EngageMedia Blog

Apakah Profesi Wartawan Aman di Indonesia?

oleh EM News Nov 16, 2017
Apakah penggunaan Whatsapp adalah langkah aman bagi wartawan untuk memberikan pertanyaan tambahan pada seorang narasumber? Adakah aplikasi alternatif lain yang lebih aman? Apakah bekerja dengan resiko membahayakan bisa dikatakan normal bagi para wartawan? Amankah jika para wartawan dibiarkan berbagi komputer di kantor redaksi mereka? Pertanyaan-pertanyaan ini muncul dalam dua periode wawancara dengan sejumlah wartawan di Indonesia sebagai bagian dari riset oleh EngageMedia mengenai keamanan digital wartawan.

Apakah Profesi Wartawan Aman di Indonesia?

Oleh Yerry Borang and Egbert Wits

Sebelumnya di tahun 2017, kami bekerja sama dengan Citizen Lab, untuk berdiskusi dengan wartawan-wartawan dari Papua, Aceh, dan Jawa Tengah untuk mendalami masalah terkini mengenai keamanan bekerja sebagai wartawan. Enam belas wartawan kami wawancarai, kami fokus pada persoalan keamanan digital dan bagaimana wartawan menggunakan teknologi (dengan aman). Selain di Indonesia, riset ini juga kami jalankan di Filipina.

Meskipun jumlah situs yang membantu kualitas keamanan pekerjaan kita sudah bertambah, namun ada diskusi yang terlewatkan, yakni mengenai pro dan kontra dari keamanan digital bagi wartawan, serta tentang berbagai kendala keamanan digital yang mereka hadapi di era cepatnya arus informasi dan instant deadline. Kami berharap bahwa hasil riset yang kami sebarkan ini dapat berkontribusi bagi diskusi ini. Mari kita mulai dengan menelaan latar belakang Pendidikan para wartawan.

Pendidikan Jurnalisme

10 dari 16 wartawan yang kami wawancarai memiliki latar belakang Pendidikan di program studi jurnalisme. Mereka mendapatkan materi perkuliahan seputar keselamatan fisik dalam proses peliputan, namun materi mengenai keamanan digital sepenuhnya absen. “Tidak ada perhatian sama sekali terhadap keamanan digital selama saya mengecap Pendidikan jurnalisme” (Jakarta no. 2). Ketika menelaah program-program studi jurnalisme di beberapa universitas di Jawa [1] hari ini, kami tidak menemukan satupun institusi yang memiliki materi ajar mengenai keamanan digital atau keselamatan wartawan. Ketika job training, mungkin? Sayangnya juga tidak. Tak satupun perwakilan pihak media yang kami wawancarai mengatakan bahwa mereka memberikan pelatihan esktra mengenai isu keselamaan dan keamanan. Pengetahuan yang beredar mengenai keamanan digital sunggguh minimal dan pengetahuan itu diperoleh biasanya dari diskusi sesama wartawan. Umumnya, para wartawan mulai mempelajari atau mencari informasi tentang keamanan digital dan keamanan kerja setelah mereka merasa terancam, dilecehkan, atau pengalaman negatif lain akibat dari pekerjaan jurnalistik mereka.

Minimnya pelatihan mengenai keamanan online dan offline adalah fakta yang mengkhawatirkan mengingat kondisi keselamatan wartawan di Indonesia ada dalam kondisi genting. Human Rights Watch melaporkan [2] bahwa angka kekerasan terhadap wartawan meningkat. Aliansi Jurnalis Independen (AJI), sebuah lembaga swadaya masyarakat bagi para wartawan, melaporkan bahwa ada 78 insiden kekerasan terhadap wartawan pada tahun 2006 [3], termasuk dilakukan oleh aparat keamanan.  Sebuah peningkatan tajam dibandingkan dengan 42 insiden di tahun 2015, dan 40 di tahun 2014. AJI menemukan bahwa hanya sedikit dari 78 pelaku kekerasan yang berhasil diadili. Jadi, meskipun sudah ada beberapa produk hukum [4] yang melindungi profesi wartawan, akses pada keadilan masihlah sulit diraih.

