Abstract
Environmental degradation is not only a product of human neglect of the physical environment, but is often the result of conflict between competing interests over scarce resources. Minority communities and the poor, who are affected by the conflict, are pushed to the margins. This commentary reflects on how the people affected by the rare earth project in Pahang, an eastern state in Peninsula Malaysia, are marginalised by the mainstream press.
Introduction
Environmental issues have featured prominently in the Malaysian media in the last two decades largely due to the environmental degradation 1 and depletion of both non-renewable and renewable natural resources (Sahabat Alam Malaysia n.d.). 2 Besides its impact on the national wealth, the breakdown of ecological balance affects the people and their daily lives, particularly communities living in the locales where development projects are taking place. 3
Since the early 1980s, the government of Mahathir Mohamed had implemented an array of privatization and economic liberalization policies to integrate the country into the global market economy. This provided a platform for announcing his Vision 2020 in 1991 under which Malaysia would become a fully developed country by 2020. This meant the country needed to maintain an economic growth rate of 7 per cent each year. Malaysia’s economy grew by about 9 per cent until 1997 when the Asian financial crisis led to the ringgit plummeting to a record low, foreign investors pulled out and the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange crashed.
The current government under Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak still holds the view that a fully mature democratic system can only materialize only after economic development is attained. 4 Ironically in the Malaysian context, economic progress has instead led to a concomitant increase of state power over economics and politics. Power has been concentrated in the hands of the Executive ever since Mahathir Mohamed came to power in 1981 (until 2003) who insisted that a strong government, with a two-thirds majority in parliament, was necessary for national development. In other words, instead of a more democratic egalitarian system being developed, political power is centred in the hands of the executive and their connected economic elite (Gomez 2004, p. 1).
This ties in well with Higgot et al’s (1985, p. 19) theory that in the second stage of modernization ‘political development came to be viewed as a process of creating political institutions able to solve specific problems pertaining to stability and regime maintenance rather than a reproduction of democracy’. In other words, as far as the Malaysian ruling elite is concerned, a strong government can provide stability for further economic growth. This not only increases the hegemony of the ruling elite but at the same time wards off the opposition’s attacks on the ruling elite’s economic development policies.
Throughout the 1980s and 90s, the government and their economic allies managed to assert control in many sectors of modern life (Gomez & Jomo 1997, p. 4). With the concentration of power, policies concerning development and economic progress that affect the environment such as development projects involving repossession of land for dam construction, timber logging, highway construction, mega shopping complexes, high rise luxury apartments are determined by the state with little or no debate in federal parliament or public notification of the development applications. 5
The adverse impacts on the livelihood and culture of the people are under-reported (Kua 2002, pp. 25–36). Often those who are affected are disadvantaged groups that have neither political nor economic power, nor recourse for their predicament. In particular, the Orang Asli (indigenous people of Malaysia), traditionally engaged in hunting and gathering and swidden cultivation, were adversely affected by this kind of development primarily because ‘the Malaysian government does not sufficiently recognize their land rights’ (Toshihiro 2009, p. 10). Furthermore, the Orang Asli have been left behind economically even though economic policies were drafted and projects implemented in the name of the Malays and other Indigenous peoples under the New Economic Policy (Idrus 2013, pp. 265–291).
The latest case in point is the setting up of a rare earth refinery plant by an Australian company, Lynas Corporation, in Pahang, an eastern state in Peninsular Malaysia. Lynas was initially granted a manufacturing licence in January 2008 to produce rare earth oxides and carbonates at the Gebeng Industrial Estate in Kuantan after it complied with the conditions prescribed by the Atomic Energy Licensing Act (1974). Rare earth metals are used in high-technology products such as smartphones, flat-screen television sets, hybrid cars and computers.
Awareness among Malaysians was initially raised by a New York Times report on 8 March 2011 regarding the Lynas project, headlined ‘Taking a Risk for Rare Earths’. Subsequently, despite widespread protests from the local communities and environmental groups the project was eventually approved by the state government (The Malaysian Insider 2012). Local communities were deprived of their rights to determine their lifestyle, culture and future—often to the point of having to face the uncertain health hazards of radioactive waste.
