Online Journalism and the Contestation of Interest

in the Post-Truth Society of Indonesia

AG. Eka Wenats Wuryanta

Department of Communication Studies, Paramadina University, Jakarta, Indonesia

Keywords: ethics, online journalism, digital media, convergence, Indonesia

Abstract: The progress of digital media is transforming the nature of Indonesian media, especially in journalism. The

individual citizen can influence a lot, while the internet encourages new forms of media journalism that are

more immediate and interactive. Journalists shared journalistic activities through social media or new kinds

of media. The economics of journalism and the Citizen’s Media struggles as audiences migrate online. The

shrinkage of newsrooms creates concern for the future of journalism and truth. The revolution requires us to

re-think our assumptions. What can ethics mean for a profession that must provide instant news and

analysis, where everyone with a modem is a publisher? The media revolution has created ethical tensions. If

journalism and online media have a global impact, what are its global responsibilities? Should media ethics

reformulate its aims and norms so as to guide the media and truth now that it has a global reach and impact?

What would that look like?

1 INTRODUCTION

Communication experts are now beginning to agree

that the modern era is marked by the information

age. The mastery and hegemony of information

places power as a logical consequence. The

prediction and analysis conducted by Alvin Toffler

(1980) stated that the era of humanity is divided into

three major eras, namely the era of agrarian society,

industrial society and information society. This has

been and is becoming a common fact that will not be

recognised. Don Tapscott (1996), an observer of the

development of information and communications

technology in the United States, in his book ‘The

Digital Economy, Promise and Peril in the Age of

Networked Intelligence’, suggests that the

development of the world economy is undergoing a

shift from the dynamics of an industrial society

based on steel, vehicles and roads to the dynamics of

a new economic society formed by silicon,

computers and networks. Some of the adagios that

have been expressed by observers of the

development of modern communication show that

information has become one of the constitutive

elements in society.

Straubhar (2002) stated that an information

society is a society that has political and social

economic activity through the process of the

production, consumption and distribution of

information. An information society is characterised

by a high intensity of exchange and through the use

of communication technology (Straubhar, 2002). It

can be said that information becomes a basic

requirement, which it can be expressed with the

phrase "information is the lifeblood that sustains

political, social and business decisions". Society has

begun to open up with the development and

dynamics of new media and global communications.

Production turnover, consumption and information

distribution are increasingly experienced and owned

by a new global community system that is powered

by economic strength and expansion, global

information system networks and supported by

technology.

Technology, in the development of the

production, consumption and distribution of the flow

of information, plays an important role. The role of

technology in the process of information

massification occurs when technological results help

to change the pattern of communication that is

bound by space and time into a pattern of unlimited

Wuryanta, A.

Online Journalism and the Contestation of Interest in the Post-Truth Society of Indonesia.

DOI: 10.5220/0008816300320036

In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Contemporary Social and Political Affairs (ICoCSPA 2018), pages 32-36

ISBN: 978-989-758-393-3

information communication. Technology is basically

good, so it is not surprising if there is a change from

traditional mass media into new mass media.

Ultimately, new media in the context of technology

and globalisation undergoes complex changes.

Globalisation is one of the most important factors in

the industry and in relation to media technology.

2 THEORETICAL REFLECTIONS

Over the past three decades (1970-2000), global

media has gone through major technological and

structural transformations leading to significant

penetrations of the national media systems. This has

taken place through direct broadcast satellites

(DBS), low orbit satellites, digital telephony and the

internet, as well as micro-media such as audiotapes,

videotapes, CDs, computer laptops, palmtops, and

wireless telephony and the Internet. Global

communication has virtually created a world without

borders. While commercial systems dominate the

content of news and entertainment, government

systems attempt — often unsuccessfully — to

control the information flows through censorship

within their own territorial sovereignties. Three

technological trends characterise the global media,

including digitalisation, convergence, and

miniaturisation. The technological transformations

have led to three structural consequences, including

globalisation, localisation, and fragmentation.

Structural changes have, in turn, led to three new

cultural patterns; globalisation, tribalisation, and

democratisation.

