On May 3, many journalists and media organisations around the world commemorated World Press Freedom Day. Many Malaysian journalists also decided to get in the act, at times ably accompanied by politicians desperate to get their faces and views in newspapers and/or on television.

For the mainstream media, the top story in this regard certainly was that of the "new" petition handed to the home minister asking for the repeal of the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA).

Much was then made about the minister's willingness to consider the setting up of a Press Council, as if he was doing the press a favour when, really, this is something that the press should have demanded a long, long time ago as their right.

As for whether such a council will see the light of day, let alone be effective, perhaps we should all not hold our breath.

At any rate, the most ridiculous outcome of World Press Freedom Day surely must have been the Malaysian mainstream media's refusal to report that, for yet another year running, Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad was named among the world's top 10 enemies of free press.

One rag was even so stupid as to name the other nine individuals in the top 10 list while conveniently leaving aside Mahathir's name ([#1] Newspaper censors Mahathir's name from press enemies list [/#], May 4). Press freedom? Yeah, right.

It didn't stop there, of course. When a journalist expressed concern about existing repressive laws at a forum to mark World Press Freedom Day, the mainstream media somehow managed to twist her comments to suggest that she wanted similar laws to curb the Internet.

It is evident, then, that while concerned journalists are right in attacking oppressive laws and lawmakers with their own agendas, they also need to look among their ilk for the source of the malaise.

They need to weed out, hang out to dry, the colleagues who are either blatant propagandists or, for want of a better term, junketeers, those who are in it just for the perks and "glamour".

The propagandists are much easier to detect. They are like this writer Christopher Ng, who wrote a truly engaging "fictitious" piece about the Malaysian mainstream media in the New Straits Times in early May.

These are the ones who constantly talk about "development journalism" and about being "objective" and "non-partisan". They are dead serious about their work and see theirs as a calling (invariably a calling to the Umno general assembly or any government soiree where they can rub shoulders with the powerful).

And when something like the Sipadan abduction or the haze hits us, these propagandists are not so much concerned about the safety of those involved as they are at pains to reassure everyone, especially foreign tourists, that everything's a-okay. They need to do this, of course, in line with the wider official policy to make Malaysia the world's numero uno tourist destination.

Junketeers are reminiscent of The Star 's "Brats" 10 years on. They've grown older, but, sadly, not wiser.

They're fast approaching middle age (or are there already), but dress like teenagers and have the brains of infants. Their main concerns are what sort of bonus package they will receive at the end of the year, which hotel or airline they can squeeze a junket from, and what's the latest watering hole in Bangsar - not necessarily in that order.

But all is still not lost. While the propagandists and the junketeers have been pretty much in evidence these past couple of weeks, a new outfit, the Centre for Independent Journalism, nonetheless made a much-awaited public appearance over this same period.

Helmed by local optimist, Sharaad Kuttan, the centre organised a workshop principally for journalists which, according to some, turned out to be like one big confessional.

While we can all appreciate the cathartic value of such encounters, we must, nonetheless, be wary of the very real possibility that it will all just end at being cathartic and nothing more.

It's fine, as a starting point, for Malaysian journalists to recognise their weaknesses and the very real problems that they all face. But, as journalism students often ask me, "What can we do next?"

Well, there certainly is a need to understand the very real structural factors - such as political and economic controls - which constrain the parameters. I say constrain because ever so often hacks use these controls to legitimise their (in)action, as a convenient excuse not to do anything, to plead that their hands are tied all the time. In any case, understanding the structural constraints enables journalists to strategise more realistically.

Then, there is a need for journalists to ask what are they in it for? If economic well-being is their top priority, then they may as well temper their ideals about "press freedom" accordingly. The most inane excuse I've heard from journalists is that they join (or remain in) mainstream media organisations so that they can "change things from the inside".

There clearly also is a need for journalists to understand elements of guerilla warfare if, indeed, change and greater freedom are what they desire. There certainly is a need to network locally and regionally - to work together for a common ideal and not merely to meet and socialise.

Networking allows for greater understanding of alternative avenues for the transmission of information. It provides the very real possibility of finding out the true potential of new communication technologies. On the other hand, it raises questions of ethics and loyalty to media organisations, of course.

But, perhaps it is time for concerned mainstream journalists to start thinking less about organisational loyalties and economic dependence, and more about loyalty to their profession. Then, perhaps, World Press Freedom Day will become a day worth celebrating here in Malaysia.