It is a sad but well-known fact of Malaysia's mainstream journalism today that almost anything that relates to the reformasi movement, Barisan Alternatif and/or deposed deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim seldom qualifies to be a news item, particularly in the mainstream English and Malay-language newspapers.

And if it does, the report usually makes many a concerned Malaysian read with some degree of trepidation.

Thus, it is one of those rare moments in the life of the reformasi movement when a certain group of its supporters gained recently seemingly rapt attention from the mainstream media.

This specifically refers to those people who attended the Keadilan-organised "100,000 People Gathering" on Nov 5 along and around the Kesas Highway and who eventually "made headlines".

The New Straits Times , for example, broke the news about the Kesas Highway gathering the following day. The kind of headline used and the photographs chosen seemed to suggest that the huge crowd was out to court danger and inflict violence upon others.

Pro-establishment

Hence, the headline screamed, "65 detained for refusing to disperse at Kesas highway"; the top photo showed a group of "Anwar supporters" - as the paper put it - roughening up a man suspected of being a plainclothes policeman; and a bottom photo showing police using "a water cannon truck to disperse the illegal gathering..."

On Nov 18, the same newspaper dutifully published, under the banner headline of "90 sought in connection with riot", 40 mug shots of the people who were alleged to have been present in that huge gathering. These pictures, presumably taken by the police, graced half-a-page of the pro-establishment broadsheet.

In contrast, The Sun was rather less gung-ho. The tabloid reported the same news with the headline, "Probe into allegations of police brutality", thus implying that the scuffle that ensued at the otherwise peaceful gathering was not as straightforward a story of reformasi supporters turning violent as some people and newspapers would want us to believe.

The NST coverage, particularly the Nov 18 report, has a number of serious implications. One, the headline seemed to suggest that the planned peaceful gathering had eventually broken out into an ugly riot.

Is this a fact? If it is, one is made to wonder why this so-called riot was not given a wide and in-depth coverage it deserved in the first place? After all, wasn't the newspaper implying a breakdown of law and order? A threat to national security as some would conveniently assert.

Sensationalism

Surely the concerned citizens deserve to be informed adequately of this untoward incident.

Two, the manner in which the screaming headline and mug shots were juxtaposed hints at an attempt on the part of the newspaper to somewhat establish the culpability of the people whose mug shots were displayed. The people concerned were made to appear guilty before investigation.

Three, the posting of these mug shots might - or might not - have the desired effect of scaring people from attending future reformasi-type gatherings or assemblies. The short message here is - don't assemble because your movement can be monitored and made public by the authorities concerned.

Four, this journalistic treatment may indicate the newspaper's penchant for sensationalism, which any good editor or journalist should abhor or decry. Sensationalism may bring in extra revenue, but it's usually cheap.

The news item on Nov 19 in the NST constitutes a continuation of the report published the day before. The headline used by the NST in this report isn't one that can be categorised as subdued.

As if to capture the "mood" of the photographs shown, the headline read, "Police looking for persons involved in illegal rally".

Apart from publishing 11 photos of suspected reformasi supporters, the newspaper again showed the earlier photo of the suspected plainclothes policeman being assaulted by "eight people".

Crucial and basic questions

At any rate, the NST coverage of this episode is selective, biased and unethical. At the risk of sounding patronising, a good piece of journalism would surely try to give a comprehensive account of the event, taking into consideration the why, where, when, what, who and how.

This formula, as a first-year journalism student would tell you, is nothing new but it does help to keep readers adequately informed.

The conscious highlighting by newspapers such as the NST of the so-called violent end to the "illegal gathering" doesn't necessarily address the crucial and basic question of why it developed into a reformasi assembly.

If anything, the way most of the news items were structured instead put the people at the gathering in a bad light, as if they were consciously seeking trouble.

Sources other than the mainstream media reported that the Kesas gathering was a sad outcome of several failed attempts to hold a gathering at a more convenient place such as the Bukit Jalil Stadium.

It is also, we're told, a result of failures to obtain a police permit to hold a legitimate, peaceful gathering.

A socially-conscious and responsible newspaper would inform and educate the reader about the fact that citizens in a democracy have the right to peaceful assembly.

Level-headed fashion

Such a democratic right is so important that the authorities concerned are expected to ensure that the country's security forces are employed to help facilitate a peaceful assembly and that at the same time the convenience of other members of the general public is not jeopardised.

It needs to be emphasised here that physical violence is not at all to be condoned in all these public gatherings. Which is why any act of violence perpetrated by the parties concerned must be highlighted and condemned.

But this, the newspapers concerned must do in a fair and level-headed fashion. In this context, physical attacks upon the police by a section of the crowd, or allegations of such acts, must be reported together with physical assaults against the public by the police personnel, or allegations of such physical actions.

True, the NST did carry a story on Nov 13 about Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi making comments pertaining to allegations of police brutality at that gathering in response to Suhakam's (Human Rights Commission) plan to investigate those allegations.

The lopsidedness of the coverage of this mainstream newspaper could have been "corrected" had it also interviewed a number of those people present at the Kesas gathering, if not also some members of the Opposition parties.

Perhaps, only then would the readers be informed of such allegations as tear gas canisters being thrown into a police truck full of detainees; the eyes of a reformasi supporter injured by chemicals sprayed into his face; and a woman forced to strip naked and do sit-ups in the presence of other detainees.

Public institution

These are allegations that should be regarded as serious by all peace-loving Malaysians and the mainstream media. Allegations from both sides should be taken note of by the media because violence was involved.

To reiterate, members of the general public do not have the right to be violent. (And in this matter, one needs also be careful about differentiating violent actions committed by ordinary members of the public from those of agents provocateur.)

The police, on the other hand, must not involve themselves in acts of brutality because this would implicate a public institution that is expected to professionally protect citizens against violence and brutality, and to steadfastly keep law and order.

A journalist or an editor should take cognizance of this in the coverage of such an issue.