The age of media digitalisation was established

through the promise of convergence between all

forms of media, relying on digital codes. Digital

formation storing and circulating information has

become basic information in computers, mass media

and telecommunications. It can be said the digital

format is seen of as the basis of world media. In the

book titled ‘The Internet Challenge to Television’,

Bruce Owens (2000) stated that through

digitalisation, the Internet will be all, and television,

telephone, and computers will all converge on the

Internet. Henry Jenkins (2006) and Friedrich Kittler

(1999) said that a platform of digital media is the

basis for the convergence of discrete kinds of media

for which digital code is enabled as a generic

language. Jenkins argued that the interoperability of

new media or platform convergence can provide

much more participation in the media if made to

work. He argued that there was not isolation

between the old audiences and new. The new

audience of convergent and digitalised media are

more socially connected.

In the economic perspective, Brian Winston

(2005) stated that digital media technology has

become a rhetorical justification for wider

deregulations in the communications and media

industries, downplaying capital accumulation as a

cause. For Winston, economical mergers and

takeovers are not just about plundering technological

opportunities but they are also driven by the

monopoly of a single industry. From a technological

standpoint, Winston argued that digital media or

technology is not required for convergence. Rather,

there have been other sufficient means of

convergence based on analogue signals that have

allowed interchangeability between medium

functions for many years. Today, people can listen

to the radio over their digital televisions or make

telephone calls on their computers.

3 A REVOLUTION IN ETHICS

Digitalised media has been transforming journalism

and its ethics. The internet encourages a new genre

of journalism that is interactive and immediate. The

ecology of media has changed. Journalists share

journalistic links with the citizen journalism that is

apparent on Twitter and other social media

platforms.

In the midst of every revolution, new

possibilities arise when and where old-fashioned

journalism is threatened. The economy of

professional journalism fights when audiences

migrate online. The depreciation of the editorial

space or newsroom creates concerns over the future

genre of journalism. However, this fear also

encourages experimentation in journalism, such as a

non-profit investigative journalism. The main

question is the extent to which existing media ethics

are suitable for today's news media and that of

tomorrow, which is direct, interactive, and always

online. We are moving toward mixed news media -

citizens of news media and professional journalism

on many media platforms. This genre of new media

requires new media ethics - guidelines that apply to

social media journalism, blogs, tweets, and writing

for newspapers. Media ethics needs to be rethought

and reinvented for today's media.

Online Journalism and the Contestation of Interest in the Post-Truth Society of Indonesia

4 TENSIONS ON TWO LEVELS:

INTEREST AND ROLES

These changes challenge the foundations of media

ethics. The challenge is deeper than the debate about

one or two ethics principles on their own, such as

objectivity or accuracy. The challenges outweigh

special problems, such as how the editorial room can

verify content from its citizens. The rapid evolution

requires rethinking the assumptions. What is the

meaning of ethics for providing instant or immediate

instant news and analysis? To what extent do ethics

have meaning related to the algorithms related to

news in social media etc.?

The changes in the media have influenced ethical

tensions. For the first level, there is a tension

between traditional journalism and online

journalism. Traditional journalism culture, with its

accuracy values, publication verification process,

impartiality, editorial process and information

filtering integrates an online journalism culture that

emphasises speed, transparency, transparency,

alignment, non-professional journalists and post-

publication corrections. At the second level,

journalism has a global impact. What is its global

responsibility? Should new media ethics redefine its

goals and norms to guide current global journalism

in its reach and impact?

The challenge for current media ethics can be

summarised with the question: Where is ethics in the

multi-media world? Media ethics should go beyond

just showing these tensions. Theoretically, it should

describe the conflict between the values. It must

decide which principle to preserve or create.

Practically, this should provide a new standard to

guide both online and offline journalism.

5 INDONESIA ONLINE

JOURNALISM ETHICS:

IN PROGRESS

Ward stated that the presence of the Internet as a

new medium, with all of its practical implications,

has created a new tension in the ethical world. The

issue of journalistic ethics comes in two levels. First,

ethical issues arise when journalism is mingling with

an interactive reader. Secondly, the new style of

online journalism that has developed in Indonesia is

very distinctive. The new style of journalism is

unique and different from the old journalism model

that has been applicable in print and television.

Beyond that, the old problem of media junction

business is still prominent.

Online media opens up a free public

conversation space on the comments page provided

on any news article. As mentioned above, interactive

space is an online medium. However, we also see

that the interaction space also has a business

perspective. What kind of mechanism does the

editorial staff impose on incoming reader

comments? Of course, we often see reader

comments that are rude, sarcastic and disrespectful.

The second ethical issue is a matter of accuracy.

