The Luna Case: A Reflection of Indonesian Inconsistency?This entry was posted in English, Media, PR & Communications, Social Media and tagged infotainment, kode etik, Luna Maya, twitter, UU ITE. Bookmark the permalink.
The Luna case is now heightening with talkshows on TV, discussing about her act of twitting that caused outraged to infotainment journalists. Roy Suryo and Ndoro Kakung were among those who had been invited to talk about this case. One interesting case indeed, that is often compared with Prita’s case.
But what is more interesting to scrutinize is from the journalists point of view. Apparently, even the journalists associations have different opinions about this case – namely, over the use of the ITE Law (Electronic Information and Transaction Law in Indonesia).
A member of PWI (Indonesian Journalist Association) has reported Luna to the police over this case, saying that she had broken several verses of the ITE Law. Another journalist association, AJI (Independent Journalist Association), responded quite negatively on this act. This is because some verses in ITE Law have been criticized by journalists for constraining freedom of expression. But now PWI are using the exact same verses to sue Luna.
AJI’s view is also shared with Jakarta’s journalist alliance, PWJ. They went further by stating that the infotainment journalist who reported Luna to the police is killing the freedom of expression. By reporting Luna using the ITE law, it shows that the journalist support the law itself – that has been a subject of disagreement itself.
Kurie Suditomo, a journalist from Tempo and a member of AJI, stated that AJI does not approve of the ITE law and demands a revision of the law. This is because there are some verses that are disadvantageous to journalist, in that they constrain freedom of expression.
The ITE law, although is intended to protect and to provide security for the public, has not served its purpose. Instead of providing a clear guide for the public, it causes misinterpretation and confusion. And, as seen in Luna’s case, it also creates disintegration among journalists – instead of unifying them.
On one hand, AJI and Dewan Pers do not support the infotainment journalist in suing Luna, and in using the verses of ITE law as the foundation of the lawsuit. But PWI supports that act, although they denied that they are the one reporting the case to the police.
Kurie also stated further that AJI’s decision to not support the infotainment journalist in Luna’s case reflects AJI’s stance on infotainment journalists in general. Until now there’s still a discussion as to whether or not infotainment journalists could be considered as journalist in the first place. Kurie said that if infotainment journalists want to be considered as journalist and to demand for their right to be supported by AJI, then they have to comply to the code of ethics for journalists. And this is one thing that they do not do. Or, perhaps, have not done yet?