Roslina Abdul Latif
Taylor’s University, Malaysia
Badrul Redzuan Abu Hassan
National University of Malaysia (UKM), Malaysia
The United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) defines public service broadcasting (PSB) as “Broadcasting made, financed and controlled by the public, for the public”. PSB is neither commercial nor state owned nor it is supposed to be free from political interference and pressure from commercial forces (UNESCO, 2005). It is clear that neither Malaysia nor Indonesia practices public service broadcasting in the way the UNESCO defines it. While PSB in Malaysia is a state controlled national broadcasting with a developmental agenda, in Indonesia it is funded by the state government but is more open in terms of ideas and regulations. UNESCO (2005) attests that when PSB has “pluralism programming diversity, editorial independence, appropriate funding, accountability and transparency”, it can serve as a cornerstone of democracy. This view of PSB is relevant to media in the Southeast Asian region. Alternatively, it would be good to consider whether a public service broadcasting model of editorial process would produce more independent news judgments in the process of nation building in shaping the trajectory of the news for both countries (Roslina, 2014).
We begin this article with the description of Malaysia and Indonesia in terms of broadcasting history and the rules and regulations that govern these industries. Interviews1 were conducted with notable editors, chief editors and group editors from Malaysia and the Head of the Press Council and its members.2 In Malaysian context the key inquiries are drawn towards the processes and practices in the newsrooms of commercial media and how the government’s rules and regulations inhibit these processes. Malaysia in short does not practice PSM but there is still hope as neighboring countries like Indonesia has embraced PSM practices and is moving forward to implement PSM practices in tandem with broadcast policies and regulations of the country. The Indonesian part reveals that media practitioners want media freedom that gives members of the public a much needed opportunity to be actively involved with the practice of media governance and co-regulation in accordance with democratic principles. The following sections explain these findings in detail.
This section provides a backdrop and context to broadcasting in general and the broadcasting stations in Malaysia in particular. As a fairly new democracy, Malaysia offers three major broadcasting houses either government or privately owned, such as, private company, Sistem Television Malaysia (TV 3); Astro, a pay-tv entity, and Radio Television Malaysia (RTM), the government owned television. They are as described briefly below.
Despite liberalization and privation of media, a free press without government restrictions is difficult to imagine in Malaysia. The government controls3 the press and the publishing enterprises throughout Malaysia. Control is also achieved through ownership of the media itself as all media companies practice self-censorship for all news be it print or broadcast. This has always been a standard practice for all TV stations regardless of ownership (Informant A).
There are also strong political and economic ties between the government and the media. One of the initial efforts to transfer media ownership from the government to the private sector was to privatize Sistem Television Malaysia Berhad (STMB) or better known as TV 3 in 1983. Today this company is known as Media Prima Berhad, which is listed on the Main Board of Bursa Malaysia, is the leading integrated media investment group. It currently owns 100 per cent equity interest in TV 3, NTV 7, 8 TV and TV 9. In addition, Media Prima now owns 100 percent equity interest in The New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) (NSTP) Berhad, one of Malaysia’s largest publisher which publishes three national newspapers; The New Straits Times, Berita Harian and Harian Metro. It also owns three radio networks, Fly FM, Hot FM and One FM (Media Prima Berhad, 2010).
Astro is the brand name of the Malaysian direct broadcast satellite pay television service which transmits digital satellite television and radio to households in Malaysia and Brunei. Astro is also an acronym for “All-Asian Satellite Television and Radio Operator” and is owned and operated by MEASAT Broadcast Network Systems, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Astro All Asia Networks plc. This company was de-listed from the Main Market of Bursa Malaysia Securities Bhd on 14th June 2010, following a successful take-over offer by Astro Holdings Sdn Bhd, a company owned by Tegas Sdn Bhd and its affiliates and Khazanah Nasional Berhad. It has operations at the All Asia Broadcast Centre located in Bukit Jalil, Kuala Lumpur and MEASAT in Cyberjaya (Astro, 2011).
The government issued a license to tycoon Tan Sri Ananda Krishnan4 in 1995 to operate MEASAT. MEASAT in turn launched ASTRO, Malaysia’s digital direct broadcast satellite service (The Malaysian Times, 2015).