Environmental degradation is not only a product of human neglect of the physical environment, but is also often the result of a conflict between two or more competing interests over scarce resources. The conflict catches the media attention where the dominant parties usually get the limelight. The poor and the minorities who are the victims of the development projects are pushed to the margins (Anuar 1994, pp. 200–212). As Stuart Hall (1986, p. 9) observes:
Some things, people, events, relationships always get represented: always centre-stage, always in the position to define, to set the agenda, to establish the terms of the conversation. Some others sometimes get represented – but always at the margin, always responding to a question whose terms and conditions have been defined elsewhere: never ‘centred’. Still others are always ‘represented’ only by their eloquent absence, their silences: or refracted through the glance or the gaze of others.
Likewise, Ulrich Beck (cited in Lester 2010, p. 54) states the media are indeed central to ‘the circulation, contestation and interpretation of knowledge about environmental risk’.
Against this backdrop, this commentary reflects on the extent that the voices of the people affected by the rare earth project in Pahang were or were not fairly represented by Malaysia’s mainstream press. It concludes with some suggestions on how journalists can be better educated and trained to cover environmental issues.
The Malaysian Milieu
Consisting of Peninsular Malaysia, the east Malaysian states of Sabah and Sarawak, and the Federal Territory of Labuan Island, Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya, Malaysia covers a geographical area of approximately 330,000 square kilometres. Peninsular and East Malaysia are separated by about 450 kilometres of the South China Sea. Peninsular Malaysia, which spans over a land area of 132,000 square kilometres, borders with Thailand in the north and Singapore in the south. Sabah and Sarawak, on the other hand, share their frontiers with the Indonesian region of Kalimantan.
The country’s total population in 2010 was 28.3 million of which 91.8 per cent were Malaysian citizens and 8.2 per cent were non-citizens. Malaysian citizens consist of the ethnic groups of Bumiputera (67.4 per cent), Chinese (24.6 per cent), Indians (7.3 per cent) and Others (0.7 per cent). Among the Malaysian citizens, the Malays were the predominant ethnic group in Peninsular Malaysia which constituted 63.1 per cent. The Ibans constituted 30.3 per cent of the total citizens in Sarawak while Kadazan/Dusun made up 24.5 per cent in Sabah. The social category of ‘Bumiputera’ includes the neglected Orang Asli as well.
The country is governed by Barisan Nasional (BN), a coalition of 13 parties, but led by the dominant United Malays National Organisation (UMNO). The opposition at the federal level is helmed by a political alliance called Pakatan Rakyat (PR), which controls the state of Penang, Kelantan and Selangor.
Development, Media Freedom and the Malaysian State
The UN Declaration of the Right to Development (DRD 1986) defines development as a ‘comprehensive economic, social, cultural and political process, which aims at the constant improvement of the well-being of the entire population and of all individuals on the basis of their active, free and meaningful participation in development and in the fair distribution of benefits resulting therefrom’. 6
Active participation of the citizenry is crucial to the shaping of policies on national development that would benefit all and sundry—and not only a select few in society. Equally important, such participation would go a long way towards preventing the possibility of certain policies impacting negatively on certain sections of society.
The right to self-determination in the context of national development has also to be complemented by the citizens’ right, and freedom, to articulate their views in the public sphere. This provides them the opportunity to exercise their right to participate in the conversation or offer criticisms that collectively contribute to the general wellbeing of a society. This public discourse is crucial to the very notion of citizens taking part in decision-making process in a thriving participatory democracy (Anuar 2000, p. 97).
The role of the mass media is crucial in this context in providing a platform for public discourse, where citizens have easy and equal access to a free and responsible media. However, the mainstream media in Malaysia is more often a mouthpiece of the government than a representative of the people’s concerns.
Malaysia’s Federal Constitution grants fundamental rights, particularly in relation to freedom of expression, of association, and of assembly, which is provided for in Article 10 of the Constitution. However, at the same time Articles 10(2) (a), 10(4), 149 and 150 authorizes Parliament to impose certain restrictions on free speech if it deems necessary or expedient on grounds (Faruqi & Sankaran 1998, pp. 14–16) such as: security of the Federation (such laws as the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act, Official Secrets Act [OSA], Printing Presses and Publications Act [PPPA] and the Sedition Act come under this rubric); public order (Sedition Act, Police Act, PPPA, and Broadcasting Act.); morality (Film Censorship Act, PPPA, Finas Act, etc.); defamation; right to citizenship under Part III of the Constitution; status of the Malay language; position and privileges of the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak; prerogatives of the Malay Sultans and the Ruling Chiefs of Negeri Sembilan; and legislative action required by reason of emergency.