The speed of Bill Kovack and Rosentiel states that

the obligation of journalism is the truth. "The main

principle of journalism, rather than partial truth, is

that it greatly differentiates it from all other forms of

communication.” Furthermore, Kovach and

Rosentiel said that in pursuit of truth, the essence of

journalism is the discipline of verification. Today's

high-tech era brings in journalism resembling a

conversation. "The function of journalism has not

changed fundamentally even though we have

entered the digital age. The technique used may be

different, but the underlined principle remains the

same. Verification is a precondition for absolute

accuracy. Therefore, no matter how and in what

form, online media is a verification medium. A

related issue, created by new media, is how to

handle errors and corrections because reports and

comments are constantly updated. The more

journalists who blog 'live' are working at speed, the

more mistakes are made, from misspelled words to

making factual errors Should the news organisation

go back and correct all of the errors? Or should they

fix the error later and leave no trace of the original

error – making it "unpublished?"

In addition to its accuracy, the quick and flowing

principle also alludes to the old principle of

journalism which is a matter of balance. This news

comes in 3 KEWI: "Indonesian journalists respect

the notion of innocence, do not confuse facts with

opinions, balance and always check the truth of

information, and Article 3 KEJ affirms that:"

Indonesian journalists always test information,

remain balanced, do not mix facts and opinions and

apply the presumption of innocence. This is as

explained in KEJ, an information test that means

checking and re-checking the correct information.

Meanwhile, the balance principle is about

providing space and time when reporting to the

respective parties proportionally. Typically, the print

media broadcast news. The balance is in the rules

contained therein. For online media, the principle of

balance in their news does not appear in the news,

but in principle, in the updates, piecemeal or broken.

So, news that is balanced typically does not appear

ICoCSPA 2018 - International Conference on Contemporary Social and Political Affairs

in the news at first, but in the second report or the

third and so on. Ethical problems are potentially

detrimental to certain public opinions that have been

formed while those who feel cornered are not getting

the opportunity to clarify the content of the news.

The news verifies the views at the next opportunity,

to allow those who feel cornered to assess their

clarification late. Over this issue, the online media is

often blamed for unbalanced news.

Partisan journalism comes in at least two types:

First is opinion journalism that likes to comment on

events and problems with or without verification.

Another form is partisan journalism that uses the

media as a funnel for political parties and

movements. To some extent, we can see the

resurrection (or return) of popular opinion / partisan

journalism before the emergence of objective

reporting in the early 1900s. Both opinion and

partisan journalism have long roots in the history of

journalism. However, their revival in the online

world creates serious ethical riddles for current

media ethics. Should objectivity be abandoned by all

journalists? Which one is best for a strong and

healthy democracy - impartial journalism or partisan

journalism?

To make matters more contentious, some new

exponents of impartial opinion and journalism do

not only question objectivity, but they question the

old principles that journalists should be independent

of the group that they have written about. For

example, some partisan journalists reject allegations

of journalistic "conflicts of interest" when they

receive money from a group or when they contribute

to a political party. Economically, the main

newsroom that upholds traditional principles, such

as impartiality, is increasingly compelled to move

toward a more polite or partisan approach to news

and commentary. No impartiality is said to be boring

for viewers. Audiences are said to be interested in

strong opinions and a conflict of opinion.

Even where the editorial room upholds the rules

of impartiality - say by delaying a journalist due to a

conflict of interest or partial commentary - they fail

to gain full public support. Some residents and

groups complain that the newsroom restricting what

analysts and reporters can say about the groups that

they cover is censorship. Is it good that more and

more journalists no longer stand between opposing

groups in society and try to inform the public fairly

about their perspectives, but become part of the

groups that seek to influence public opinion in the

process?

Another problem is that less attention is paid to

online media managers concerning content

aggregators. Simply put, content aggregators are

sites that stream information from other sites. They

do not produce, just collect. Technically, the practice

of news accumulation can be done automatically

through RSS systems and the like. What matters is

when accumulator sites get information from

something that is not self-produced.

6 CONCLUSIONS

Ethics for media and journalism could be public

in one of two ways - in terms of topics and in terms

of justification. Ethics are a common topic if its role

is to discuss and evaluate behaviour and policies

with significant public impacts, such as ethics

related to police actions during protests or ethics to

enable severely ill patients to die. Ethics are a public

justification if it is necessary, in the end, to justify

the norms by referring to the concepts of public

goods, and not individual goods. Often, this type of

behaviour involves public ethics in both senses.