Five of the seven stations are owned by Airtime Management and Programming Sdn Bhd (AMP). AMP additionally operates four ‘FM’ services that are available only via digital direct broadcast satellite (ASTRO). AMP is also a division of Krishnan’s ASTRO. Not to forget, Krishnan also has control over the telecommunication company Binariang Bhd that owns two satellites Measat-1, Measat-2 and now Maxis Communications Berhad (S) (Shriver, 2003) which he recently sold 64.97 percent stake worth RM 34,13 billion (equivalent to USD 8.10 billion). After the launch of the Measat-1 satellite as part of Malaysia’s commercialization of space, Astro commenced broadcasting in 1996 with an initial bouquet of twenty-two television and eight radio channels, which are its own channels (Astro, 2011).
Radio Television Malaysia or better known as RTM is a government owned television network. It broadcasts from its headquarters in Angkasapuri, Kuala Lumpur. RTM owns and operates a number of radio and television stations. At present, it runs six national, two international, 17 state, 11 district radio stations and two television channels – TV 1 and TV 2 (RTM, 2011).5
Radio Malaysia later became ‘Rangkaian National’ (National Channel) on 1st January 1971 and became the nation’s first 24 hour radio station. In 1978 ‘Rangkaian Satu’ (Network One) was renamed ‘Malaysia Television Satu’ (Television Malaysia One). A year later Rangkaian Dua was renamed ‘Malaysia Television Dua’ (Television Malaysia Two). New separate logos for both networks were launched the same year. The following year, ‘Televisyen Malaysia’ and ‘Radio Malaysia’ merged to become ‘Radio Television Malaysia – RTM’ (Penyiaran, 1987).
As of 2007, RTM controlled 17 percent of the television viewership market (in terms of audience reached) in the country behind Media Prima with 54 percent and Astro with 29 percent. But of late, neither RTM or Astro has made the top 20 television programs (AC Nielsen, 2011). This is important as the top 20 programs as rated by AC Nielsen will also determine the advertising patterns for the broadcast stations. The higher the stations sit in the rating system, the higher the rates are for advertisers and this would mean higher revenue for the stations.
The Indonesian television history illustrates a medium finding its own way, going from one state-produced official channel to a multiplicity of commercial channels. It includes periods of time when advertising was banned as contrary to traditional values.
Beginning its operations in 1964 as the state’s broadcaster, Televisi Republik Indonesia remained a major player despite the growing importance of commercial television. Since it enjoyed a longstanding monopoly with a mission of promoting the official viewpoint, it long remained in a state of stagnation. The Indonesian government early on recognized the importance of television as a policy instrument and a tool to promote national unity in their far-flung islands. This insight drove the program to provide free television sets to villages. In 1974 Indonesia launched its communications satellite, Palapa (Sanskrit for unity) to be able to reach the entire country, (Indonesia, 2015). TVRI was always hampered by a small budget, and the budget situation became even tighter in 1981, when the administration banned advertising from television. This was in reaction to the effect that the Western, urban, and consumer-oriented advertising were having on village life (Indonesia, 2015).
The rest of the television stations introduced in this paper are privately owned and follows the highest ranked in terms of viewership. It is worth noting that the five of Indonesia's private, Jakarta-based television stations - SCTV, RCTI, Indosiar, Anteve, and TPI - had ties to the Suharto family but despite that, the new openness created bolder programming, even before Suharto stepped down. The stations also did investigative reporting on ongoing issues and political talk shows that would have been unheard of in the New Order (Indosiar, 2013).
The organization and structures of the Malaysian channels are simple with the usage of several main languages as in Malay (TV1, TV2, TV3 and Astro Awani), English (TV2, TV3 and Astro Super Sports), Chinese and Cantonese for (TV2, Astro Asian Entertainment Channel, and Astro Loh Wai Toi), and Tamil (TV2 and Astro Vaanavil). The usage of these languages also caters to the diverse Malaysian audience (see, Appendix 1).