Such strong provisions only demonstrate that the Constitution ‘has been so devised as to give the government in Parliament virtually unfettered powers to do whatever it wishes to do to regulate speech, assembly and association’ (Faruqi & Sankaran 1998, pp. 14–16).
Specifically, the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA, amended 2012) is a principal law that governs and shapes the press industry. It provides power to the Minister of Home Affairs: the legal provision stipulates that he has the authority to grant, renew, and revoke printing licences and publishing permits. The choice to reject an application is also available to him although such rejection can now be contested in a court of law under the new amendment.
A major implication of the execution of the PPPA is that it is highly likely that a media organization that has invested so much money in high-tech printing machinery, huge manpower, sophisticated computerization system, would be extra cautious in exercising any semblance of investigative and socially responsible journalism simply because of the fear of permit revocation or suspension.
But the PPPA is not the only law that curtails press freedom and freedom of expression. The Sedition Act (1948) proscribes public comment on issues classified as sensitive, such as citizenship rights for non-Malays, the special position of ethnic Malays, and certain aspects of religion. Section 4 (1b) of the Sedition Act reads as follows:
Any person who utters seditious words shall be guilty of an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable for a first offence to a fine not exceeding RM5000 (about US$1600) or imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both, and for a subsequent offence, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
However, the Sedition Act has been used to stifle legitimate criticisms and dissent. For instance, Lim Guan Eng, former deputy secretary-general of opposition Democratic Action Party (DAP) and current Chief Minister of Penang (since 2008), was charged in early 1995 under the Sedition Act and the PPPA for ‘publicly criticising the government’s handling of the allegations of statutory rape against former Melaka Chief Minister Rahim Tamby Chik in 1994’ (SUARAM 1998, p. 225).
The Official Secrets Act (OSA, 1972) was amended in 1986 to broaden the definition of government documents and puts the burden on journalists to prove that the information sought is not official secret before it is published. This law also provides for a mandatory minimum one-year jail sentence on those found guilty of an offence under the OSA. Under this circumstance, very few journalists dare to practise investigative journalism.
The media-related laws are clearly designed to empower the state to largely rein in the media industry. But more than that, these laws shape the structure of media ownership in Malaysia and the involvement of the various component parties of the ruling coalition and their economic allies.
Media Prima is the largest media conglomerate in the country and has a large stake in the New Straits Times Press (NSTP)—which publishes the English-language newspapers New Straits Times, New Sunday Times, and the Malay-language newspapers Berita Harian, Berita Minggu, and Harian Metro. NSTP also owns the Sistem Televisyen Malaysia Bhd (popularly known as TV3), 8TV, TV9, and NTV7. This group, which is close to the dominant UMNO party, also owns the radio stations Hot.FM, OneFM and Fly.FM (The Edge 2005).
An investment arm of the BN component party Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA), Huaren Holdings owns the English-language The Star and Sunday Star; the Chinese-language dailies Nanyang Siang Pau and China Press; and the radio stations Red FM (English), 988 FM (Mandarin), and Suria FM (Malay). The company also publishes magazines, namely Kuntum, Shang Hai, and Galaxie.
Huaren Holdings acquired Nanyang Press Holdings Bhd., which publishes Nanyang Siang Pau and China Press, on 28 May 2001, which triggered vehement opposition from the Chinese community as a whole because this sale was perceived as ‘the final nail for press freedom in the country’ (SUARAM 2001, p. 90). In October 2006, the MCA sold off its share in Nanyang Press Holdings to Chinese media baron Tiong Hiew King (
The Utusan Melayu group, which is closely linked to UMNO, owns the Malay-language newspapers UtusanMalaysia, Mingguan Malaysia, Utusan Melayu Mingguan and tabloid Kosmo!. Apart from newspapers, the group also publishes magazines, namely Wanita, Mangga, Saji, Rias, URTV, Hai, Mastika, Harmoni, Al-Islam, Kawan, iSihat and Pemikir. The group also publishes books, both academic and popular (
Timber tycoon Tiong Hiew King, who owns Media Chinese International Limited, publishes the popular Sin Chew Daily, Nanyang Siang Pau and Guang Ming Daily, apart from having other media interests in Cambodia, Indonesia, and Papua New Guinea.
Another Sarawakian, timber tycoon Lau Hui Kang, was given permission by then prime minister Mahathir to operate the Chinese Oriental Daily as a way of checking the growing influence of Tiong in the Chinese community.