Smartphones

Semua wartawan yang terlibat dalam riset kami sangat bergantung pada smartphone untuk berkomunikasi dan merekam wawancara. Nomor kontak narasumber juga disimpan di sana. Grup percakapan Whatsapp adalah sumber informasi penting karena menjadi tempat berbagi informasi yang efektif. Hanya tiga dari enam belas wartawan percaya bahwa data dalam telepon genggam mereka akan aman juga digunakan dengan benar. Metode keamanan seperti encrypted messaging tidak diketahui secara luas, meskipun umumnya para wartawan sadar bahwa informasi sensitif lebih baik tidak disirkulasikan melalui aplikasi mobile chat atau SMS. “Pesan penting lebih baik tidak dikirim lewat SMS. Agar aman.” (Papua no. 1)

Ironisnya, umumnya para wartawan sadar bahwa keamanan gadget mereka rentan karena mudah diakses oleh orang lain ataupun diretas oleh pihak yang ingin menginvestigasi data yang mereka miliki. Namun, tidak banyak yang mereka lakukan untuk mencegahnya, dan mereka hanya bisa berharap yang terbaik: “Saya hanya berharap bahwa menggunakan Whatsapp akan aman-aman saja, Saya menggunakannya karena tidak ada alternatif lain” (Jakarta no. 2). Wartawan lain mencoba lebih waspada: “Kami harus lebih mawas diri dalam menggunakan aplikasi dan peralatan digital” (Jakarta no. 7). Tapi umumnya para wartawan tidak begitu peduli. Hanya enam dari enam belas mengatakan “Ya” ketika ditanya apakah mereka berprasangka bahwa keamanan data digital maupun keselamatan fisik mereka mudah terancam sehubungan dengan pekerjaan jurnalistik mereka, kurangnya langkah pencegahan ini begitu mengejutkan. Hampir semuanya menganggap situasi yang sebetulnya berbahaya ini sebagai hal yang biasa saja.

Memisahkan yang Personal dari yang Profesional

Sebelas dari enam belas wartawan menggunakan nomor pribadi dan atau akun sosial media mereka dipakai untuk rutinitas pekerjaan sebagai wartawan. Meskipun banyak yang berpendapat bahwa lebih baik memisahkan akun dan nomor telepon pribadi dengan akun dan nomor untuk bekerja, berbagai alasan membuat mereka tidak mengindahkan prinsip ini. Kenyamanan, seringnya bekerja di luar jam kerja, kedekatan sesama wartawan, dan peralatan kantor yang tidak menunjang menjadi alasan bagi penggunaan nomor dan akun pribadi untuk urusan pekerjaan.

Sehubungan dengan ketidakmampuan wartawan untuk memisahkan akun dan nomor pribadi dan profesional, beberapa wartawan terpaksa harus menonaktifkan akun sosial media mereka, bahkan ada yang menghapusnya. “Saya sudah menghapus semua akun media sosial saya. Sudah tidak punya akun Twitter lagi, begitu juga dengan Facebook dan Instagram. Biar aman saja.” (Jakarta No. 5). Para wartawan juga menyebutkan bahwa mereka sering menjadi korban bully atau menerima ancaman melalui akun sosial media mereka. Juga, detil informasi pribadi mengenai wartawan (anggota keluarga, alamat, dan tempat nongkrong favorit, dsb) dengan mudah ditemui secara online. Sebuah pertanyaan besar apakah kondisi ini bisa ditangani, mengingat nama dan identitas wartawan sering muncul seiring terbitnya artikel mereka di Indonesia. Lewat pencarian sederhana di Google saja, informasi pribadi kita bisa terkumpul dengan mudah.

