Precedence: bulk Buletin PANTAU Edisi 3 (21 Mei-30 Mei 1999) PDI PERJUANGAN TREATED MOST UNFAIRLY Many TV stations still do not seem to appreciate that the visual images they show are an important part of the message they convey and that the use of such images must be just as balanced and fair as their verbal reporting. Indeed, the use of visual images can exert a great deal of influence on the way the audience interprets the narration and how they assess the source of the information. Also, the overall context in which images are shown can influence viewers. It seems that TV stations are either unaware of or ignoring the fact that what show on the screen can create different perceptions in viewers' minds. Here is a concrete example from the election coverage this week. Visual images of PDI-P having street rallies, parades and convoys were used in different ways by TV stations during news reporting. Some TV stations reported that during campaigning, traffic rules - such as bypassing traffic lights, riding motorbikes without wearing helmets and climbing on bus hoods - had been broken and that these violations were not penalised. While the coverage did not actually mention the names of the parties that had violated these rules, the visual images focused on PDI-P's convoys and parades blocking the streets. This clearly suggested that PDI-P was the party that was primarily responsible for these violations. However, another news item showed the Minister of Security and Defence, Indonesian Military Commander General Wiranto praising the parties' orderly campaigning, saying that each party had proved that it was responsible. During this item, the same visual images of PDI-P parade campaigning were shown, suggesting here that PDI-P is a party that can maintain order and peace during its campaigning. This indicates that even where the purpose is not necessarily to exercise bias either against or in favour of PDI-P, broadcasters need to pay more attention to the way in which visual images are used. On balance, however, our analysis indicates that there were more broadcasts projecting a negative image of PDI-P than those favouring it. As a result, overall PDI-P was disadvantaged by this election coverage. In particular, broadcasters focused more on the negative impact of PDI-P's parade campaigning rather than on the positive side of party parades. For example, when local observers of the parades, such as street vendors, were asked for their comments, only those complaining about the negative effect on business of the street parades were reported. Although these reports covered all parades, the visual images continued to depict PDI-P parades rather than those of other parties. Such reporting tends to cast PDI-P in a negative light. Another aspect of the negative coverage of PDI-P was the reporting on physical clash between Golkar and PDI-P supporters in Medan. The most frequently aired visual images were the ones about PDI-P's partisans throwing stones at Golkar's supporters and office buildings. In fact, however, Golkar partisans were also throwing stones at PDI-P supporters. This selective screening of certain visual images gave the impression that PDI-P was using illegitimate means to win the elections whereas in fact it was unclear who was responsible for initiating the violence. ---------- SiaR WEBSITE: http://apchr.murdoch.edu.au/minihub/siarlist/maillist.html