In terms of viewership (AC Nielsen), TV3 under Media Prima is standing as the main station that the people prefer at 26 percent. The TV9, another Media Prima channel has 8 percent viewership, followed by TV2 under RTM with 7 percent viewership. The rest of the channels are 8TV (Media Prima), 6 percent; TV1 (RTM), 5 percent; NTV7 (Media Prima), 5 percent. And lastly Astro Ria, Astro Prima and Astro Ceria, all Malay channels under the Astro umbrella with 4 percent, 3 percent, and 2 percent respectively (see, Appendix 2).
In comparison, Indonesia has 41 television stations to date with an approximate 13,750,000 viewership. A few of these television stations have undergone changes with the times in terms of name and ownership especially the privately owned television stations for example RCTI, Global TV and SCTV, just to name a few. Almost all the private television stations focus on general entertainment with an exception of TVOne and Metro TV that gives focus on news (Appendix 3). TVRI as per RTM, as state broadcasters have not changed much in recent years. The viewership for Indonesia is averagely distributed across the board with RCTI and MNCTV, which is under Media Nusantara Citra, receiving 14.9 percent and 14.1 percent respectively, while SCTV which is under the banner of Surya Citra Media has 13.6 percent viewership (see, Appendix 4).
As it is with the local press, so evidently, local television has seen remarkable changes taking place over the past decade. Television was first introduced in December 1963 with the help of technical consultants from Canada. The initial set-up comprised of a single channel national network, under the control of the RTM or the department of broadcasting which, in turn, was one of three departments under the control of the Ministry of Information. In October 1969 a second channel was launched, also under the direct control of the Ministry of Information and guided by the same directives as those which governed the operations of the first channel (Karthigesu, 1991 in Mohd Azizuddin Mohd Sani). The directives are:
These directives have remained virtually unchanged and have informed broadcasting policy. For the discussion of this paper, the researcher has quoted only two acts which are specific to the broadcasting in Malaysia, which is the Broadcasting Act 1988 and the Multimedia and Communication Act (CMA) 1998 that governs the online media that currently all broadcasting stations subscribe to as the need to be savvy is paramount in order to capture the online audience.
a. Broadcasting Act of 1988
The Broadcasting Act 1988 continues to play a crucial role in the development of Malaysian broadcasting. The act as it stands is both stringent and inflexible, and bestows enormous powers on the government to determine the type of television made available to the Malaysian public. The introduction of the act in 1988 was clearly in anticipation of the further commercialization of broadcasting, especially television. Indeed, in the midst of the supposed ‘deregulation’ of broadcasting, the broadcasting act now gives the Minister of Information or now renamed the Ministry of Communications and Multimedia, virtually total powers to determine who will and will not broadcast and the nature of the broadcast material. Under the act, any potential broadcaster would need to apply for a license from the minister beforehand. On paper, this means that one individual has the power to decide. Further, part III, section 10, sub-section (1) of the act (emphasis added), states that ‘it shall be the duty of the licensee to ensure that the broadcasting matter by him complies with the direction given, from time to time, by the minister.’The October 1996, amendments made to this already stringent piece of legislation were aimed at taking into account the introduction of new services, such as cable and satellite television, satellite radio, pay-tv and video-on-demand.
b. Multimedia and Communication Act (CMA) 1998
The Broadcasting Act of 1988 was changed to the Multimedia and Communication Act (CMA) 1998. To date it has been amended twice, once in 2002 and again in 2004 (the Communications and Multimedia Content Forum of Malaysia, 2004). The scope and coverage for this act are strictly for: (a) Direct to Home (DTH) subscription broadcasting and/or video on demand services, whether via satellite or cable, and (b) Terrestrial Free-to-Air TV and Radio (The Malaysian Communications & Multimedia Act Content Code, 2004).
The main objective of these specific broadcast guidelines is to ensure continued reliable standards of content dissemination by broadcasters by accordance with expectations of audience and internationally recognized good practice of electronic media and journalism. This Code is a manifestation of a paradigm change that was brought about by technological advancements in the broadcasting industry. It is acknowledged that compliance with the Content Code is what sets the standards for Content and not the other way around whereby content takes precedence over standards. Malaysian Broadcasters recognize that creative freedom carries with it the responsibility of ensuring that not only are the rights of the children protected but also that of viewers and listeners in general. This necessitates the upholding of ethical and professional practices in the conduct of their business operations toward fulfilling social responsibility.