Keamanan Data

Hanya lima dari enam belas wartawan menyebutkan bahwa perusahaan mereka menerapkan kebijakan yang spesifik mengenai penggunaan perangkat lunak, administrasi online, dan penyimpanan data. Detilnya, hal ini berarti soal penamaan file (pengarsipan dan penyimpanan database) dan perekaman kata kunci yang digunakan untuk menerbitkan artikel. Sebagian besar wartawan menggunakan laptop, smartphone, dan kartu SD pribadi atau peralatan pribadi lain untuk menyimpan data. Hampir semua responden menggunakan perangkat lunak data online (Google Drive atau Dropbox) untuk menyimpan back up data mereka.

Mengenai keamanan data, komentar ini sangat penting: “sebaik apapun kami mengamankan data dalam perangkat elektronik, tetap akan ada orang-orang yang mampu meretasnya” (Jakarta no. 10). Wartawan terlihat memahami adanya bahaya, namun mereka merasa hanya sedikit yang bisa mereka lakukan untuk menanganinya. Para wartawan sudah terlalu terbiasa dengan menyimpan data dalam smartphone pribadi mereka, dan kurangnya alternatif sistem pengamanan, adalah kesepakatan para responden tentang perilaku mereka dengan data digital. Tak satupun perusahaan media tempat para wartawan bekerja membuat aturan ketat mengenai keamanan digital, berbagi komputer di ruang redaksi dipandang sebagai aktivitas yang dianggap wajar. Bahkan kata kunci untuk mengakses komputer tersebar, untuk berjaga-jaga jikalau ada masalah dengan computer atau jika file tertentu butuh diakses wartawan lain. Kesimpulannya, keamanan penyimpanan data tidak dipertimbangkan sebagai sebuah isu penting.

Jakarta vs Daerah

Ada perbandingan yang kontras antara paktik kewartawan di Ibukota Indonesia, Jakarta, dengan di kawasan-kawasan lain Indonesia. Wartawan-wartawan di Jakarta merasa diri mereka lebih aman dalam menjalankan praktik kewartawanan, sedangkan wartawan-wartawan dari kawasan lain, atau yang biasa disebut “daerah”, merasakan lebih banyak bahaya yang mengancam mereka. “Bekerja di luar Jakarta itu masih bahaya. Teman saya wartawan di sana sering menerima terror. Tapi di Jakarta, kami masih cukup aman” (Jakarta no. 3). Ancaman paling bahaya yang mereka sebut datang dari penguasa lokal. Misalnya, pelaku industri lokal, orang pemerintahan lokal, pebisnis lokal yang bekerja di bidang ekstraksi sumber daya alam, dan kelompok-kelompok ekstrimis lokal.

Kami berpendapat bahwa kondisi kontas antara praktik kewartawanan di Jakarta dan kawasan lainnya utamanya dikarenakan oleh perbedaan level akses internet dan akses masyarakat pada informasi. Sebagai tambahan, berbagai kejadian di Jakarta dengan cepat menjelma menjadi isu nasional. Tetapi di “daerah”, karena penetrasi internet lemah dan akses pada informasi lebih sulit. Yang terjadi di level lokal, tetap menjadi lokal; memberikan kesempatan bagi aktor-aktor lokal lebih bebas untuk berkuasa.

Perangkat Lunak Ilegal

Membuat wartawan-wartawan di Indonesia untuk menggunakan perangkat lunak yang legal sungguh merupakan tantangan besar. Hampir semua wartawan menggunakan bajakan, artinya mereka tidak mendapatkan up-date sistem keamanan, dan proteksi dari live malware juga tidak up date.

Kesempatan

Selain menyediakan perangkat lunak asli, pimpinan media juga harus menyediakan pendampingan lebih kepada wartawan. Kelompok diskusi bulanan untuk mendiskusikan dan menginvestigasi isu-isu keamanan digital bisa menjadi solusi. Juga, ada beberapa kursus mengenai perangkat lunak dan internet di luar sana, tapi jika pimpinan media tidak mendorong wartawannya untuk meningkatkan level keamanan data mereka, keadaan tidak akan berubah.

