Page 19 - SCANDAL AND DEMOCRACY

4 Introduction

in the latter half of the twentieth century, militaries in developing societies tended
to be vehicles for the establishment of, or reversion to, authoritarianism. Yet when
atavistic forces are so entrenched that the inevitable tendency is toward reversal, the
primary concern is not who has the power to lead a return to authoritarian rule, but
rather who has the means and motivation to resist. Those who do are often identified
as reformists, democratic actors, or simply democrats. They might include journalists
as well as students, intellectuals, nongovernmental organizations, opposition political
parties, or even members of the military. Among these many actors, however, mem-
bers of the news media are uniquely positioned to counter the forces of reversal and
further democratic consolidation. Such was the case in Indonesia, although there the
synergy between media actors and civil society has been, and likely will continue to
be, the critical force in deciding democracy’s future.

Democratization and the Media
From the earliest democratization scholarship, there has been general agreement
that freedom of the press, or the media more broadly, is necessary to building a mod-
ern democracy, primarily through promoting government accountability and serving
as a key vehicle in citizens’ communication of political preferences. Much of this older
literature, however, tends to treat such freedom in the binary terms of presence versus
absence. In the 1990s, scholars began examining the media as a more dynamic force
but generally focused on their role in regime change.
10
While this book addresses the media’s influence in Suharto’s downfall, its empha-
sis is on the critical consolidation phase during democratization. In this second phase,
the main concern is not the cessation of authoritarian rule but rather the reversibility
of democratization and challenges in building democratic institutions. Numerous
11
scholars have examined the post-1999 wave of democratization. Many of these have
focused on the conditions conducive to media support for democratization. Some have
taken a primarily empirical approach, and others have been predominantly prescrip-
tive, outlining what news outlets should do to strengthen democracy while critiquing
media failings in specific political contexts. By contrast, this volume examines what
12
media outlets actually do, or are inherently inclined to do, that helps ward off reversal
in practice.

The News Media’s Unique Role

In their diurnal responsibilities, members of the media differ little from other
professionals. But the news outlets they serve stand apart from other sectors, in part
because the services they provide are distinctive. In producing and disseminating
news and commentary on public aff airs, they are the only sector whose primary job is
to observe, record, and analyze the actions of other players and so inform the public.
Media actors in democracies may not cut deals and form coalitions to the same extent
as others, but individually and collectively, intentionally and haphazardly, they shape
the environment in which other actors make decisions and forge alliances, aff ecting in
multiple ways the calculations of contending forces. Moreover, simply by reporting on
key players and unfolding events, the media help impose transparency on both, alert-
ing the public to developments aff ecting power relations and general welfare.
But as Indonesia’s democratic transition illustrates, in shaping this decision-
making environment, the media’s most critical function may be their contribution