Currently in Malaysia, there has not been any initiatives towards PSM or have they been and demand for it. In the future if Malaysia were to embrace the idea of PSM like our neighbor, Indonesia, much must be done in terms of rules, regulation and also mindset for the idea to work and more importantly for transition to happen smoothly.
Media governing bodies and machineries were established to monitor the media and creative industry such as the Council of Journalism (Dewan Pers) and the Broadcasting Commission of Indonesia (Komisi Penyiaran Indonesia, KPI). They are effectively perhaps the most important and influential independent regulating bodies today. The appointees in these agencies are elected through an annual voting system from three professional groups namely, journalists, media owners and academicians.
Since 1966, Dewan Pers has been predominantly formed by three professional associations: Indonesian Journalists Association - Persatuan Wartawan Indonesia (PWI), Journalistic Television Bond - Ikatan Jurnalistik Televisi (IJTVI) and Indonesian Journalistic Association - Asosiasi Jurnalistik Indonesia (AJI) (Abu Bakar, A. 2008). The main purpose of Dewan Pers is to serve all public interests as collectively defined by the Indonesian media laws but more specifically, because of their ‘independent’ nature, they are expected to ensure the freedom of the press, uphold ethical media practices, mediate and provide solution to any media-related crisis involving the public as well as promoting media education and literacies [Buku Kecil Wartawan, 2013 (A Journalist Pocket Book)].
Meanwhile, the KPI was founded in the aftermath of the Indonesian Reformation which marked the end of the New Order. Its conception was the brainchild of UU32/2002, a set of broadcasting laws that provide, amongst others, an opportunity for/call for the formation of the broadcasting commission to govern and regulate the broadcast media systems in two broad capacities. One, as KPID, which is responsible for the regulation and development at the district level including awarding broadcasting rights and permits; the other as KPI, which is responsible for the issuance of broadcast licenses to radio and television stations; and it reports to the House of Commons (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat RI) and the President on media violations particularly related to journalism (Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 11 Tahun, 2006). Both KPI and Dewan Pers have a working MoU with regards to enforcement of broadcasting laws and code of ethics (Ndolu, 2009).
In Malaysia, the decision making process in the Malaysia newsroom could be unique to this country but they are also characteristics to other newsroom studies done internationally (Faridah, 1995; Faridah, et. al. 2012; Gaziano & Coulson, 1988; Joseph, 1983; Lowrey & Chang, 2010; Gans, 1980). In the traditional practice of the newsrooms here in Malaysia, decisions on what is going to make the news lies in the hands of the management. Although the reporter and the editor might have their personal biasness and/or professional news judgement, the organizational news-gathering routines that have been long established limits of time and space in the news gathering process. This coupled with the economic constraints on news production, the flow of information, communication technologies and most importantly the ideological factors and ownership issues also ‘dampen’ the decision making process of the newsrooms.
The adage of editorial independence therefore is non-existent as there are underlying issues between editors and their superiors, sideways (between departments) and downwards (with reporters acceptance of editorial change). However, despite the lack of editorial independence, these news organizations continue to pursue the aim of objectivity in news reporting – of disinterested, unbiased and factual reporting of the news.
It is clear that RTM follows the government model in which public broadcasting is controlled directly by the government or by the political majority. This system is similarly practiced in France, Western Europe, Greece, Portugal and Spain. TV 3 and Awani on the other hand use the professional model epitomized by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), where a strong tradition has developed that broadcasting should be largely insulated from political control and run by broadcasting professionals.
The Malaysian media to a certain extent is pressured by the structure and the people who make up the structure, to be biased and virtually silent on issues critical of the government and those deemed sensitive to the general public, especially on race and religion. With all this going on in the media industry in Malaysia and people who assume the on goings in the newsroom, it is not surprising that it is ranked amongst the most stringent in the world.
In a nutshell in terms of ownership, TV3 and RTM stakeholders are clear cut and there has been much change in terms of decision making and news presentation with the change of Prime Ministers especially in TV3 as they have an appointee from the Prime Minister’s office that sits in the newsroom to ‘help’ make decisions. Nevertheless having said that,Informant A feels that the powers that be “do not micro-manage the newsroom”.
