Introduction to the Banning of Malaysian Insider

Discuss about the Media, Politics and Political Citizen.

Malaysian Insider is a popular news website of Malaysia that was ranked as one of the most popular website in Malaysia. On 25 February 2016, the Malaysian communications and multimedia commission banned the Malaysian insider for the security purpose. The opposition opposed the ban of Malaysian insider. However, the company had to shut down due to loss in finance. The ban of the website led to the shutting down of website. The government was responsible for the blocking the website and the reason were due to preserving the security of the nation (Gov’t blocks The Malaysian Insider, 2016). According to the experts, the reason provided by Malaysian communications and multimedia commission for banning the website was vague. The reason for banning the news channel was that the site was found breaking the law and rules and regulations. The site was also blocked for the security purpose, to maintain peace and harmony and stability in the country. The site was blocked to preserve the culture of the country and safeguard the norms and practices in Malaysia. The media and news channel was said to be involved in publishing and broadcasting the content that would create confusion and unwarranted situation in the country (Kasim & Sani, 2016).

The government of Malaysia was greatly criticized for this act , as the government had no valid reason and content for blocking the website. The government was criticized  for blocking the website juts after the case of prime minister. The government was criticized for blocking the website due to mere reason for publishing reports against Prime Minister Najib Razak. Censorship is a concept of banning a particular site that contains something unhealthy that creates confusion in the country. Censorship is the suppression of freedom of speech or public communication. Malaysian communications and multimedia commission was charged under sections 233 and 263 (2) to deny public access on the Malaysian Insider for not providing the proper reasons for banning the website and  suppressing the freedom of speech of the media (Hopkins, 2014).

Both the government and the media have power and one can affect the other. The government banned when the media was involved in broadcasting news against the prime minister of Malaysia that is Najib Razak the website. Public confusion cannot be counted in offense as anything can cause confusion. The government feels that the media should not be given freedom and should be restricted. Parties in the ruling coalition, Barisan National, control the local media in Malaysia that are tightly controlled (Weiss, 2012). The issue was raised for the misutilization of political freedom and abuse of the power. The government has affected the position of BN in the state controls the media and communication in Malaysia (Ngui, 2016). Due to the limitations put by the government, the media in Malaysia is not able to put forth the viewpoint of its supporters. The critics argue that the government banned Malaysian insider to silently control the opposition of Prime minister. However, according to the government and the media communications the reason for banning the website was to maintain peace and stability in the nation. The two perspectives differed due to the control that the government had on media and politics (O’shaughnessy & Stadler, 2012).

Government’s Control over Media in Malaysia

The government himself was involved in corruption and the main reason for banning media was due to political corruption and broadcasting controversial articles against government. Malaysian insider was supporting the view of people. However, as soon as it published an article against government the media communication banned the website that ultimately led to the shutting of the website. The role of media in society is to raise the issues and problems that people face. For example, various issues regarding the economy and such as terrorism, the media publish corruption and others. The role of social media is to bring about change in the society by raising the issues and views of people (Couldry, 2012).

The Malaysian human rights raised concern for the banning of social media news site by the Malaysian government as it suppressed the freedom of speech. The prime minister of Malaysia was charged in case of corruption for entering millions of dollars in his personal bank account. Social media published an article due to which it was banned by government. This was the main reason for the concern by the organizations as freedom of speech was suppressed (Beng & ahmad, 2015). Australia is country that supports journalism and media and hence it supports freedom of speech. Politicians use social media for its own interest to fulfill its demand. This can be seen from the example of prime minister of Malaysia that used the social media for its own interest. Public sphere is the area where the people can discuss the problem freely in an open forum. Public sphere is the area of discussion that is used to analyze the societal problems. Public sphere is often connected with media, as it is a platform that can be used to discuss problems (Sani et al., 2016).

In case of Malaysia, the media is not concerned as public sphere as they are not given freedom of speech. Censorship is a growing problem and issue in Malaysia. The country has the one of the strictest censorship where if the sites is said to be violating any rule they are censored and banned.  The news portal was said to publish an article relating to 1 Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) that was a case against the Prime Minister Najib Razak (Ali, 2016). United States and the human rights were concerned about the media crackdown in Malaysia. An alternative named as Malaysian outsider was published to create a mirror site. The reason for banning of website the charge of corruption of the prime minister of Najib published in the website (Rao, 2013).  

Impact of Social Media on Political Space

Media in Malaysia is controlled by the political parties for the security reasons and is regulated by the government. The government censors the content that is not good for the nation. The political parties and the government in Malaysia also control the newspapers and news channels. The journals are biased in Malaysia due to the control by the government. The government criticizes the freedom of press that is done by threatening for reduction in employment opportunities and giving other opportunities to the family members of journalists (Rao, 2013). The newspaper only broadcasts news in favor of the political parties while refusing the advertisements of the opposition. The media in Malaysia is not for the people but for the government. According to the government this is done for the security purposes to maintain peace and stability. However, the main reason to enhance the political power and stay superior in the country. The government for its own security and interest uses media (Sani et al., 2016).

