September 3, 2012
Consider the contrasting treatment in the mainstream media of the two currently unfolding financial scandals. The first is the National Feedlot Corporation mess (“cow-gate”) that is now ensnaring the husband and family of Women’s Minister Shahrizat Jalil; it had also led to her resignation from her cabinet post. The other is the nearly half-a-million ringgit engagement party for Prime Minister Najib Razak’s daughter and an equally expensive birthday bash for himself that he allegedly tried to on to Treasury, and thus the taxpayers.
Both scandals were first exposed in the Internet through the diligent investigations of Rafizi Ramli, the chief strategist for Pakatan Rakyat. With the first scandal, the mainstream media were quick to pick up on and embellish the story; on the second, there was no mention at all. One can safely conclude that the respective primary players in both scandals, Shahrizat with the first and Najib for the second, are from different factions within UMNO. No marks for guessing which side is on the ascendance.
Rafizi is no rabble rouser throwing off wild accusations here and there. His first exposé of the “cow-gate” was initially dismissed by no less than the chief of police; today the principal player, Shahrizat’s husband, is charged with criminal breach of trust and she was caught in the ensuing wake.
With Rafizi’s track record, you would think that those investigative journalists in the mainstream media would be eager to pursue his leads. At the very least their curiosity should have been piqued. Thus for them to completely ignore the story of the alleged publicly-paid engagement and birthday parties meant that they are journalists only in name, and that they are told what to do.
In terms of monetary value, Najib’s birthday bash and his daughter’s engagement party, both totaling at about “just” half a million ringgit, are but a small change compared to the cow-gate’s RM250 million price tag; cow-gate in turn pales in comparison to the multibillion billion ringgit Port Kang Free Zone Development debacle or the “commission” paid on acquiring the second-hand French submarines that would not submerge.
While the price tag may vary, the underlying mindset of contempt for taxpayers’ money remains. To these leaders the concept of integrity or the diligent exercise of fiduciary responsibility is foreign. At best they are but slogans uttered during election campaigns and then conveniently ignored.
To be sure, this is not a weakness unique only unto Malaysian politicians. In some countries these wayward politicians are caught and brought to justice; in others, well, they continue on business as well, their greed feeding on itself. There is no limit to their avarice. Their “success” would then be celebrated, and they would then become the new role models. Unfortunately that is where Malaysia is today.
What struck me most about this latest scandal, the one involving Najib’s birthday party in particular, was the utter lack of class. Najib has made more than a few UMNOPutras rich through his giving away many lucrative contracts. Surely at least one of them would be generous or grateful enough to host the party for him.
Alas that is the problem with greed; there is literally no boundary to it. Najib’s many rich friends are still expecting to sponge off him! Likewise with Shahrizat’s husband; if he had spread the bounty around just a wee bit as, for example, to include the head of Utusan Malaysia, Bernama or The New Straits Times to be on the board of directors of his Feedlot Corporation, Rafizi’s accusation would never have gone beyond cyberspace.
Greedy and unscrupulous politicians alone would and could not do in Malaysia. It would take more. There would have to be a general failure of our institutions to allow such abuses and corruption to go on and be tolerated. Toleration soon degenerates into encouragement, and a new cultural norm is established.
This is what happens when the institutions of our society have been let to deteriorate. They are no longer able to function as effective defenders of citizens’ interests. We expect members of the fourth estate to be aware of their awesome responsibility to keep citizens informed. We expect these journalists to be on the vanguard of this sacred task. Alas they too have been taken in; they have prostituted themselves to those in power.
There is an honorable place in this world for cheerleaders, spinmeisters, or even court jesters and others who see themselves doing the bidding of those who hired them, but reporters and journalists they are not. If those in the mainstream media feel that they have to cari makan, then I suggest that they join the advertising and pubic relations industry. If they are talented enough in that endeavor there will get plenty of rewards. They do not need to soil and degrade the hallowed traditions and functions of the fourth estate.
This degradation of our mainstream media is of course not a recent phenomenon, nor is it a subtle. RTM has only a few hundred followers on its Twitter. As for The New Straits Times, if not for its highly subsidized distributions and subscriptions, its circulation would down in the dumps. And if not for the government-paid announcements and advertisements and paid press releases of government-linked corporations, so too would be the paper’s revenue.