In Indonesia, the common dilemmas and biggest hurdles for PSM to function is that the media practitioners want media freedom that gives members of the public the opportunity to be actively involved with the practice of media governance and co-regulation in accordance with democratic principles. Although the informants claim that the process of liberating the Indonesian media started since the beginning of the New Order in 1966 but it is still an ongoing process.
The amendments to the rules and regulations that are done by the Press Council (Dewan Pers) and the Indonesian Broadcasting Commission (Komisi Penyiaran Indonesia, KPI) are effectively perhaps the most important and influential independent regulating bodies today that work for this system (Dinas Syariat Islam, 2009). The appointees in these agencies are elected through an annual voting system from three professional groups namely, journalists, media owners and academicians. Their main goal of regulation of the media content is to achieve an ethical and independent freedom of press, of expression along the legitimacy of existing Indonesian laws on media, broadcasting and human rights.
The Press Council and KPI are both tasked to oversee a series of progressive media laws doing their job to protect the interests and independence of various parties in the industry regardless weather it is PSM or broadcasting as a whole. There are clear officially written rules and regulations for both the Press Council and KPI.
They also ensure ethical journalistic codes are being practiced in the broadcast media industry which in turn will promote greater sense of media governance and regulation; and ultimately public satisfaction. All informants (D, E, and F) appear to agree that there ought to be better informal coordination between officials, the broadcast media industry and members of the public whereby co-regulatory decisions may be made through joint discussions but still along the established statutory rulings of each organization.
The Press Council and KPI clearly accommodate difference in opinions as a style of governance. They both hold special meetings depending on the case or current issues for both the PSM and the broadcasting media industry. Interestingly, they have different modes of meetings as well as frequency of meeting. The former has lesser meeting frequency than the latter. However, the former seems to be making up for it by holding monthly plenary meetings which the latter does not commit to. The formality and frequency of their meetings are dependent on the types of case or current issues that arise.
Overall, most of the informants think that the media should be free but also be responsible. Importantly, they believe that there must be some limits on how much freedom of expression should be allowed to the Indonesian broadcast media. It is apparent that most of the Press Council and KPI informants feel that it is time to revise the media law in Indonesia again.
Clearly the Malaysian and Indonesian broadcasting systems move on different platforms. Even after fifty-eight years of independence, Malaysia is relatively a young democracy where the founding fathers felt, either rightly or wrongly, that the fourth estate needed to be guided in the early years. The important fact that the first indigenous Malayan government came into power in 1957 against the backdrop of a nine year old communist insurgency, must be remembered as it had arrived at the heels of the Second World War. The nascent Alliance Government had to maintain calm and harmony in a multi-racial and multi-religious society that had been rent in more ways than one, hence the curb on media. The media, print and broadcast alike has not neglected journalistic values or been intolerant of the stand of those oppose to the government of the day.
In truth, the media has found it difficult to wean itself of news affecting the government or its view point, given this important historical background. Therefore, in general, the traditional practice within the media organizations that most editorial and other decisions lie in the hands of the management. And when the management’s hands are tied by the policies that camouflage the newsroom practices which in turn dictate the decision making process, it becomes less democratic. Most often than not, not adhering to these ‘guidelines’ would mean treading on thin ice.
While in the neighboring front, although this preliminary study has shown an important aspect in media policy studies, that is, whilst the laws are seeming enforced, they do not necessarily benefit the media regulating bodies as informed by lamentable comments by, for instance, Informant D, “The Government is reluctant to hand over the authority to KPI as an independent body,” and Informant F, “In Indonesia, the so-called independence of the KPI is merely a lip-service for the Government to be seen as democratic.” When the state is in control of the structure and financing of the Press Council and KPI, it seems inevitable that those designated policies and laws to safeguard media ‘publicness’ as it were, will not be as effective as they can be. The failure to regulate the broadcast media industry is really frustrating the officials who, if it can be suggested here, are feeling cuckolded and demoralized by the state’s wrong-doing.