Another example of close ties between the state and the press is the media outfit Berjaya Media Berhad. Former Prime Minister Mahathir’s close allies Vincent Tan Chee Yioun owns The Sun, a free paper distributed in the Klang Valley and other urban centres in Malaysia via selected outlets, especially the convenience store 7-Eleven, the Malaysian franchise of which is owned by Berjaya Media Berhad.
Tamil newspaper Tamil Nesan is published by Indrani S. Vellu, the wife of the current president, Samy Vellu, of the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), a component party of the ruling BN. Another Tamil daily, Malaysia Nanban is also closely allied with the MIC (Ramanathan 1992, p. 11).
Murdock (1980, p. 57), commenting on the British media situation, argues that ‘proprietors and other capitalists do not need to intervene in newspaper production since the logic of the prevailing market structure ensures that by and large the output endorses rather than opposes their general interests.’ In the case of Malaysia, these ‘general interests’ of the mainstream media owners are firmly protected and promoted not only by market logic, but also by the fact that, unlike the British case, the proprietors are also members and/or friends of the ruling parties.
A Study of the Mainstream Press Coverage of the Lynas Project in Pahang, Malaysia
In this preliminary study, three mainstream newspapers—The Star, New Straits Times and Utusan Malaysia—were selected from April 2011 to March 2013 to ascertain the pattern of reporting on the Lynas issue. A total of 35 news items on the Lynas issue were identified and culled for scrutiny. Although the three mainstream newspapers did provide editorial space for the grouses, fears and concerns of the local communities and civil society groups in Kuantan, the assurances and public statements of the prime minister, his cabinet ministers, BN politicians and officials from the ministries concerned as well as of the Atomic Energy Licensing Board prevailed. Only 11.4 per cent of the news items selected provided space for protestors to express their grievances and concerns, while the rest were voices from the ruling politicians, government officials, Lynas leaders and experts, who predictably supported the project.
A sample of headlines of such ‘positive’ news items are: ‘Lynas plant one of the safest in the world, says White House energy adviser’ (The Star, 1 March 2013); ‘Lynas says committed to operating safely’ (The Star, 20 June 2012); ‘More job opportunities in Pahang, says MB’ (The Star, 24 August 2012); ‘Projek Lynas, kemenangan untuk rakyat Malaysia’ (Lynas Project, the triumph of the Malaysian people) (Utusan Malaysia, 18 Nov. 2012); and ‘Public safety our goal’ (New Straits Times, 24 April 2011). It is noteworthy that positive remarks from so-called experts were highlighted by the media as a significant indicator of an endorsement of the Lynas project. Furthermore, Lynas’ legal triumph was characterized, nay symbolized, as the ‘victory’ of the ordinary Malaysians, which is akin to saying that the refinery plant is a ‘national interest’.
The protests staged by local communities and civil society groups were painted by the mainstream newspapers as irksome activities. For instance, ‘300 hold protest over Lynas project’ (New Straits Times, 21 May 2011); ‘Protests as nuke panel meets reps’ (New Straits Times, 31 May 2011) and ‘Lynas sets start date for Malaysia rare earth output amid protests (The Star, 20 Nov. 2012).
The mainstream media gave scant attention to the larger context of, and historical background to, radioactive-related industry in Malaysia. Few of the mainstream newspapers alluded to similar protests by Malaysians and their concerns about the health hazards posed by the Asian Rare Earth factory in 1982 in Bukit Merah in the northern state of Perak.
The pattern of reportage on the Lynas project finds resonance with that of the Broga incinerator project and the Selangor dam project. The plights of the people affected by the development projects, as in the case of the villagers of Broga area and the Orang Asli in the vicinity of the Selangor River Dam, were neglected by the mainstream media that are affiliated with the ruling party. Given the nature of media ownership in Malaysia, the mainstream press generally had not been helpful in providing that much needed platform or space for discussions and dissent to emerge in the public domain. The views of the powers-that-be are foregrounded to the detriment of the marginalized in society.
Some Lessons for Journalism Education
The lopsided reportage of Lynas Corporation’s rare earth refinery project in Pahang raises some practical questions on how journalists could be better educated and trained to report on the impact of industrialization projects on the environment and the people. 7 This should start from the journalism programs offered in local universities. The School of Communication at Universiti Sains Malaysia in Penang, for example, places an importance on environmental journalism education. It offers a Master’s Programme in Science and Environmental Journalism where students are exposed to the rudiments of environmental reporting, media-related laws and ethics and environmental issues. 8
However, there are challenges to the teaching of environmental journalism in Malaysia. The main challenge is accessibility to information about controversial development projects. Here, the restrictive Official Secrets Act (OSA, 1972) comes to mind. The OSA empowers the government to classify documents as ‘secret’, hence criminalizing attempts to communicate any information contained in them. For instance, a hill slope that is cut for a housing project and which has caused a major landslide would require a journalist to gain access to documents pertaining to such a development scheme from the authorities concerned. The OSA poses an obstacle to such investigative journalism.
