As observed yesterday, the omission of certain incidents or issues by certain newspapers is as politically and journalistically significant as what is reported and how it is covered by the newspapers concerned.
In other words, the ’silencing’ or the reporting of certain things that occur in society reflects a certain political and ideological stand on the part of the newspapers concerned.
And yesterday, I took lawyer Zaid Ibrahim’s public remark (see the previous posting below) on premier-in-waiting Najib Razak as an example to illustrate this point.
The Star today, for instance, gives the reader a very brief, if not selective, glimpse of what was said by Zaid.
What needs to be emphasised here is that he was ‘presented’ in the reportage only through the eyes of other people, namely Dr. Mahathir, Umno vice-president Muhyiddin Yassin and Umno supreme council member Mohd Shafie Apdal. In other words, Zaid was not quoted or reported directly by The Star.
This has serious implications, one of which is that what Zaid had said was actually ‘defined’ by those responding to his public commentary. At times, the person being commented upon — and duly reported by the press — may not be put in a proper perspective or, worse, may be unfairly judged.
The only recourse here is for the newspaper concerned to provide enough space for Zaid to respond to these criticisms that were hurled against him. This is only fair journalistically.
But on second thought, if what Zaid had said was apparently considered by certain newspapers (and a few observers) as not worthy of reporting (i.e. not newsworthy) yesterday, then why bother in the first place giving the opportunity today for others to comment on Zaid’s public remark — as The Star has done today?
Perhaps papers such as The Star have ‘good reasons’, which we don’t know about, for reporting it in this manner.
The Star is a BN leaflet. So what do you expect? And (some of) the bunch who work there are moronic stooges who would sell their mothers for a bag of potatoes.
“Perhaps papers such as The Star have ‘good reasons’, which we don’t know about, for reporting it in this manner”
The Star surely have “good reasons” Mus. After all they are just an arm of their political masters.
There is rumour that a new chief spin master will be appointed to NST after Najib takes over as the PM.
Any one would like to take a guess who that maybe??????
I would suggest that “indirect journalism”, as you put it (here), makes clear the distinctions between what journalism does, rather than what it is.
Journalism is basically defined by reporting. But it also involves criticism, editorializing or the making of judgments. All of these involves a journalist (or more accurately, in the Malaysian context, the ruling elite, given media ownership and control issues) making assessments of the significance or value (newsworthiness) of an issue or the actions of its subjects.
So journalism really functions to shape public consciousness. A journalist by reporting also supposedly ‘makes sense’ of issues and events for its readers. By their expressions of what they see (or in this case, not choose to ‘see’) they frame issues and events for their readers. In the process, they also decide (through their reporting, analysis, commentary etc) for the public, what those things really mean as well. Omission whether of certain aspects or entire events- which amounts to silencing of salient voices – is merely a method to this end.
Some journalists are just more ‘creative’ than others in their expressions.
Let me guess The Beetle, a Bru of the stoney kind?
Idiot. What do you expect? You think Malaysiakini will have kind reports about BN/UMNO/MIC/MCA/Gerakan? Or for that matter, The Rocket and Harakah?
Thanks, ‘Perakian’, for dropping by. Perhaps you could enlighten the idiot in me as to why would one expect party organs such as The Rocket and Harakah to function as if they’re full fledged independent newspapers and, conversely, why would one anticipate much of the mainstream press, such as The Star and the NST, to behave to all intents and purposes as if they’re the mouthpieces of the BN. And as for news portal Malaysiakini, I can’t for the life of me fathom why it would still attempt to provide news of, and interviews with, some of the BN leaders although it apparently faces some difficulty at times in accessing certain important personalities from the ruling coalition and in the federal government.