a view from blogosphere
(Photo credit: www.veneerselector.com/)
It was reported (and here too) that a DAP assemblyperson was nabbed yesterday by the police in Ipoh in connection with a DVD about the now famous ‘democracy tree’. He was arrested for allegedly violating certain provisions in the Film Censorship Act (2002).
This is a cause for concern for many Malaysians as this incident is not only about the said Tree and the alleged violation of the censorship law; it also touches on the principles of freedom of expression and of the right to dissent in a democracy.
IPOH, March 30 – Police arrested DAP’s Tebing Tinggi assemblyman Ong Boon Piaw here last night in connection with a DVD video on the “democracy tree”.
Ong was arrested for allegedly violating the Film Censorship Act 2002 for “manufacturing, circulating, distributing, and displaying the content of the DVD without first getting a ‘B’ certificate from the Film Censorship Board”.
“We were doing the sneak preview for the DVD of the coup d’etat in Perak. After the speakers gave their speeches, we played the DVD content at 10.30pm. Then a police officer came and told me that the DVD does not have any B certification from the censorship board, that’s why they needed to make the arrest,” Ong told the Malaysian Insider.
The “democracy tree” refers to the rain tree outside the State Assembly where the ousted Pakatan Rakyat government held an emergency sitting when it was locked out of the state government complex.
Malaysian citizens and voters have been likened to a woman, waiting to be courted by UMNO.
An UMNO delegate reportedly suggested that the party woo Malaysian voters the way men entice women into marriage.
Federal Territory delegate Mohd Shafie Abdullah said Umno must imagine the people as a woman who is to be wooed into marriage.
“Remember how we tried to entice our wives when we wanted to marry? First rule, is to know what she likes. Show her we care, always be close with her.
“We must continue to approach her. And this is the basis of closing ranks with the people again,” he said, drawing laughter and applause from those present.
Shafie and others of his ilk would be better off to steer away from making such a statement, especially if it has an element of sexism.
It would be more fruitful for him and friends to perceive Malaysian voters as citizens and taxpayers who expect the former to respect them as people who have rights and responsibilities and are equally concerned about the future of the country.
The Malaysian people would expect them to listen to them attentively during and after a general election. This means that they want to be heard through, among other things, the media and, if necessary, via peaceful public gatherings that are legitimate in a functioning democracy.
In fact, they have already made known their ‘likes’ in the last general election on March 8 last year, one of which is the crucial need to strengthen the democratic institutions in the country.
People would appreciate UMNO’s attempt to woo the Malay and Malaysian voters alike, just as they would understand that other legitimate political parties such as PKR, DAP, Pas, and component parties of the BN too have similar objective.
This is why many Malaysians perceive as unfair and undemocratic the BN government’s action to suspend recently the party organs of PKR and Pas, especially in the run-up to the forthcoming three by-elections, as these publications serve as an important vehicle for the political parties concerned to reach out to the people.
Contrary to popular belief, Khairy Jamaluddin (photo credit: Malaysiakini) eventually snatched the coveted UMNO Youth chief title away from his rivals Mukhriz Mahathir and Khir Toyo.
Khairy saw his triumph as an important indication that democracy was ‘genuinely practised’ in UMNO Youth in particular and UMNO in general — to the chagrin of Mukhriz’s supporters who shouted “Khairy rasuah (corrupt)” soon after the election result was announced.
The 33-year-old was widely expected, initially, to lose the heated contest what with the anticipated move of FIL Abdullah Badawi to leave the national political scene early next month.
With this win, the young UMNO Youth leader may acquire a ministerial position, as was the case in the past. One small step towards a long and winding road to premiership?
(Photo credit: http://media.photobucket.com/image/i%2Bspeak%2Benglish/lauralk83/009.jpg)
Of late, there seems to be a sudden surge of interest among certain Malaysians to spekk Engriss. Indeed, this strange phenomenon of the political kind has made me rather speechless.
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.
It is often said that what is reported and the way an incident or issue is reported tell a lot about the political preference or ideological bent of a newspaper.
But it also matters a lot what is left out or, to use the language of the digitial age, deleted by the newspaper concerned.
Well-known lawyer and former UMNO member Zaid Ibrahim publicly made a strong remark yesterday at a weekly luncheon meeting of the Kuala Lumpur Rotary Club about premier-in-waiting Najib Razak that could be interpreted as something ‘newsworthy’ because it has elements of public significance and national importance.
And yet, mainstream dailies, in particular the New Straits Times and The Star, or at least their online versions, chose not to carry the statement of this public figure for reasons best known to themselves.
At the very least, Najib should be given an equal opportunity to respond to such a strong statement via the mainstream media after Zaid’s utterance had been made and duly reported.
On the other hand, websites such as Malaysiakini, The Malaysian Insider and The Nut Graph carried a report of Zaid’s statement, if not his entire speech.
Or could it be that the two mainstream newspapers are indeed trying to indicate something important to us the readers? That, for instance, the news websites concerned do not have a good sense of news or, worse, are socially and politically irresponsible?
Mustafa K Anuar's blog 