Kesimpulan

Kesimpulan dari mewawancarai para wartawan Indonesia adalah, para wartawan menganggap isu keamanan digital dengan santai. Ditambah dengan adanya persepsi bahwa tidak banyak yang bisa mereka lakukan untuk memperbaiki keadaan, membuat situasi menjadi lebih buruk. Sangatlah penting bagi para wartawan untuk mau lebih memahami bahwa lemahnya keamanan digital bisa berdampak buruk. Bukan hanya bagi wartawannya sendiri, namun juga bagi narasumber, keluarga, pemilik media dan publik pada umumnya.


1 Diantaranya, kami meninjau UGM (Yogyakarta), Unpad (Bandung), UI (Jakarta). Ini link sebuah kurikulum dari program studi ilmu komunikasi, Universitas Atma Jaya (Jakarta).

2 Baca:https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/04/25/indonesia-journalists-under-assault

3 Angka ini hanya menghitung kekerasan yang dialami oleh wartawan “professional”. Banyak lagi kasus yang tidak dilaporkan di mana korbannya adalah jurnalis warga atau wartawan freelance.

4 Contohnya: pasal 28 UUD 1945 menyatakan bahwa negara melindungi kebebasan berpendapat dan berekspresi. Sumber hukum perlindungan terdapat wartawan juga terdapat pada Undang-undang HAM, UU No. 39 (1999), Undang-undang pers UU No. 40 (1999), dan Undang-undang Penyiaran.

Persepsi tentang Keamanan dan Keselamatan Profesi Wartawan di Filipina

oleh EM News Nov 16, 2017

Persepsi tentang Keamanan dan Keselamatan Profesi Wartawan di Filipina

Oleh EngageMedia

Filipina secara konsisten selalu masuk di puncak daftar negara-negara paling berbahaya bagi profesi wartawan dan pelaku media. International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), misalnya, mendudukan Filipina sebagai negara paling berbahaya kedua di dunia bagi wartawan. [1]

Menurut Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), 77 wartawan telah terbunuh di Filipina sejak 1992, 75 wartawan dibunuh, dan 68 kasus berakhir dengan impunitas. [2]. Centre for Media Responsibility and Freedoms (CMFR) mengelola sebuah database tentang pembunuhan wartawan di Filipina sejak 1986. Database itu melaporkan adanya 151 upaya pembunuhan sejak 1986 [3] yang mengancam 68 wartawan radio dan 58 wartawan cetak [4]. 57 persen pembunuhan terjadi di wilayah Mindanao, Filipina Selatan.

Kasus impunitas yang paling menonjol dalam pembunuhan wartawan di Filipina adalah kejadian pembantaian di Ampatuan (atau pembantaian Mindanao) di mana 58 orang terbunuh, 32 diantaranya wartawan, pada 23 November 2009. Sampai 5 Januari 2016, 113 dari 197 orang yang menjadi tersangka pembantaian telah ditangkap tapi proses pengadilan masih berlangsung dan terkesan dihambat dan diperlambat [5].

Untuk mengeksplorasi topik ini, dari Juni hingga Juli 2016, berbagai wawancara dengan sejumlah wartawan kami lakukan di Filipina untuk memahami bagaimana persepsi mereka mengenai keamanan dan keselamatan kerja jurnalisme di sana, serta bagaimana strategi mereka untuk menjaga keselamatan.

