Who Determines the Nature of News? A Look at the Close Relationship Between Sources and the Mass Media

By Sirikit Syah

Introduction

This paper begins with an essay question, ‘Is the nature of news determined more by the organizations in which journalists work or by the sources upon whom journalists rely?’ It is not easy to answer this seemingly simple question. Some people say journalists are very much controlled by the organizations they work for/at. But some others may argue that it is the sources that mostly influence what the journalists report and how they report it. In fact, the relationship between sources and journalists resembles a dance, for sources seek access to journalists, and journalists seek access to sources. Although it takes two to tango, either sources or journalists can lead, but more often than not, sources do the leading.

As persons, journalists also have cultural, religious, and/or political backgrounds that may shape their views and perceptions towards social affairs, which eventually influence their reports. Another theory points out to the ‘market-driven’ selection of news, meaning that the public determines what news is. So, at least there are three parties presumably involved with the determination of news; journalists, sources, media organizations. Influence by advertisers is also imminent, as Michael Parenti writes in his book Inventing Reality (will be discussed later).

The Unmentionable Source of Terrorism

by John Pilger

The current threat of attacks in countries whose governments have close alliances with Washington is the latest stage in a long struggle against the empires of the west, their rapacious crusades and domination. The motivation of those who plant bombs in railway carriages derives directly from this truth. What is different today is that the weak have learned how to attack the strong, and the western crusaders’ most recent colonial terrorism exposes “us” to retaliation.

The source of much of this danger is Israel. A creation, then guardian of the west’s empire in the Middle East, the Zionist state remains the cause of more regional grievance and sheer terror than all the Muslim states combined. Read the melancholy Palestinian Monitor on the Internet; it chronicles the equivalent of Madrid’s horror week after week, month after month, in occupied Palestine. No front pages in the West acknowledge this enduring bloodbath, let alone mourn its victims. Moreover, the Israeli army, a terrorist organisation by any reasonable measure, is protected and rewarded in the west.

Understanding Conflicts in Southeast Asia: Indonesia is Heaven for Conflict Study

By Sirikit Syah

“Indonesia is a heaven for researchers and activists of conflict, peace and resolution. It is the center of conflicts. Any type of conflicts is available here. You just name what kind of conflict you want to research or study. In Indonesia, you’ll be satisfied.”

That was how Dr. Kamarulzaman Askandar portrayed Indonesia in his presentation on Conflict Resolution in Southeast Asia. He spoke at ‘Asian Regional Seminar and Workshop on Peace Journalism’ organized by AMIC (Asian Media Information and Communication Center) and FES (Friedrich Ebert Stiftung) in Taiping, Malaysia. The seminar was held on 4-7 August 2003. His remark drew laughter among the participants, who were journalists and editors in Asian countries.

He might have been joking, but his joke contained some truth in it. In Indonesia, as explained the following day by two Indonesian participants; Ridwan Sijabat from the Jakarta Post and Sirikit Syah from LKM Media Watch, there have been conflicts of religion, ethnicity/race, politics, and -on top of that- struggles for independence. East Timor got its independence in 2000. The other two still struggling for it are Papua and Aceh.

Loosing the right for diverse and varied information

(While Soeharto is sleeping ……)

Sirikit Syah

These days, newspapers, radio stations, and TVs, are blocked with the news of Soeharto. We wake up at dawn (Subuh) hearing the news about Soeharto on TV and radio, which go on the whole day; in the afternoon, evening, late night, and early dawn again. All is about Soeharto. Fed up by TV news, we may pick up newspapers. There it is: Soeharto’s face and story is all over the pages. The news does not only take the headlines, but also the whole page on the front page, another whole page on the back page. A few more stories are published in the inside pages.

Meanwhile, businessmen and grass-root people who need other kinds of information are wondering. Why is the soy bean price rising? What happens with the small-medium enterprises in crisis? What is the latest development of the Ratification of ASEAN Charter? What is the impact of Obama and Clinton’s campaign to future Indonesia? Why Yanti is executed in Arab Saudi without her family knowing the trial process?

Can we call him an “unprofessional hero”?

Opinion

After a number of uncomforting facts about the downfall of media institutions affected by economic crisis, the record of international journalism this year is ended spectacularly by the shoe incident. The shoe throwing to George W. Bush by journalist Muntazer Al-Zaidi has ignited debate and controversy among the press practitioners and the media consumers. Some people dubbed him “a patriotic hero”, while others simply labeled him “unprofessional”. Can we call him the “unprofessional hero” of our time?

Indeed, throwing shoes to your source, regardless his position, is an act of rudeness. But a mailing list writer sarcastically commented: “Indeed, civilized people do not throw shoes. They drop bombs.” Al-Zaidi’s anger is widely accepted. Journalists are human being. They have emotions too. There are other kinds of emotions that journalists have expressed this last decade: smiling and laughing at funny news during presenting, crying at tragedy and disaster during reporting. So, what’s the difference? If a journalist is allowed to look happy or to be sad, why can’t he be angry?