Has the media revolution undermined the idea of

journalistic ethics based on the public interpretation

of the role of journalism in democracy? The answer

is no. The overall impact of journalism is increasing,

not declining. What is different is that many citizen

journalists are not included in the professional code.

It's hard to say if the public code should include

professionals and non-professionals. But such

difficulties do not deny the idea that some of the

public grounds for journalism ethics are necessary.

Their job is to reinterpret the ethics of public

journalism for the global media world.

These points lead to my main conclusion -

journalistic ethics does not "belong" to journalists.

There should be publicly owned journalistic ethics.

Responsible reporters should formulate principles

that meet the "media needs" of citizens in a self-

regulating democracy. There are at least six media

needs: information needs - citizens should be alert

and informed even if without access to a rich soup of

information about the facts and reports going on in

their world. Explanation needs - citizens need more

than facts. They need context and cause-and-effect

explanations to understand the facts and events

correctly. "Perspectival enrichment” is necessary:

citizens need comments, criticism, and many points

of view about the information that they get, and

about the state of their society. Advocacy and reform

needs - citizens must be free to go beyond the

comments to use the media to advocate for causes

and to encourage reform, or to hear the position of

supporters. Participative needs - citizens must have

Online Journalism and the Contestation of Interest in the Post-Truth Society of Indonesia

the ability to participate in meaningful ways in

discussions and debates, sharing facts and analysis.

Dialogical needs - citizens must have the

opportunity to be part of a plausible and informed

dialogue on a common problem, and should not be

subjected to offensive attacks. Therefore, journalists

have no special authority to simply announce ex

cathedra, as individuals, as a particular platform

user, or as a collective, what they value. They must

show how their values are firmly rooted in the six

media needs. Of course, they can make such

announcements but their statements do not have any

social power unless the journalists show how their

principles promote the public good, and not just their

subjective or idiosyncratic goals. Subjectivism can

damage free journalism. If citizens are notified by

journalists that they are making their own ethics,

then the citizens can conclude that tighter press laws

are needed. "Ethics are subjective" makes hash of

the idea of self-regulation journalism. The latter

refers to wide accountability practices. The "self" in

"self-regulation" does not mean that every journalist

regulates their own activities.

REFERENCES

Couldry, N., Curran, J. 2003. Contesting Media Power:

Alternative Media in a Networked World.

Darmaputera, E. 1988. Pancasila and the Search for

Identity and Modernity in Indonesian Society. E.J.

Brill. The Netherlands.

De Wolk, R. (2001). Introduction to Online Journalism.

Allyn and Bacon. USA.

Ess, Charles, 2009. Digital Media Ethics. Polity Press:

Cambridge

Friend, Cecilia and Jane Singer. 2007. Online Journalism

Ethics: Traditions and Transitions. Armonk, N.Y.: M.

E. Sharpe

George, C. 2006. Contentious Journalism and the

Internet: Towards Democratic Discourse in Malaysia

and Singapore. Singapore University Press: Singapore

Jenkins, H. (Ed.). 2006. Convergence culture: Where old

and new media collide. New York University Press:

New York University.

Pavlik, J. 2001. Journalism and New Media. Columbia

University Press. USA.

Pavlik, J. (Jul/Aug 1997). The Future of Online

Journalism. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved

March 20, 2007, from

http://archives.cjr.org/year/97/4/online.asp.

Owen, Bruce M., 2000, The Internet Challenge to

Television. Harvard University Press: Cambridge

Rowman & Littlefield. UK. Dahlan, A. 2000. Mass Media

Laws and Regulations in Indonesia. Asian

Media Information and Communication Centre.

Singapore.

Ward, Stephen J. A. 2005. “Ethics for the New

Investigative Newsroom.”

Winston, B. 2005. Messages: Free expression, media and

the west from Gutenberg to Google. New York:

Routledge.

Ward, Stephen J. A. “Ethics for the New Mainstream.” In

The New Journalist: Roles, Skills, and Critical

Thinking, eds. Paul Benedetti, Tim Currie and Kim

Kierans, pp. 313-326. Toronto: Emond Montgomery

Publications

Low, P. C. (2003). The Media in A Society in Transition:

A Case Study of Indonesia. The Fletcher School. USA.

Börnsen, A., Braulke, T., Kruse, J., & Latzer, M. (2011).

The allocation of the digital dividend in Austria.

International Journal of Digital Television, 2(2), 161-

179.

ICoCSPA 2018 - International Conference on Contemporary Social and Political Affairs