Sex, as a subject of public discussion and an act of love (or lust), almost always easily arouses excitement and passion among many of us. That is why sex (and sex-related matters) is a staple commodity for many newspapers the world over; it makes "good copy". And Malaysian press is no exception.

It is little wonder, therefore, when the maker of a famous condom brand unveiled the result of the Durex Global Sex Survey 2000, many mainstream Malaysian newspapers gave it a big splash. Equally excitable, the New Straits Times ran a headline on Oct 18, screaming, "Survey: Malaysians have sex only 62 times a year", apparently cautioning the readers of this purportedly lackadaisical attitude: only two months of sexual frenzy in a year.

The report lamented the seeming lack of zest in the sex lives of the ordinary Malaysians. For a society that is quite used to the idea of bagging superlatives in the areas of bakery, building, and bridges, to be placed the second last position in terms of sex frequencies next to Japan, could be considered as a frigid fate worse than death.

National libido

It could conjure up a pathetic picture of a national libido that is endangered. It could also give you the strange feeling that you're being sneered by the sexually active Americans and Russians, to name but a few.

As an indicator of sorts about the current sexual attitudes, mores and preferences of the average Malaysians, this media reporting of the sex survey has its significance and relevance. Attitudes and preferences change over a period of time and it is only fitting that this be recorded for public knowledge and understanding.

But life, as we know it, isn't only about sex. For surely the Malaysian society also deserves to know what the ordinary Malaysians think about certain political, economic and social issues of the day. In other words, a responsible and respectable press may want to report findings of social surveys or carry out opinion polls themselves that are scientific and non-partisan.

For instance, one would be tempted to know what the average Malaysians would think of the type of socio-economic development that is taking place in the country, particularly one that seems to place too much emphasis on material well-being.

What would the average Malaysians feel about the issue of transparency and accountability in the present government? What would they feel about the increasing privatisation of public services such as healthcare in the country? What would they think of the public institution Petronas' heavy involvement in the recent Formula One extravaganza, and also the oil company's recent entanglement with the Terengganu "oil royalty" issue?

What would people think of the country's state of press freedom and their right to peaceful assembly? Expressing opinions in this fashion is also one way in which citizens can participate in the country's decision-making process. Besides, social surveys can provide useful and fairly reliable indicators to policy makers who will not have to rely on the whims and fancies of politicians instead.

Desperate attempt

In a society such as Malaysia's where opinion polls or periodic surveys of social and political attitudes are a rarity, or perhaps rarely made public, this somewhat sensationalist revelation of sexual attitudes among Malaysians could be perceived as a desperate attempt by certain mainstream press to arrest declining readership, if not regain to a certain extent their recently lost circulation figures.

One may argue, though, that this reporting of the sex survey isn't necessarily indicative of the mainstream press' inclination to exploit sex. The issue reported just happened to be about sex in all its seriousness. However, if this reporting is seen in relation to the way many of the other sex-related stories, such as rape, are covered, one would be tempted to conclude that sex, as already intimated earlier, is also a fascination among certain journalists and newspapers in the country.

Moreover, seen in the larger context of socio-economic and political problems that the society is facing, sex stories often seem to be getting high priority over other more important issues. If anything, sex - and women - can be used by the mainstream press as a cunning device to divert people's attention from the more pressing and pertinent issues of the day.

NST , for instance, in its Oct 24 issue front-paged a story about a woman marrying a Singaporean man solely for the practical purpose of procuring a maid, not for sex. That woman presumably doesn't snugly fit the "normal woman" bill, and therefore deserves at least public curiosity. The legal constraints pertaining to the hiring of a foreign maid in Malaysia, which gave rise to this situation in the first place, were not duly and properly highlighted. The maid was desperately needed to help look after the woman's sick son (from a previous marriage).

Look at another recent example of the vicious rape and murder of the woman engineer who was eventually made an object of public gaze and scrutiny. This heinous crime, to be sure, requires public attention and condemnation, but there's always the possibility of certain newspapers making a wholesome meal out of this. In other words, there's the thin line between straight and factual reporting on one hand and sleazy reporting on the other.

Blow-by-blow accounts of the rape were given by the newspapers concerned as if to whet the appetite of the readers, particularly the male ones, whose sex lives apparently are nothing to talk about. A sex-related story loses its journalistic credibility when it transforms itself into a form of sheer cheap entertainment.

Culture of voyeurism

In cases like this, as rightly pointed out by one of the malaysiakini's readers, victims of rape, and their respective families, are further humiliated by the way the report is made, while the (male) perpetrators are "sidelined", "excused" from the scene, or simply made "silent".

The highlighting of the female victims is often made in such a fashion that could conveniently court public blame and odium against them, not the assailants themselves. The likely outcome of such a reportorial slant is that the underlying causes of such bestial acts - such as unequal power relations - may be forgotten or left hidden in the debris of journalistic onslaught.

What is also happening here is that such reporting encourages a culture of voyeurism among the readers, something that isn't very much different from the way addicts of pornographic materials would think and behave.

A newspaper doesn't have to flaunt graphic pictures of sexual romps or scantily clad women in its pages to be deemed sleazy and sexually flippant. It only needs to pander to the basic instincts of the readers, and also corporate profit goals, through a selection of words and phrases, hackneyed framing of sex incidents, and, last but not least, sexist portrayal of women.

But more importantly, sex is no substitute to serious and investigative reporting of social issues, impassioned debates, intelligent commentaries, and constructive criticisms that any respectable and responsible newspaper would allow and encourage. It's a truism that high standards of journalism are made of the latter stuff.