Informant F whilst candidly expressed the dilemma of Indonesian regulators, is urging them to remain ‘aggressive’ “The Press Council must be courageous to be vocal with the Government” whilst at the same time work harder to “develop communication between the press, the public and the government”. The most heartening resolution is certainly their struggle against media collusion in the broadcasting industry. Informant F’s call for the government to improve its broadcasting laws is deafening because it suggests that the regulators have “never been capable of discharging its executive powers like a truly independent body”. This is the paradox of the governance and regulation on the overall Indonesian broadcasting industry.
The public broadcasting system which comprises of the state-owned radio (Radio Republik Indonesia - RRI) and television station (Televisi Republik Indonesia - TVRI) have been the official media channels of the State since independence. Of the two, TVRI has had more structural transformation but like most developing nation-states, it is considerably outnumbered and outclassed by private media enterprises’ pay-per-view system. It appears today that the state-owned TVRI and RRI have lost their roles as the nation’s ‘official voice’; overlooked by the public/stakeholders; trapped by institutional issues like interdepartmental coordination and commitment and the flaring ethos of corruption and collusion (Nugroho, Siregar, & Laksmi, 2012). The ‘absence’ of a clear state media policy to regulate the commercial/profit-driven logic of media industry have resulted in the inevitable, that is, its ‘displacement’ by the ever-growing media privatization due to market forces, symptomatic media monopoly and oligopoly and gradual liberalization of the public sector and weakening of the public sphere – (for example, public may get more channels but less content options). Therefore it is still an uphill climb for the PSB in adjacent Indonesia be fully realized or even move towards PSM.
To conclude, transformation in the PSM system in Indonesia as in any transformation program demands agility, adaptability and efficiency not only from communication professionals but also regulators that ‘rule’ them.
Abu Bakar, A. (2008). Paradigma, Kebijakan, dan Kegiatan. Banda Aceh: Dinas Syariat Islam.
AC Nielsen (2011). TV Viewership Report, proprietary data not published.
Andalas Televisi (Anteve, ANTV) (2014). Retrieved from http://www.an.tv/about_us
Astro. (2011). Astro Official Website. Retrieved from http://www.astro.com.my/ Astro. All Asia Networks. 2011. Retrieved from http://www.astroplc.com/09/ Broadcasting Act, 1988. (Act 338). (Repealed by The Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (Act 588). 2006. The Commissioner of Law Revision, Malaysia under the Authority of the Revision of Law Acts 1968 in collaboration with Percetakan Nasional Bhd. Dinas Syariat Islam. (2009). Himpunan Undang-Undang, Perutusan Presiden, Peraturan Daerah/Qanun, Instruksi Gubernur, Edaran Gubernur Berkaitan Pelaksanaan Syariat Islam. Banda Aceh: Dinas Syariat Islam. Faridah, I. (1995). Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity among Malaysian Journalists in Newsroom Decision-Making. PhD Dissertation, UPM. Faridah I., Latiffah P., Chang P. K., Fuziah Kartini H. B., Badrul Redzuan A. H. and Wan Amizah W. M. (2012). Journalists and news sources: Implications on professionalism in war reporting. The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 16(3), Article 4. Gans, H. J. (1980). Deciding what’s news. A study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek and Time. New York: Vintage Books. Gaziano, C., & Coulson, D.C. (1988). Effects of newsroom management styles on journalists: A case study. Journalism Quarterly, 65, 869-80. Indosiar. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.indosiar.com/corporate/struktur-korporasi Joseph, T. (1983). Decision-making preferences and practices. Canadian Journal of Communication, 9(2), 37-48. Lowrey, W., & Chang W. W. (2010). The news organization in uncertain times: Business or institution? Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 87(1), 41-61. Media Prima Berhad (2010). Retrieved from http://www.mediaprima.com.my/ Mohd Azizuddin Mohd Sani (2009). The public sphere and media politics in Malaysia. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Ndolu, F. (2009). Public broadcasting in Indonesia. 