Kee to unlocking the door to real journalism

theSun this past weekend, 17-18 September, featured an interview with Kee Thuan Chye - journalist, playwright and actor – by Jacqueline Ann Surin. It is an interesting piece in several ways. It understandably covers many issues, including Kee’s observations about Malaysian journalism.

Kee is now an associate editor in charge of the English column at The Star. It is unheard of, very close to being a taboo, for a paper to write about a journalist from a competitive paper. theSun deserves kudos for that as well as for allowing Kee to offer some strong views against Malaysian journalism.

The paper’s weekend interview section has been consistently heads and shoulders above whatever interviews The Star or NST have run; it is often direct, honest, substantial, and even hard-hitting. This is also true of Kee’s interview.

Kee has been a journalist for some 20 years. He began at The National Echo, then moved on to New Straits Times before joining The Star. He spoke about his experiences and brought up four major points about his journalism.

Point no. 1: Advertising and marketing department personnel - as opposed to what it should be, the journalists themselves - have increasingly taken over control of the editorial

The implications are clear. Journalists, especially the editors in charge, have abdicated their responsibilities to their readers by basically selling their souls to the advertisers. In this day and age of the news media being treated essentially as Big Business, the issue is not just profits that understandably a newspaper company must make in order to stay in business. Instead, the competition is for more and more profits, not to mention higher and higher share values.

Just look at the complaints by NST and theSun against ratings company, A C Nielsen, for the way they measure newspaper readership. It is not that both papers did not have a point; rather, their complaints were really over their getting a smaller share of the advertising ringgit, hence smaller profits.

Point no. 2: Never be critical of the prime minister of the day

Many of us may remember Mahathir’s premiership best simply because he was prime minister for 22 years—which are only about two years shy of being equal to the lengths of the premiership of Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Abdul Razak, and Tun Hussein Onn put together. This may get some to think that the media’s lack of critical reporting of the prime minister was associated with only Mahathir. Certainly, Mahathir’s iron-fisted rule got the press to curry favour or tip-toe around him.

But Kee’s point here is a reminder that the press did not give just PM Mahathir the fawning treatment. PM Abdullah Badawi is currently given such treatment as well.

Point no. 3: Kee said he had received “memos” from his superiors warning him to lay off certain stories or issues

These “memos” suggested that the warnings were not because Kee’s superiors were worried that his stories or issues might spark violence and mayhem in the country. Rather, his superiors were more concerned about upsetting the government.

Point no. 4: To be critical of the government does not mean one is not patriotic

This point seems obvious enough: patriotism is towards the country, and a country is much more than whoever is in control of the government. Many Malaysians, however, may equate patriotism with not being critical of the government because the BN government has been the ruling government since Merdeka, and the line between government and country has been blurred. Certainly, the BN government has been happy to go along with such thinking. The reason is equally obvious: what better way to get Malaysians to feel guilty about their lack of patriotism every time they should see the need to be critical of the BN government. This fourth point of Kee’s bears repeating.

Although Kee’s four points are important, he appeared disillusioned, believing that the future is against his ideas of what professional journalism is or should be about. That future is one in which the press is more interested in making larger and larger profits, serving advertisers more than citizens, and keeping citizens in the dark about good governance or about holding government to its responsibilities as servants of the citizens.

The future is now

To be sure, such a future is already here now. In fact, these observations have been characteristic of the Malaysian media for quite some time now. That is why they have come to be called “mainstream” media. However, does this mean they are are the only type of media Malaysians will continue to get, the only type Malaysians deserve to get? Is there no alternative media that can be viable?

But then what about what has been happening in cyberspace for the past half dozen years or so in Malaysia? What about Malaysiakini and some of the weblogs that have allowed space for more and more Malaysians who are interested in more critical information from the media?

Perhaps these Malaysians are still small in number. Perhaps these alternative news outlets still need work. But do they not represent something to build on for a better future for Malaysian journalism, including creating a critical mass demanding the removal of press/media restrictions as well as the ISA?

Other than what is happening in cyberspace, perhaps it is also time for journalists like Kee to do something in the twilight years of their careers: write books about their journalistic experiences. Talk about the contemporary changes in journalism, about what is wrong with the changes, about what constitutes the “professional” journalists Kee spoke about, and about why it is important for younger generations interested in journalism to be aware of it in order to carry on the torch.

So far, Malaysia has hardly seen the publication of such books. We have seen such books written by people in the US and other Western nations. But why not Malaysians writing about their journalistic experiences in Malaysia? That way, we can disabuse those who still think a free and fair press is an alien concept imported from the West. That way, Malaysian university or college professors can use the books to teach Malaysian journalism.

These books may not be best sellers in terms of making lots of money. But they will pass on invaluable ideas to future journalists. And, who knows, they may also contribute to changing journalism in Malaysian or steering it towards the true essence of the profession in the future.

The current situation with Malaysian journalism may strongly suggest a bleak future, but it does not mean we just throw in the towel and give up, does it?