KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 29 (Bernama) — We are living in a period overwhelmed by media. If in those days we only had the theatres and televisions as the main media outlet, now we have satellite TV and Internet, and right on our palms the iPod, mobile phone, video games and the list goes on.
With the availability of diverse media contraptions, many have taken for granted that it is their absolute right that their thoughts, all conveyed in creative manner, should not be intruded or filtered.
They insist that their views and their so-called work of art should reach the general public that is diverse in its cultural and religious outlook.
In looking further into this hypocrisy, we have to be clear that there is a distinction between `free to think’ and `freedom to preach the thoughts’. Samuel Johnson (m. 1784) had drawn the line between `liberty of thinking’ with `liberty of talking’ or `liberty of preaching’.
As there is no way of knowing what is in the heart and mind of others, thus it is subliminally acknowledged that there is `freedom’ for individuals to think as they liked.
Yet, definitely there exists no absolute freedom for one to preach his mind if the views and ideologies go against the societal virtues or norms.
VIEWS OPPOSSED TO VIRTUES SHOULD BE AVOIDED
Thus any view that contradicts the norms of a state that is further recognised by religion should be avoided at all expense including through the enforcement of laws.
In my opinion, our society is obliged to accept good advice. The term `advice’ in the language of al-Qur’an refers to “synchronising the differences to improve something” (mula’amatun bayna shay’ayn wa islahun lahuma).
Malaysia’s plural society won’t forge ahead if the thoughts are no more than to extol, or to be precise to `apple polish’.
On the contrary, we are in need of good views so that we can choose the best among them to ensure the well being of society.
Allah has reminded us in surah al-Asr that “man is actually at the losing end; except for the pious ones and those of good character, advising one another to remain loyal to Truth, and advising one another on the virtues of patience.”
Within such framework, we have to consider differing views that may cause ramifications but that does not necessarily mean that we have to take a divergent path in the tree of life or go against the universally accepted views.
In fact looking at the underlying principles of community living, we Malaysians are one when comes to the Rukun Negara principle as stated in the Federal Constitution.
Mankind’s actions in this world are the result of the views on life that they subscribe to. If only we can manage properly our views and thinking, then we will be able to manage our actions and deeds in upholding public order, peace and the principles of democracy.
Therefore, any teaching that goes against peace has definitely gone beyond the limits of truth and betrays the loyalty to the nation and the rule of law.
MUST THREAD CAREFULLY REGARDING PERSONAL VIEWS
We also have to be on alert as there are prejudiced groups with personal views that are spiteful and imbued with desirous wants. There are also groups that have preference for tainted media content, including pornography.
Concurrently, the media programmes that play up emotions, like reality TV entertainment programmes that capitalises on the roller-coaster emotions to keep viewers glued are the easiest for the producers to make. And these are the programmes that easily make into the prime-time slots and more easily imitated by viewers.
“As a methodical and organised state, we are highly dependent on the creativity of media that stimulates the spirit, strengthens the mind and renews wisdom, and not those that ruin emotions, weaken the desire or cause one to lose hope.
The freedom of expression through media is akin to a dangerous sharp sword. The one holding the sword should handle it with care. If the sharp sword is used recklessly, it will end up destroying our race and society.
In my view, the freedom of expression must be seen within the context of the benefit for religion, laws, custom and tradition, and the real knowledge. The problem is that many of the smarter one among us choose to distort to the extent the bad appears good and vice versa.
“Maybe they have reached the point of betraying or even rising against the government, yet in reality in the long term they also contribute to the deterioration of the society.”
To the extent some of the expressions are actually brilliant work of art to make the message appear general and the meaning hidden; yet the hidden meaning deviates for the acceptable norms.
Lack of clarity and the certainty of content in media programmes are the ones that make laws and regulations indiscernible especially regarding production and media broadcast
Lack of clarity and certainty too makes legal laws appear personal and subjective, that represents the personal views of the relevant minister.
At times, lack of clarity and certainty like this are the ones that make laws look weak, as there are some who are of the view that they can manipulate the laws to escape from penalty and societal rules.
TOO FEW GOOD PEOPLE
Unfortunately, there are too few humans who exude orderly behaviour and can be entrusted with the freedom of expression notion.
As long as we don’t show our maturity in making use of the freedom that we are enjoying, then it’s only proper that we limit ourselves within the societal laws.
Another important question that we should consider together is to what extent we can allow work or art that encourages violation, obscenities, slander/libel, incitement, misrepresentation, nonsense, betrayal, violence, cruelty, dishonesty and intentional insult to other religions?
This is where the government shoulders a heavy responsibility.
However, at the same time, there shouldn’t be any unnecessary legal restriction that is seen to ridicule the people’s ability to decide wisely on the pros and cons of any matter.
An independent and sovereign government should decide wisely the creative thoughts that are destructive and those useful for nation building.
The government must also decide on the right time to allow boundless expression and to what extent, and to whom this freedom to disseminate opposing views to a plural society should be entrusted with.
The government must be wise in appointing officers to be entrusted with the task of filtering the media; that is, to reject and discard and prevent anything bad from being broadcast.
The role of the filtering body is more to establish order and correcting the decorum and not just to filter and cut. We have to understand that many of the media content, regardless they are good or bad, more or less reflect the existing norms of the society that produces the media content.
While we can’t force someone to change his/her personal views, we have the responsibility to ensure that no dangerous outlook is disseminated to the society.
(The writer is a Senior Fellow / Director of Economic and Social Studies Centre, Institute of Islamic Understanding (IKIM).
(Note : This article was translated by BERNAMA)