18th JAMCO Online International Symposium. Chairman, Indonesiasatu Communication. Nugroho, Y., Siregar, M. F., & Laksmi, S. (2012). Mapping media policy in Indonesia. Jakarta: Centre for Innovation Policy & Governance. Penyiaran, 4 Dekad Bersama Anda. (1987). Kuala Lumpur: Persatuan Penyiar Kebangsaan Malaysia. Radio Television Malaysia. Retrieved from http://www.rtm.gov.my/rtmnew/ Roslina A. L. (2014, August). Crossing boundaries in the broadcast media industry in Malaysia. Paper presented at Re–Visionary Interpretations of the Public Enterprise (RIPE@2014) Conference, “Public Service Media across Boundaries,” Tokyo, Japan. Rajawali Citra Televisi Indonesia (RCTI). (2012). Retrieved from http://www.rcti.tv/profile/view/1 The Malaysian Times (2015, February 26). Kuok Robert, Ananda Krishnan retains top spots on Malaysia rich list. Retrieved from http://www.themalaysiantimes.com.my/robert-kuok-ananda-krishnan-retains-top-spots-on-malaysia-rich-list/ Sekretariat Dewan Pers. (2013). Buku Saku Wartawan. Jakarta: Dewan Pers. Shriver, R. (2003). Malaysian media: Ownership, control and musical content. Khattab, U. & Ibrahim, F. (Eds). Communication and media studies in ASEAN: Bridge to new frontiers (pp. 187-195). Malaysia: Universiti Kebangsaan. Surya Citra Television (SCTV). (2012). Retrieved from http://www.sctv.co.id/corporate Televisi Republik Indonesia(TVRI). (2014). Retrieved from http://www.tvri.co.id/page/sejarah The Malaysian Communications & Multimedia Content Code (2004). The Communications & Multimedia Content Forum of Malaysia. Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 11 Tahun (2006). Tentang Pemerintah Aceh. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (2005). Public Service Broadcasting. Retrieved from http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=1525&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html Yesudhasan, T. J., & Wong Zhin-Seng, L. (2010). Media and public sphere: Representation of democracy in the Malaysian press. MediaAsia, 37(2), 67-72. Table 1. List of local television channels in Malaysia, January–September 2012Appendices
Channel |
Name |
Language |
Owner |
Group |
Type |
1 |
TV 1 |
Malay |
RTM |
Free-to-air |
Terrestrial |
2 |
TV 2 |
||||
3 |
TV 3 |
STMB |
|||
4 |
Astro Ria |
Astro |
Astro Channels |
Satellite |
|
5 |
Astro Super Sports |
English |
|||
6 |
Astro Asian Entertainment Channel |
Chinese |
|||
7 |
Astro Loh Wai Toi |
Cantonese |
|||
8 |
Astro Vaanavil |
Tamil |
Source: AC Nielsen (2011). “TV Viewership Report,” proprietary data not published.
Table 2. Viewing patterns in Malaysia, January–September 2012
Position |
Channel |
Group |
Share of total viewing (percent) |
1 |
TV 3 |
Media Prima |
26 |
2 |
TV 9 |
Media Prima |
8 |
3 |
TV 2 |
RTM |
7 |
4 |
8 TV |
Media Prima |
6 |
5 |
TV 1 |
RTM |
5 |
6 |
NTV 7 |
Media Prima |
5 |
7 |
Astro Ria |
Astro Holdings Sdn Bhd |
4 |
8 |
Astro Prima |
Astro Holdings Sdn Bhd |
3 |
9 |
Astro Ceria |
Astro Holdings Sdn Bhd |
2 |
Source: AC Nielsen (2011). “TV Viewership Report,” proprietary data not published.
Table 3. List of local TV channels in Indonesia, January–September 2012
Channel |
Name |
Owner |
Genre |
Type |
Notes |
1 |
TVRI |
Indonesian government |
Government |
Public |
|
2 |
RCTI |
Media Nusantara Citra |
General Entertainment |
Commercial |
|
3 |
MNCTV |
Formerly known as "TPI" from 23 January 1991 until 20 October 2010 |
|||
4 |
Global TV |
Formerly known as "TVG" from 8 October 2002 until 15 January 2005 |
|||
5 |
SCTV |
Surya Citra Media |
General Entertainment |
Commercial |
Formerly known as "Surabaya Central Televisi (SCTV)" from 24 August 1990 until 23 August 1993 |
6 |
Indosiar |
|
|||
7 |
antv |
VIVA Media Asia |
General Entertainment |
Commercial |
Formerly known as "ANTeve" from 1 March 1993 until 28 February 2003 |
8 |
TVOne |
News |
Formerly known as "Lativi" from 30 July 2002 until 14 February 2008 |
||
9 |
Metro TV |
Media Group |
News |
Commercial |
|
10 |
Trans7 |
Trans Media Corporation |
General Entertainment |
Commercial |
Formerly known as "TV7" from 25 November 2001 until 15 December 2006 |
11 |
TransTV |
|
|||
12 |
RTV |
Rajawali Corporation |
General Entertainment |
Commercial |
Formerly known as "B-Channel" from 1 November 2009 until 2 May 2014. |
13 |
NET |
Indika Group |
General Entertainment |
Commercial |
|
Source: Nielsen, “TV Viewership Report,” proprietary data not published.