Tentang Responden

  • Para wartawan yang kami wawancarai adalah campuran antara wartawan tetap dan paruh waktu. Sepuluh wartawan tetap berasal dari beragam perusahaan media, satu seorang pemandu acara televisi, dan tiga wartawan paruh waktu yang secara reguler mengirimkan berita baik kepada media mainstream maupun independen.
  • Ada tujuh wartawan yang bekerja untuk media online, dan empat wartawan bekerja untuk stasiun radio, hampir semuanya mempunyai pengalaman bekerja untuk media cetak, penyiaran, video dan kantor berita radio.
  • Para responden termasuk wartawan-wartawan yang sudah berpengalaman. Enam responden pernah bekerja sebagai wartawan selama sepuluh sampai enam belas tahun, empat responden sudah bekerja lebih dari dua puluh tahun, dan hanya empat wartawan yang menjadi wartawan kurang dari sepuluh tahun.
  • Hampir semua responden menjelajahi ruang peliputan yang sangat luas, di dalam maupun di luar Filipina. Dua puluh wartawan menguasai area liputan Manila dan kawasan ibukota (National Capital Region); enam responden menguasai area liputan Filipina tengah – Visayas (Bacolod, Iloilo, Tacloban); dan tiga responden memiliki area liputan Mindanao. Tiga dari responden juga memiliki area liputan di luar Filipina.
  • Tema peliputan para responden juga sangat bervariasi. Enam diantaranya fokus pada politik (pemilihan umum, pemerintahan, pemerintahan lokal, dan hukum); enam lainnya fokus pada bidang hak azasi manusia (hak buruh, hak masyarakat adat, hak perempuan, dan hak anak-anak); lima responden fokus pada isu perdamaian dan penanganan konflik, lebih spesifiknya isu negosiasi Bangsamoro dan National Democratic Front (NDF) dengan pemerintah Filipina.

 

Narasumber Utama dan Cara Berkomunikasi dengan Mereka

Semua responden sepakat mengenai pentingnya mendapatkan narasumber langsung dari tangan pertama. Beberapa responden menyebutkan bahwa mereka menggunakan sosial media untuk mendapatkan akses ke narasumber-narasumber utama dalam proses peliputan.

Para responden juga sepakat bahwa mendapatkan dan menjaga akses ke sumber utama butuh kerja keras dan ketekunan.

Semua responden memilih untuk mengontak narasumber secara langsung: wawancara tatap muka. Namun, adakalanya keamanan untuk kedua belah pihak yakni narasumber dan wartawan terancam. Dalam kondisi ini, mereka memilih untuk berkomunikasi lewat telepon atau SMS. Selain itu, mereka menggunakan sosial media (pesan pribadi di Facebook atau direct message di Twitter) untuk menginiasi kontak dengan narasumber, atau untuk membuat janji pertemuan.

Semua responden menggunakan beragam cara dan beragam perangkat untuk menyimpan informasi yang mereka kumpulkan dari narasumber mereka. Tak satupun yang dari mereka menggunakan perangkat enkripsi (encryption tools).

Salah satu tantangan yang ada di Filipina adalah, menurut beberapa responden, minimnya peredaran informasi terpercaya di ruang publik (open data) dan sulitnya mendapatkan data statistik dan informasi lain dari pemerintah. Memiliki kontak dengan orang-orang di dalam instansi-instansi pemerintah menjadi sangat penting, meski tidak selamanya bisa terwujud.

Seorang responden berkata: “Biasanya kami bergelut dengan sulitnya mengakses kantor-kantor pemerintah. Tak ada yang lebih sulit daripada itu. Untuk mendapatkan dokumen pemerintah, terkadang kita malah meminta ke organisasi lain. Contoh dari penolakan dari pemerintah, misalnya, Saya ingat bahwa Noynoy Aquino menolak peliputan media sewaktu inagurasi. Kamu butuh kesabaran yang sangat besar bekerja di sini. Saya pernah diminta untuk menunggu enam jam untuk wawancara lima belas menit. Kamu harus ngotot dan mengerjakan apapun yang kamu bisa, dan harus selalu menelpon dan mengingatkan mereka.”