Internet and social media has expanded the political space in Malaysia due to the control of the government. The government to suppress the media and the freedom of speech uses censorship. Hence, the media in Malaysia is used for the interest of government and not the people. The Malaysian case demonstrates that although the Internet and social media have significantly expanded the political space, it has not prevented governments around the globe from attempting to, and sometimes succeeding in, controlling this space. With the advancement of technology, the way of media control has changed in the world. The internet based media is more widely used that gives larger opportunity for people to voice their opinion in the public sphere. The internet has allowed people to be engaged with the state on a larger scale. Internet does not only allow in engaging with state but it also allows to redistribute power and control among a wider range of entrants and to decentralize debate (Castells, 2015).

The social media has to face many challenges and has both pros and cons. The advantages of using social media are as follows:

• Social media helps in increased criminal prosecution and track criminal that are foolish enough to brag about the crimes online.
• Social networking helps in creating new social connections that is helpful for career and friendship.
• Internet help in accessing information and gain knowledge that is helping the student do better in school.
• Social media can be used as source of employment where job recruiters can take advantage when looking for right people or employee.

The disadvantages of social media are as follows:

Social media has outdated the news, papers, printing and pint media that is hampering the industry and employees.

Social media often misguides people by publishing false news and information.

Spending too much time on social media and networking waste time and results in lower productivity and lower grade of students. People only spend time on internet and not sports.

Advantages of Using Social Media

Social media leads to a less face to face conversation and communication.

Government controls media for its benefit and interest as well as for security purpose. The government and the political parties in few states and not all states control the media. Government in China and Malaysia manly controls it. This is done to increase the political space and power and to exert control over citizens. It is also done to suppress the power of opposition and put a barrier from new entrants (Tufekci & Wilson, 2012). The government controls media for the following reasons:

• The government is responsible to let the teenagers and youth grow in a healthy environment. The youth is a group of people that is most likely to get affected by media and the information that is broadcasted. Hence, in order to let the teenagers grow in healthy environment the government controls media because of the misuse (Bode et al., 2014).
• Government controls media for security purpose. Internet and social media has led to an increase in crime rate. Media is used by criminals to harms others. Hence, it is essential to protect the citizens by controlling the media.
• Media plays a role to supervise the government for the society. Some critics argue that the government uses and controls media for its benefit. The citizens and the public might be cheated if government controls media. If the government controls the media, the opposition is not allowed to broadcast their opinion, which can be harmful to society. In case of Malaysia, government had banned news channel for broadcasting news against the prime minister of Malaysia. Malaysian insider a news channel had broadcasted the news of corruption and money being transferred into the personal account that outraged the government. Hence, the government had banned the news channel because the media is in control of government and political parties in Malaysia (Loader et al., 2014).

It is essential to control the media by the government if it is used for the right purpose and for the benefit of citizens. Government control of media has both pros and cons. The government should not use media for its own purpose and interest but for the citizens and the public. However in many states where media is controlled by government freedom of speech if often suppressed and is used for proliferation of virtual politics.

The emergence of social media has changed the way people share information and communicates with people. Social media and internet helps in making the politics more democratic as it gives people freedom of speech and voice opinions for or against the government. The impact of social media has both contrasting views on transforming the political space. Some say that with the emergence of social media and internet the political process has become more democratic while some say that there is no proper evidence in this regard.  The changes in the political space in the Middle east countries in the year 2010 is seen as result of use of internet and social media that was known as Facebook revolution. The government and political parties to exert their control and power over the citizens and normal people use internet and social media (Juris, 2012). The use of internet and social media has changed the political space into more democratic process that is bound to shape future political expectations and decisions. The internet and social media has attracted interest of many social activists, policy makers and developers of organization to use it as a forum for exchange. The advent of internet and social media has changed political process from authoritarian style to democratic style. Authoritarian governments and political space use social media for its own interest and exert censorship on various news and films that violates the rules and regulation (Bennett & Segerberg, 2013).  

Disadvantages of Using Social Media

Internet and social media gives freedom to people to voice their opinion. It also includes lager amount of people that has changed the political process from authoritarian style to democratic style. Internet and social media allows in better understanding of political framework and process and the political culture that has significant impact on thinking of people. Social media helps in providing a platform for discussion of information and ideas where people are given freedom to voice their opinion against any political party.  The people to communicate with the state and government and put forth the queries and problems that they face use media. Social media has great role to play in political processes particularly with respect to democracies. Media has not only helped the citizens in voicing their opinion but has also helped the political parties and the government in spreading the message and information to larger citizens (Im et al., 2014).  