Table 4. Viewing patterns in Indonesia, January–September 2012
Position |
Channel |
Group |
Share of total viewing (percent) |
1 |
RCTI |
Media Nusantara Citra |
14.9 |
2 |
MNCTV |
Media Nusantara Citra |
14.1 |
3 |
SCTV |
Surya Citra Media |
13.6 |
4 |
Trans7 |
Trans Corp |
12.1 |
5 |
Trans |
Trans Corp |
11.6 |
6 |
IVM |
Emtek |
11 |
Source: Nielsen, “TV Viewership Report,” proprietary data not published.
1 We employed in-depth interview method to collect data for the purpose of this study, with three of active members of the Press Council and KPI from Indonesia, and another three informants representing the three broadcasting houses in Malaysia. Two sets of questions were prepared for this research. The reason is because Malaysia does not practice PSM, so the questions were more drawn towards the practices in the newsrooms and its implication with government rules and regulations. The main questions that we asked the Indonesian informants from PSM industry were: a) what are the dilemmas and biggest hurdles for PSM to function in Indonesian contexts? And b) what interventions may help to advance the PSM cause? What is being done already, institutionally and in practice?
2 List of informants:
Informant A: Group Deputy Managing Editor (TV3 – Malaysia)
Informant B: Executive Editor for Strategy (Astro - Malaysia)
Informant C: Deputy Director of News and Current Affairs (RTM - Malaysia)
Informant D: Head of the Press Council (Indonesia)
Informant E: Corporate Department, the Press Council (Indonesia)
Informant F: Corporate Department, KPI (Indonesia)
3 The Malaysian media is controlled by the government through a series of enactments and draconian laws such as the Printing Presses and Publication Act (1984), the Broadcasting Act of 1988 and its successor, Multimedia and Communication Act (CMA) 1998 (amended 2002), the Sedition Act (1948), and Official Secret Act (1972) and the famous Internal Security Act (1960).
4 Krishnan is a long-time member of the board of Bank Negara and operates Malaysia’s ‘Sports Toto’ (owned by Berjaya Group currently). He is also estimated with a net worth of over US $9.7 billion. Malaysia’s privately owned FM stations exhibit similar ownership patterns as television, and is largely controlled by Krishnan (The Malaysian Times, 2015).
5 When it started transmission on 1st April 1946, RTM was established as Radio Malaya operating out of Singapore. On 31st August 1957 when Malaya received its independence, Radio Malaya was split into two with the original studios in Singapore taken over by a new station called Radio Singapura while Radio Malaya moved to Kuala Lumpur going on air from the new location on 1st January 1959 (RTM, 2010). Radio Malaya was later named Radio Malaysia on 16th September 1963 with its signature transmission trademark words ‘Inilah Radio Malaysia’ (This is Radio Malaysia). Services rendered under Malaysia Television (Malaysia TV) started on 28th December 1963 in the Klang Valley and Selangor. The 10 month old Television Singapura (Singapore Television) which was launched on 16th February 1963 became part of Televisyen Malaysia (Malaysia Television) till 1965 when Singapore broke away from Malaysia (Penyiaran, 1987).
Copyright © 2016 (Roslina Abdul Latif and Badrul Redzuan Abu Hassan)
A. Rahman & G. F. Lowe (Eds.), Public Service Media Initiatives in the Global South, SFU Library Publishing, 2016.
Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
DOI: 10.21810/sfulibrary.1.5