The mark of an interesting and intellectually vibrant publication, as many of malaysiakini readers have pointed out, or alluded to, in recent times, is, among other things, a lively letters' column that invites and encourages views of different hues. The primary purpose is, of course, to provide democratic space for public expression of opinions on matters of public importance as well as to help build an intellectual tradition that we can all be proud of.

And so lately, the letters' column in the English Section of the Harakah has become an intellectually stimulating site where a number of Malaysians, particularly those of Indian origin, had crossed swords over matters that confront the Indian community.

It all began with a certain Ananda Krishnan ( Harakah , Feb 7) who espoused the view that problems encountered by Indian Malaysians could be best tackled by a PAS political party that is voted into power. This is because, he argued, there are comforting similarities that Islam, which PAS champions, has with Hinduism regarding prohibition against vices such as alcoholism, gambling, etc. This contention, which primarily perceives alcoholism and other such ills as a moral problem, provoked a dissenting view from another reader, Sharaad Kuttan, who feared that such an argument would only pave the way for what he called "social fascists", i.e. the moral and religious guardians, to police "our private lives..." ( Harakah , Feb14).

In other words, Sharaad was, and still is, concerned that a moral panic, usually easily fanned by the mass media, could lend justification for greater social control and tighter state surveillance over the citizenry. In the subsequent issue of the Harakah , Sharaad's view was in turn vehemently opposed by a number of other readers.

What can be said of this public debate in PAS' political organ? For one thing, it is commendable that the Harakah has given some space, particularly in its letters' column for Indians, non-PAS members at that, to air their views regarding matters that affect the general welfare of the Indian community. It also suggests an opening up on the part of the publication to issues beyond the realm of concern of many Muslim Malays; an editorial, if not also ideological, shift that is significant in a multiethnic set-up like ours. In short, certain problems of other ethnic communities ought to be put on the national agenda.

It is hoped, however, that any ensuing debate in the Harakah on the problems confronting the Indian community, particularly alcoholism, would place those problems in a larger social context. For while we take cognisance of the moral question of alcoholism, the social dimension should not be missed either. For surely factors such as social neglect, educational failure, financial difficulties, crammed homes, and a lack of public utilities in geographical areas where particularly the poorer sections of the Indian community reside, play some role in giving rise to problems such as alcoholism, drug addiction, etc.

In short, a holistic approach is required. Having said that, though, we should also be aware, as I had argued elsewhere in malaysiakini , of the inherent limitations that a political mouthpiece such as the Harakah has. The publication can only do so much in an intellectual and editorial space that is by and large governed by the party objectives and ideology concerned. In other words, Harakah in the final analysis will have to wear its partisan garb.

A socially responsible newspaper in the mainstream, on the other hand, would have been forthcoming in addressing grievances suffered by groups in society, especially cultural or ethnic minorities such as the Indians. Furthermore, such an approach is even vital if and when these complaints have policy implications.

And yet, for reasons only best known to themselves, Malaysia's mainstream newspapers tend to either ignore or marginalise such social issues as if to suggest that you could conveniently wish them away. It is cruelly cynical of the mainstream press to take these minorities into account only on national occasions such as Merdeka day to purportedly celebrate the country's cultural diversity and multiethnic unity.

Without much compunction, the media would parade representatives of these minority groups almost as theatrical props to show how "unique" we Malaysians are. The uniqueness here belongs to no-one but.

This shortcoming notwithstanding, certain mainstream newspapers have initiated a few changes of late, indicating that they apparently are aware of the need to improve on and expand physically their letters' column given the fact that such a column can help the paper to, if I may use the worn-out clich, feel the pulse of the nation. But it's here that we have to be wary about.

Expanding the column is one thing, selecting and publishing these letters is quite another thing altogether. Many of the letters that see the light of day are the ones that mainly comment on the implementation of policies, but very few, if any, delve on the policies concerned. Often these letters touch on things politically safe.

Certain newspapers even categorise and grade the letters they receive. For instance, there is the "Letter of the day". While this editorial device may help to highlight a certain concern or problem, it can also be subjected to abuse. This mechanism can also prioritise a trivia to such an extent that public's attention can be diverted away from an underlying and crucial problem.

Finally, if it is still not so obvious for some, social justice can be served to some extent by providing a platform or space in newspapers and other kinds of publications to citizens irrespective of their colour, creed or craving.