The first round of presidential debate between Jokowi and Prabowo which took place on 17 January this year has faced much criticism for its poor quality. On social media some Indonesian netizens deem debates of high school students are far more impressive despite the language used in the debates is not Bahasa Indonesia but English. To me the reproach is not groundless as just a week after the event I became one of the judges of an English debate competition for high school students of the city of Jambi. The quality of the arguments, the organization of ideas, as well as the method of delivery of the students in the competition surely outclassed that of the two contenders.
The students, unfortunately, are only a well-trained minority living in a society where 65% of their fellow internet users believe the information received online without further examination for its credibility. In addition, since 2014 much of the Indonesian population has been severely polarized being trapped inside echo chamber of either excessively loving Jokowi or blindly idolizing Prabowo. There seems to be no room for critical inspection regarding politics in particular discourses relating to the two politicians. Everyone has had his own unshakeable stance towards the two thus all unpleasant stories about them have to be rejected and only the good ones that must be amplified.
While experts agree that critical thinking is an indispensable skill for this century as well as healthy for democracy, yet exercising the skill in Indonesia at this time of year especially about politics is a highly risky business. We Indonesians now live in a state of what Danish philosopher, Soren Kiekergaard once famously termed, ‘fear and trembling’. We tremble to be critical, we tremble to voice what we believe being right, and we tremble to criticize the government. We fear imprisonment.
The political scene is just frightening that there has been a continuous trend of imprisonment or moves to jail critical individuals of both presidential candidates for any reasons justifiable before the law. Ahok, Rizieq Shihab, Jonru, Buni Yani, are just a few examples of how being critical in current political atmosphere is a highly risky business. A tiny error or even a slip of the tongue is more than enough evidence to send a person to jail.
Encouraging critical thinking becomes more difficult as the media, in particular the renowned ones, limit the circulation of certain voices. Most of Indonesian media are now in the hands of oligarchs who have strong economic power and active involvement in politics. These oligarchs own numerous print and electronic media which vigorously stir public opinions on particular issues. Concerns that harm their interests are carefully packaged to prevent public anger and only stories that have the potential to benefit the group are sensationalized.
The most serious problem regarding these oligarchs is that they have aligned well with the government. Media Moguls such as Surya Paloh, Hary Tanoesoedibjo, Erick Thohir gather around Jokowi whereas The Jakarta Post remains to be a loyal supporter since the paper’s announcement to support the president ahead of the 2014 election.
The control of the oligarchs over Indonesian media is more harmful when it comes to television. Currently there are only 5 FTA satellite TV stations that are entirely devoted to news stories: Hary Tanoesoedibjo’s INews, Surya Paloh’s Metro TV, Aburizal Bakrie’s tvOne, Kompas TV, and TVRI. Whereas the former three have been clear over their political affiliations, public still cannot rely on Kompas TV for objective, nonpartisan, and unbiased journalism. Kompas has been very cautious in its coverage to avoid conflicts with the ruling power and business groups, preventing the influential media company from performing a critical watchdog role. As for TVRI, the TV station is funded by the government which greatly influence its critical reports.
The above TV channels play a significant role in setting news agenda, framing news stories, as well as giving perspectives on political information due to the fact that they are aired through satellites which can reach every corner of Indonesia. In regions that do not have internet access or terrestrial television makes satellite TV an only means of obtaining information for residents. In addition, television still maintained its position as the supreme media for Indonesian society with a penetration of up to 96% in 2017. It is unimaginable how much biased news stories that Indonesians have been exposed to every single day.
The oligarchs’ control of Indonesian media has contributed to the decline of trust in Indonesian professional journalism, self-censorship among journalists, the waning of media freedom, the deterioration of journalists’ autonomy, as well as the difficulty for public to criticize the government due to the lacking of data which is traditionally and idealistically provided by media.
To make matters worse, the government through the Indonesian National Military (TNI) has been intensively seized books which have contents related to communism and other ‘banned teachings’. At university the situation is not good either. Measures to shut up critical voices of students have been taken including through ways condemned by academic values. Student press for instance, of 64 newspapers, 47 of them has been subject to violence and 11 of which done by university officials.
With all the mess resulted from the rivalry between Jokowi and Prabowo prior to the 2019 presidential election, it is now time for Indonesian elites to apply the principle of ‘I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it’. It is their responsibility to give good education to public on how to face disagreements through noble examples not through imprisonment or detainment threats.
The government should also consider revising the ITE, the blasphemy, and the hate speech laws which have proven effective for knocking out political opponents. Last but not least, whoever is elected in the April’s election should find ways to take the oligarchs’ hands off the Indonesian politics. They must be banned to own media while being active in politics. Although this sounds difficult as Jokowi and Prabowo rely on the oligarchs for delivering messages to people, with firm willingness and people’s supports the work is not impossible to accomplish.
When all these obstacles are tackled, Indonesia will have a healthy environment to nurture critical thinking for its people. And when Indonesia is already full with critical citizens, it is a guarantee that future presidential debates will be far more lively and impressive.
