molotov cocktails at the shops!
It does not help that a loud-mouthed politician used that incident to gain popularity for him and his dying party. But the fault still remains with us the rakyat, viewers and readers of online content. Why do we react like that?
In the Sabah whistleblower affair, I do not want to be a tool for someone seeking political mileage and using the MACC as leverage over any dubious dealings the person may have undertaken.
I am not protecting Sabah politicians in this matter. I am protecting our own sanity and our own integrity as well as our own dignity.
What if someone else were to release video clips in segments that gave the impression we were committing a crime but in actual fact these clips had been fabricated? Especially now that use of artificial intelligence allows someone to convincingly mimic actions and speech. How do we save our society and community from chaos and destruction?
To me, this is not a failure of government policy but a failure of each and everyone of us who use online media without understanding the devastating effect of the technology.
The whistleblower affair should be a reflection of two important things: how we understand media technology, and what are our values in making snap judgements and quick accusations in the face of dubious content?
Finally, if our country were to fail, it would be we, the people, who are mostly to blame. Let us look at this whistleblower affair with patience and clear thinking, not sensationalised claims in the mass media, whether well-intentioned or not.- FMT
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.