Ada tantangan yang berbeda bagi wartawan yang meliput area di luar kawasan urban di Filipina. Seorang responden mengatakan: “… Jika kamu wartawan dari daerah pinggiran dan kamu ingin mendapatkan informasi resmi dari pemerintah pusat, kamu harus pergi ke pusat kota. Kadang-kadang, meskipun ada kejadian di daerah, dan kami membutuhkan pernyataan dari pemerintah, media-media di pusatlah yang pertama-tama mendapatkan pernyataan resmi. Sudah menjadi norma juga bahwa pemerintah membagikan informasi ke media yang mereka suka. Hal ini juga berlaku bagi pihak kepolisian dan militer, mereka ingin informasi yang disebar selalu merujuk pada pernyataan resmi dari kantor, dan itu selalu datang dari pusat. Sangat sulit bagi kami di daerah untuk mendapatkan akses informasi resmi, oleh karenanya kami memperbesar akses kami ke komunitas akar rumput. Banyak juga agensi-agensi yang tidak memiliki cabang di level provinsi. Kamu butuh waktu untuk mengakeses mereka, kalau kamu ingin menekan mereka agar meluangkan waktu, kamu butuh kolega di kota untuk membantumu. Jika kamu ingin mendapatkan pernyataan dari Commission of Human Rights, mereka tidak punya cabang di provinsi, jadi kita harus menggunakan koneksi kita untuk menjangkau mereka. Namun meskipun kamu bisa menjangkau mereka, sulit juga untuk mendapatkan kepercayaan mereka, berhubung mereka tidak kenal kita. Jika kita mencoba untuk mencari informasi di dalam situs mereka, karena mereka seharusnya menyediakan informasi di sana, kamu juga tidak akan mendapat apa-apa.”

Persepsi tentang Keselamatan dan Strategi Mitigasi

Ketika diajukan pertanyaan mengenai ancaman-ancaman apa yang mereka hadapi dalam pekerjaan, para wartawan memberikan jawaban yang bervariasi:

  • Keselamatan fisik adalah yang utama. Tidak mengejutkan, mengingat Filipina selalu masuk ke dalam daftar negara-negara di mana wartawan bisa terancam nyawanya.
  • Seorang responden mengatakan bahwa kantor medianya pernah diretas.
  • Beberapa mengatakan pernah diprovokasi, diawasi, dan diancam.

Beberapa responden mendapatkan pelatihan mengenai keselamatan dari institusi dimana mereka bekerja, jadi mereka memiliki kesadaran akan resiko ancaman bahaya dan menguasai sedikit kemampuan taktik mitigasi. Teknik mitigasi itu berguna untuk melindungi keselamatan fisik maupun data digital. Antar wartawan biasanya saling membagi taktik ini.

Salah seorang responden mengatakan: “Saya mencoba, meskipun sulit, untuk setidaknya mengganti kata kunci akun-akun media sosial secara rutin. Menggunakan kata kunci yang berbeda untuk tiap akun. Sistem keamanan akun yang berlapis juga itu sangat membantu – verifikasi akun lewat telepon, lewat email, semuanya sangat berguna. Saya tidak nyaman membiarkan laptop saya terbuka ketika ada di ruang publik. Karena dokumen pekerjaan kita ada di sana, bahkan akun personal kita juga di sana. Sudah banyak terjadi insiden ketika data wartawan diretas, dan data itu dipublikasikan di akun Facebook sang peretas. Bagi saya, hal itu sangat tragis. Meskipun tidak disengaja, seperti karena telepon genggam kita dicuri, hilangnya perangkat penunjang profesi kita adalah masalah besar baik untuk karir professional maupun kehidupan personal kita. Seperti jika foto pribadi kita tersebar, iya kan? Kenapa kita harus membiarkan seseorang punya akses itu melakukan itu?”

Saya pikir kita juga harus berhati-hati dalam mengklik tautan. Misalnya jika kita mendapatkan email dari situs pihak ketiga, dulu saya membuka tautan itu tanpa curiga, sekarang saya tidak pernah membukanya lagi. Pasalnya, saya sekarang lebih familiar dengan spam….dan bagaimana melalui ini sejumlah hal bisa tercuri.”

