On ethics, media freedom

I might not have studied mass communication but I did study ethics. In information technology, the question of ethics comes to a head when it comes to whistle-blowing.

As my former lecturer in UiTM asked, if you were keeping a trace on email threads, and what was being discussed is in fact of questionable legality, does it justify your actions in hacking?

The question divided the class and the lecturer let it remain as such to this day.

But his subsequent question reunited the class. What if someone paid you to divulge the information?

This was where everyone agreed it was wrong. This was in 2004.

In March 2015, British paper The Sun found its journalists in the dock on charges of paying public officials for stories. The jurors let them off due to the belief that the payments were made due to “public interest”.

However, the question of ethics is awaiting debate.

Now back to Malaysia. The Edge admitted to conning a source for information by promising US$2 million. Following this, they have decided that it was in the “public’s interest” to con Xavier Andre Justo to get information regarding 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB).

It was a shocker, for me, to see such detailing in a justification.

See, The Sun belongs to Rupert Murdoch, the same guy who owned News of the World, which had to close down in 2011 after being found to have hired private investigators to hack phone networks since 2006 and was notorious for chequebook journalism.

When this was revealed, Murdoch was reported to have asked the Labour government under Gordon Brown at the time to back away from investigating the allegations. That didn’t happen and it led to the closing down of one of the oldest papers in the UK at the time.

Just in case someone refuses to draw the line on when it is supposedly okay to pay for journalism, I ask them to think about this.

Yes, the wrongdoings in 1MDB are a matter of public interest, but it is a slippery slope to continue justifying paying (even if it was a con) for information in journalism as ethical.

Media freedom

The Edge saw its licence suspended for three months for apparently three reasons. And these are what I wish to address, and why I will be joining the protest on August 8 regarding this suspension.

The first excuse given was that the headlines and reportage of The Edge created negative perception towards the company and also implicated the government and national leaders.

1MDB is owned by the Ministry of Finance, which is run by “the government and national leaders”. Thus, if the company made a stupid decision and “the government and national leaders” approved the stupid decision, of course, it is going to give negative perception.

First lesson to the Home Ministry and ministers alike in the Cabinet, the media is not supposed to make you look smart. If you want to appear smart, hire a proper press team. That goes double for the prime minister.

Or, better yet, you could all just shut up and stop talking to the press, close down your social media pages and just hire a press secretary to talk for you.

Because you were all voted for your ability in politics, not media relations.

The second excuse given was that the information was based on doubtful and unverified information.

For goodness sakes, you are the government with access to the documents to the company involved in these “doubtful and unverified information”. The prime minister is the chairman of the frickin’ company!

So why can’t the government verify it when the allegations first cropped up, since it is being run by our “Bapa Nothing to Hide” himself?

The third excuse is perhaps the dumbest one given out by the home minister. The suspension was also because since 1MDB is being investigated, it was, therefore, unnecessary to create negative perception in the public domain.

Wow.

The investigation was triggered because the media, including Sarawak Report, The Edge and The Wall Street Journal, reported things being wrong in 1MDB. In fact, the company has since been featured in Bloomberg and even The Star.

The problem is the company itself. The fact that multiple ministers are stupidly looking at censorship as a solution and even testifying that there is no “honour among cooks (sic)”, clearly shows we have a mentally immature group of leaders, which unfortunately reflect us all.

Censorship, denying access and suspending licences when it comes to media is never a solution. It is an act of unjustified aggression using words like “public order” and “negative perception” as pure excuses.

And I do hope that those who act in such a bullying style will get their just reckoning. – July 28, 2015.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.