Just as the shifts in fortune among the politically powerful are reflected in the coverage of the mainstream media, so too is the dysfunctional leadership among them. We saw this played out during the early days of barely-under-the-surface rivalry between Mahathir and his then deputy, Anwar Ibrahim. Their supporters take their cue from how their patrons were covered in the mainstream media. The New Straits Times rivaled Pravda in this regard. This was repeated when Abdullah Badawi took over; then it was Mahathir’s turn to be at the receiving end.
There is no honor among UMNO leaders. Theirs is a world of hyenas; a world of winner takes all, right to last bit of morsel of their prey. Mahathir did it to Tengku Razaleigh when the latter lost a closely contested leadership contest back in the 1980s. Mahathir did it again later, this time at a more vicious level, with Anwar Ibrahim. Then Abdullah Badawi tried to do it to Mahathir, and learned to regret it.
You would expect the women of UMNO to show some gentleness. Yet there was Shahrizat and Rafidah still at it with their cat fight, now more openly and much uglier.
There is plenty of blame to go around for the present pathetic state in Malaysia. Our callous acceptance of wrong doing among our leaders did not develop overnight. We have been taught, and taught well, to accept these misdeeds as anything but that, aided by those cheerleaders and spinmeisters in the mainstream media.

Let us hope someone from the NST or The Star can respond to this article. –Din Merican
Reblogged this on The right of reply and commented:
I can easily use this article and replace mainstream media with alternative media like TMI and BN with PR. The depth of logic of Bakri in this article is astoundingly low. The fact that he was selective in condemning mainstream media shows how partial he is. To most Malaysian free media is when they publish your view and censor contrarion views. They without conscience mix facts with their selective views to discolor the facts. Journalists including pro pr media are the same without exception. For example TMI went to town day in day out condemning BN’s deficit budget and huge handout as making our country bankrupt. But when PR does propose similar deficit budget and billion dollar hands out it suddenly becomes very commendable. We need ethical balance and objective media. We must educate public with US SPJ ethical standards. We ask MSM and AM to report truth and raw facts. We decide what to conclude.
____________
Ellese,
My advice to you is: Keep your eyes and ears to the ground. Listen to the voices of the poor and unemployed and you will know what is really happening. The feedback is not encouraging. –Din Merican
Din,
Perhaps, we ask ellese why there is a right of reply blog. Specifically, how this blog created by him comes along. I have many of my cookies missing all the time but never I had created another blog just for.
It’s time to ask ellese to stake his case Again. If you read between the lines, does he ever occur that he may imply you. I am all for freedom of speech & right of reply. Just as Lee Kuan Yew might have said, you don’t get away with by just throwing stones & thereafter hiding hands.
Ellese,
I know what you did in dr raffick’s blog & he has commented to you. You want me to bring dr raffick to testify. Again, happy spinning!
P.S I am looking forward to hishamh’s comments. He sounds natural with no pretension.
Assallammuallaikum, this article is like hitting a nail directly on the head. Straight to the point. Bravo. This is what is meant by Malaysia Boleh
Bakri Musa has said all that that has to be said to this topic.
Ellese, he/she, put your ears to the railway line and you’ll hear the train coming to putra jaya, it will be either loaded with PR or with the people who want justice and fairplay for the country.
Looes,
My position has been consistent for a number of years. I’ve condemned MSM and AM. I’ve called for fair balance and objective media. Why? Coz these media are pulling out countries apart with falsehood and lies and we have less common grounds.
I truly believe we need more common grounds and think a fair balance objective media reporting facts as they are without spinning selective views are imperative for our nation. But You have always objected to these views. To you free media are those which publish your views and censor contrarion views. I have called these views as nonsense.
Because of these you have on numerous occasions called for my views to be banned and censored. Your claim in that you believe in the right of reply is thus utterly shallow.
You can call dr rafik as much as you want. Every view I’ve stated I’ve defended with justifications not because I blindly follow it but because I believe in it. But because of blind partisanship you just cannot accept it.
Now you can see yourself what I wrote is similar to Hisham (though I think he is more erudite). For example I’ve written many times that the claim that we’re bankcrupt is not justifiable and hypocritical. Now Hisham has written an excellent but elementary write bluntly saying such bancruptcy claim is not justifiable and a myth. If you think hisham’s write as correct then in the first place dont you think you should not have objected to me and start demeaning my character?