The government and political parties can use internet and social media for a good purpose as well. Government can know the problem the individuals and citizens face in the nation through internet and social media and then act accordingly. Technologies and social media have changed the political process from the authoritarian type of government to the democratic type of government. Media and internet transformed the political process into a more transparent process (Tang & Iyengar, 2013).

Despite the growth of social media and internet government all over the world has maintained an ability o exert influence over political space. The main reason for doing so is to control the power of citizens and oppositions. Government uses social media to reach to larger section of society and provide a public sphere where the citizens can communicate with the government. Governments have exerted some control over media in order to safeguard the security of nation and citizens. The main power of social media is in supporting civil society and public sphere (Thompson, 2013). The rise of mass media has broadened the concept of public sphere. Public sphere is a platform that is used to discuss and put forth the views by the public. Internet and social media has changed the political process from the authoritarian type of government to more democratic and transparent. It has become easy for the state to connect with the citizens and put forth its arguments (Lasswell & Kaplan, 2013).

Apart from Malaysia, it is the Chinese governed that controls media through censorship. Media of china mainly consists of television, newspaper, magazines and radio. Internet is also used as a media for communication process. All these components and factors are placed under the supervision of the government and political parties in china. Until the year 1989, the state and the government controlled almost all the media in china (Donald et al., 2014). With the economic reform came an emergence of private and independent media that was for the Chinese citizens. Strict regulations are put by the government on the censorship off the media and internet in china just like Malaysia. This is done for the security purpose. Despite of the monitoring of media by government in China the competitor is increasing for media with diversified content and increase in reporting. The media is transforming more into a commercial market in China despite the regulation by the government (Xu, 2014).

Government’s Control over Media and Proliferation of Virtual Politics

References

Ali, A. M. (2016). 1MDB: The Background. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 5(4), 133-141.

Beng, l. Y., & ahmad, m. (2015). Liberalisation of the Malaysian Media and Politics: New media, Strategies and Contestations. Media Watch, 296.

Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2013). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Cambridge University Press.

Bode, L., Vraga, E. K., Borah, P., & Shah, D. V. (2014). A new space for political behavior: Political social networking and its democratic consequences. Journal of Computerâ€ÂMediated Communication, 19(3), 414-429.

Castells, M. (2015). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age. John Wiley & Sons.

Couldry, N. (2012). Media, society, world: Social theory and digital media practice. Polity.

Donald, S. H., Hong, Y., & Keane, M. (2014). Media in China: Consumption, content and crisis. Routledge.

Gov’t blocks The Malaysian Insider. (2016). Malaysiakini. Retrieved 26 September 2016, from https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/331711

Hopkins, J. (2014). Cybertroopers and tea parties: government use of the Internet in Malaysia. Asian Journal of Communication, 24(1), 5-24.

Im, T., Cho, W., Porumbescu, G., & Park, J. (2014). Internet, trust in government, and citizen compliance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(3), 741-763.

Juris, J. S. (2012). Reflections on# Occupy Everywhere: Social media, public space, and emerging logics of aggregation. American Ethnologist,39(2), 259-279.

Kasim, A., & Sani, M. A. M. (2016). The 2013 general elections in Malaysia: An analysis of online news portals. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences,37(2), 119-125.

Lasswell, H. D., & Kaplan, A. (2013). Power and society: A framework for political inquiry. Transaction Publishers.

Loader, B. D., Vromen, A., & Xenos, M. A. (2014). The networked young citizen: social media, political participation and civic engagement.Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 143-150.

Ngui, Y. (2016). Malaysian Insider to Close After Government Blocked It Following 1MDB Coverage. WSJ. Retrieved 26 September 2016, from https://www.wsj.com/articles/malaysian-insider-news-site-closing-1457942708

O’shaughnessy, M., & Stadler, J. (2012). Media and society. Oxford University Press.

Rao, A. (2013). Film Censorship and Its Relevance in Modern Malaysia.Researchers World, 4(4), 42.

Sani, M. A. M., Ahmad, M. Z., & Wahid, R. (2016). Freedom of the Internet in Malaysia. The Social Sciences, 11(7), 1343-1349.

Tang, W., & Iyengar, S. (Eds.). (2013). Political Communication in China: Convergence Or Divergence Between the Media and Political System?. Routledge.

Thompson, J. B. (2013). Political scandal: Power and visability in the media age. John Wiley & Sons.

Tufekci, Z., & Wilson, C. (2012). Social media and the decision to participate in political protest: Observations from Tahrir Square. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 363-379.

Weiss, M. L. (2012). Politics in cyberspace: New media in Malaysia. Berlin: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.

Xu, B. (2014). Media censorship in China. Council on Foreign Relations, 25.