Fielding tough questions, particularly to government leaders, constitutes an exception rather than the rule in Malaysia's mainstream journalism. And it appears that this practice has become quite alien to the local journalistic circle over the years that any journalist who tries to do the "exceptional" will be looked upon with shock, ire and cynicism.

Nothing illustrates this sorry state of Malaysian journalism better than the recent verbal encounter between Works Minister Samy Vellu and malaysiakini's journalists Susan Loone and Zakiah Koya at the former's media conference in the run-up to the Lunas by-election.

Samy was reportedly angered by the barrage of questions posed to him by the two journalists. They essentially questioned the lack of ethics and propriety of the BN government as a whole in spending massive amounts of money on development projects just prior to the by-election, a move that was largely perceived as an "electoral bribery".

It appeared that Samy, almost Santa-like, had callously allocated funds and instructed appropriate government departments to, for example, tar roads, unclog drains, and build schools with miraculous speed in Lunas. Samy insisted that it was his duty as a minister to bring development into Lunas.

To display his apparent concern for the Lunas people, he even said something which, with the benefit of hindsight, he shouldn't have: "If this still doesn't impress the people then I may have to stay at the Lunas JKR (Public Works Department) office."(New Straits Times, Nov 24)

One would imagine that it would have been all right for many of us, including the two malaysiakini journalists, had the loads of money spent come from Samy's own pocket. But, as it turned out, this was sadly not the case. It was, if Samy's memory needs jogging, the rakyat's money - that was supposed to have been spent in the most judicious and fair manner possible.

Publicly shamed

As if to distance itself from this purportedly rude and deviant demeanour, and to reinforce its self-perceived integrity and honour, the staid NST found it rather urgent and necessary to "expose" these journalists and their antics to the whole world.

And so with a screaming headline, "Two Internet newspaper reporters get an earful from Samy Vellu", the pro-establishment paper on Nov 24 reported that the two journalists had been ticked off by no less than a minister because they had crossed the line. It's akin to saying that these two journalists didn't know how to behave in front of the Yang Berhormat, and so they ought to be publicly shamed.

Like Samy, colleague and Transport Minister Ling Liong Sik also had problems with journalists who were, in his mind, too inquisitive. It was reported on Dec 6 that Ling had barred a malaysiakini reporter Leong Kar Yen from a press conference on the long delayed monorail project [#1]('Malaysiakini' barred from minister's PC, Dec 6)[/#].

On another occasion, Ling also had warned he might have to turn away a malaysiakini journalist from his media conference for having asked questions that "should only be raised in Parliament". [#2](Reporter told he may have to leave PC, Nov 24)[/#].

This journalist-minister tension really points to something that has infested the psyche of most government leaders, some other politicians as well as certain groups of local journalists over the years. Ever since the nation's independence, the media have always been hailed as important partners in national development next to the government. What is inherently implicit here is the insistence that the media must have close, if somewhat too cosy, relationship with the government, for there's the need to work hand in hand for the professedly national good.

This close proximity between the media and the state is further enhanced by the notion of development journalism that theoretically encourages the reporting of both the successes and failures of government policies and projects. In practice over the years, however, this amounts to "the-government-says-so" journalism, thereby leaving little room for critical and investigative journalism.

Self-censorship

Harmonious relationship between the media and the government is also partly ensured via ownership and control of the mainstream media. Media owners who are normally aligned to the ruling elite tend to comply with the wishes of the latter as is often evident during times of political crisis or general elections.

There's also the belief that the government knows best for all, including the mainstream media. Viewed from this perspective, the media must be monitored and controlled by the paternalistic government for the sake of the supposedly national interest.

While I agree with Zakiah Koya [#3](The duty of journalists, Dec 7)[/#] that the present journalistic malaise can be attributed to the refusal of a number of local journalists to test the limits, and as a result imposing self-censorship, the institutional, economic and legal constraints that have been put in place also play a vital and major role. Self-censorship, which essentially arises out of a culture of fear, is one of the potent weapons of a ruling elite in its attempt to keep the press in line.

We need to remind ourselves at this juncture that offering alternative views and criticisms is very much an endeavour that partners of national development, such as the mass media, ought to have. There are certain national policies, for instance, that have to be debated thoroughly - and done so through wide public participation - so that the outcome can fully serve the interests of the majority. Sycophancy and slavish compliancy, on the other hand, may work towards the gradual destruction of a society.

Unfortunately, media conferences held by ministers - as already intimated above - often transform into mechanisms aimed at telling journalists, particularly those from the mainstream media, what the former want the people to know and believe in. It's very much a public relations exercise. In the minds of many, if not most, of the government leaders, media conferences aren't the forum to ask them probing questions, to insist on their accountability and transparency, which are crucial in a democracy.

Given this mind set, are we to be surprised by the actions of the two ministers concerned in the presence of certain inquisitive journalists. But then, has malaysiakini, for example, really been misquoting them, or deliberately distorting their comments? If so, shouldn't they demand their right to reply to whatever that was perceived as untruth or exaggeration? Shouldn't a boycott of the on-line newspaper concerned, or any other papers for that matter, be only considered as a last resort, i.e. after all possible avenues have been exhausted? Or, is this rash reaction a convenient way of them escaping from very searching questions?

The right tune

Such a warped view of the role of the press also helps to explain the way certain publications, especially the alternative press, had been treated by the government the last few months. The Home Ministry, for example, had no qualms about banning Detik and Al-Wasilah (which largely cater to the Malay constituency); and issuing warnings, or "advice", to certain Chinese-language dailies (which primarily address issues vital to the Chinese community) such as the China Press and Nanyang Siang Pau, all of which were seen not singing the "right tune".

In contrast, certain dailies are so closely identified with the ruling coalition, or the latter's political ideology, that the government found it prudent to come to their rescue, if need be. A recent example involves the Deputy Home Minister Zainal Abidin Zin who defended an Utusan Malaysia's piece written by Rozaman Ismail (Dec 1), "Politik orang Cina di Lunas" (Politics of the Chinese community in Lunas), arguing that it was not seditious. He was responding to the opposition DAP's claim that the article concerned questioned the integrity of the Chinese community.

This misplaced notion of the press also helps to explain why, for instance, when a certain newspaper from a foreign country makes a critical report of Malaysia, particularly its government, our government leaders would insist that the government of that particular country reprimand the paper so that it will fall in line. This is indicative of our leaders' inability - or refusal - to appreciate the fact that a newspaper should have its own editorial stand and independence. The press doesn't necessarily have to be an ideological arm of the state.

Journalists worth their salt, such as those from malaysiakini, are expected to ask questions that are probing, ones that would eventually help clarify matters to the general public, make the government as a whole accountable for its actions, and in the process help democracy function. This is why they have to do their best to avoid making mistakes - such as the one committed by malaysiakini journalists during the recent Lunas by-election over Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi's visit to the Chinese shops - for any error on their part will be closely monitored (Pak Lah snubbed in Lunas, Nov 27).

In the meantime, malaysiakini journalists may want to do both the Malaysian people and Samy Vellu a great service by clarifying with Samy over some rumours, of which a few were quite nasty, that he may eventually settle down in Lunas and set up shop. One version has it that Samy may open up a hair saloon called Samy's Cut Above the Rest; or a coffee house called Kedai Kopi Samy, or simply Samy's Bean; or a shop where time doesn't stop at Samy's Watch Shoppe. Surely a little clarification of this sort isn't too much to ask.