Ismira Lutfia – The frenzied media circus that sprang up around uploaded Internet sex videos that seem to star three local celebrities has prompted a debate over what should be considered public or private when it comes to sexuality, and the media's role in reporting on the issue.
Press watchdogs have lambasted the media for failing to draw a line between the two, and for failing to understand who are the real victims in the case of the so-called Peterporn videos.
At a discussion on Wednesday organized by Indonesia Media Watch, former journalist and media analyst Veven Wardhana said that the majority of print and broadcast media outlets failed to see that the leaking of these home videos constitute a breech of privacy that should be the central issue in the case.
"The media has failed to educate the public on what should be considered public and private," he added.
At the event, renowned filmmaker Nia Dinata said in a written statement read out by Mariana Amirudin, executive director of Jurnal Perempuan, urging the media to "get out of the private domain."
"Local media is still unable to distinguish between public and private. Their interests are driven purely by ratings and profit, which has caused them to consistently fail to live up to their main role as watchdogs for social and welfare issues," Nia said.
Veven said the moral condemnation heaped onto the three celebrities – singer Nazriel "Ariel" Irham, celebrity Luna Maya and TV star Cut Tari – by much of the public is hypocritical.
He stressed that what the celebrities allegedly did when recording the videos was done in private and never meant for public consumptio n.
"It should be obvious that, legally, the only people who should be charged are those who leaked the videos, not the video makers themselves," he said.
Gay-rights activist and Indonesia Media Watch cofounder Hartoyo said that only a handful of media outlets reported sensibly on the sexually-charged case; the vast majority did not, in particular popular TV "infotainment" gossip shows.
Panelist Andy Budiman, head of ethics and professionalism at the Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI), said his group has long denounced such shows as lurid tabloid journalism, despite the fact that the majority of viewers in Indonesia seem to believe they are sources of real information.
"They regularly violate the journalistic code of ethics," Andy said. "And now TV news programs are adopting the same characteristics. The media should educate their audience about the issues, rather than focusing on judging an individual's morality," Veven said.
Andy said it was pointless to apply moral standards in such cases, pointing out that "standards of moral conduct are relative, so no consensus could ever be reached."
"That's why moral values can never be used as a yardstick," he said, adding that a modern, enlightened society would instead refer to prevailing legislation for a public consensus on morality.
"The media should decide whether this issue is an infringement of the law or not, instead of prying into an individual's morality," Andy said.
Indonesian Broadcasting Commission official Idy Muzayyad agreed, saying that moral judgements are always open to varying interpretations.
He said some boundaries, though not explicitly delineated, were dictated by common sense, such as "in the context of broadcasting, where airing snippets of the sex videos must be considered a breach of the norms."
"Reporting on this issue is of course a broadcaster's right, but it's regrettable that most media outlets chose to air clips from the videos, making it a trial by the press," Idy said.
Press freedom, he went on, has become the go-to excuse when reporting on almost anything. He called on media organizations to keep in mind that with freedom comes responsibility, especially with regard to selecting subject matter.
"It would be preferable to avoid reporting on issues that agitate the public, or to find an angle that makes the issue less provocative," Idy said.