This is why the push for a Freedom of Information law, as already initiated by the state governments of Selangor and Penang in the Federation of Malaysia, requires full support not only from civil society groups and concerned Malaysians, but also academics and students in the field of communication and journalism so that such legislation would eventually be introduced, and implemented in the country. For the time being, journalism students should be encouraged to gain access to information that is made available by the two states as a way of familiarising themselves with and appreciating the benefits derived from a Freedom of Information enactment.
Given the realities of how the mainstream media in Malaysia and elsewhere have fallen short of fairly and accurately reporting on the impact of environmental projects on the people, it is imperative that journalism students be exposed to critical theories of society so that they could view the media within the larger social context in order for them to make, subsequently, the necessary connections, such as linking journalism to the political economy of the media, power and class relations, gender and ethnicity. With a stronger foundation in looking at the bigger picture, students would be better equipped to ask probing questions and investigate into the ramifications of environmental issues.
At the very least, journalism students, who are provided with the bigger picture, would be well poised to manoeuvre in a society where there are vested interests linked to national development that, as a result of these entrenched interests, may not be sustainable at all. In other words, journalism graduates would go out into ‘the world’ not with their eyes closed but with a better understanding of their own society.
Students should be educated on the importance of getting information from not only ‘official sources’ but also from the margins of society where issues of environment, self-determination and social justice matter most. Searching for a range of sources is one way of attempting to be fair, ethical and responsible in one’s journalism. Although the online media do try to be fair in its reporting, its limited resources and obstacles imposed by the government (such as barring them from official functions) make them appear supportive of the opposition. 9 This, of course, does not deny the fact that a few of the online publications are also guilty of unethical journalism in their desire to help champion the cause of the opposition. For instance, in the case of the Lynas project, the Free Malaysia Today (FMT) was found to have carried reports that had credibility gaps (The Star 2012).
An introduction to environmental journalism, however, has to be approached in a holistic manner so that students are alerted to the social forces at work that directly or indirectly are responsible for the eventual destruction of nature, and the welfare and livelihood of the people. In this regard, it is imperative that journalism educators, on their part, be attentive to the important issues of human dignity, human rights, development and social justice so that journalism would be informed by these social concerns. By doing so, the educators would more likely be able to demonstrate to their students that journalism is more than just a career; it is a vocation that bears heavy social responsibility.
Furthermore, journalism students need to have a passion for the environment or, more specifically, the protection of, and love for, the environment. As a starting point, they could be alerted to the fact that, for instance, the food chain can eventually affect the survival of the human species and future generations. Water pollution in the sea can poison, for example, the fish that we eat. Or, radioactive wastes, as posed by the Lynas project, if not administered properly, may find their way into the soil, nearby rivers and the sea where there is hitherto thriving marine life.
As for the journalism educators, their awareness about the environment can be further enhanced by organizing workshops where environmental journalists have the opportunity to interact with the educators as well as students. In this way, lived experiences of the journalists, as well as environmental issues of the day can be shared actively with the academics. Additionally, seminars and conferences can be held to enable journalism educators and academics from the sciences to share knowledge arising from their collaborative and trans-disciplinary research. Arising from such interaction with practising journalists and editors, journalism students may have better access to the media in terms of having their reportage of the environment, which forms part of their academic requirement, published.
It is also useful for the students to be exposed to concepts of human rights and self-determination so that they can appreciate the necessity to provide a voice for the marginalized where people with vested interests are always in a relentless pursuit of profits and capital accumulation at the expense of the welfare of the ordinary people. This academic exposure is crucial especially in a social context where democracy is fragile and certain aspects of human rights are often trampled upon. The social sciences in many Malaysian universities do provide an exposure to issues of human rights and development, and therefore communication departments ought to tap on the available expertise.
Armed with such academic and professional training as well as heightened awareness of human rights and democracy, students of journalism can make a necessary difference in a world fractured by competing interests and abused by escalating environmental negligence and degradation.