Responden lain fokus pada taktik keselamatan fisik: “jika meliput ke area yang rawan bahaya, kita harus datang bersama teman. Contohnya di Hacienda Luisita, kami harus selalu membawa kawan dan tidak menginap di sana. Kami harus pulang sebelum gelap. Kami juga harus selalu mengabari teman atau keluarga melalui pesan singkat seperti “kami sudah sampai di area liputan” atau “kami sudah kembali dengan selamat.”

Ketika ditanya tentang persepsi mereka mengenai resiko bekerja sebagai wartawan, sebagian besar responden menjelaskan meningkatnya resiko dari pengawasan di dunia online. Hampir semuanya merasa yakin bahwa mereka tengah diawasi secara online. Resiko di dunia online yang mereka hadapi termasuk: agensi berita mereka diretas, diterimanya pesan-pesan provokatif yang membangkitkan emosi (troll), akun atau website dibekukan karena laporan yang masif dari pihak tertentu setelah mereka menerbitkan berita yang tidak menguntungkan pemerintahan, terakhir adalah di-bully di dunia maya.

Semua responden mengerti bahwa pekerjaan mereka mengandung resiko yang besar. Seorang responden mengajukan pendapat mengenai bagaimana menghadapi berbagai tantangan bagi keselamatan wartawan: “Kami harus mendapatkan pelatihan lagi untuk lebih waspada dan hati-hati. Enkripsi—meskipun kamu butuh kompetensi untuk menguasainya. Namun, dengan berbagai kesulitan yang harus kami hadapi untuk menerbitkan berita, saya merasa belajar tentang enkripsi menjadi tidak relevan. Mengapa saya harus mengembangkan kemampuan untuk menyembunyikan informasi ketika sudah menjadi tugas saya untuk membagi informasi? Itu paradoksnya. Pastikan saja kita berhati-hati dengan informasi yang kita dapat dan yang kita publikasikan. Selama semuanya untuk kepentingan umum.”

 

Kesimpulan

Wawancara di tahun 2016 ini berguna sebagai informasi dasar mengenai bagaimana wartawan memandang keamanan dan keselamatan di dunia maya. Tapi itu wawancara setahun lalu. Iklim politik dan situasi di Filipina kini telah berubah drastis. Begitu juga dengan dunia sosial media, perilaku masyarakat, dan dalam takaran tertentu budaya juga mengalami perubahan. Akan sangat menarik untuk mengeksplorasi pengalaman responden yang sama mengenai keamanan dan keselamatan profesi wartawan di Filipina tahun 2017 ini, mungkin dengan jumlah sampel yang lebih besar.

Berbicara mengenai keamanan dan keselamatan wartawan, aspek digital biasanya luput dalam pembahasan atau tak terjamah sama sekali – yang bisa diartikan sebagai celah dalam pemahaman penuh kita mengenai resiko pekerjaan wartawan. Dari wawancara yang sudah diselenggarakan, kami belajar bahwa wartawan sudah menyadari akan resiko dibobolnya data digital kita, namun mereka belum sepenuhnya menyadari hubungan yang jelas antara berkomunikasi online dan keselamatan fisik wartawan. Hubungan ini harus dieksplorasi lebih jauh.

Sebagai sebuah organisasi yang menyediakan pelatihan keamanan digital, riset ini telah membuka beberapa pencerahan yang akan sangat berguna bagi pembuatan materi workshop bagi para wartawan. Spesifiknya, yakni:

  • Meyakinkan bahwa hubungan antara resiko dalam komunikasi digital dan resiko fisik akan dibuat jelas dan itu semua berdasarkan pengalaman aktual para wartawan.
  • Membuat sistem keamanan digital senyaman mungkin, mengingat sistem ini akan dikesampingkan ketika wartawan sudah fokus pada berita yang mereka buat dan pekerjaan kewartawanan lain.
  • Pelatihan mengenai keamanan digital fokus pada mengamankan komunikasi dengan narasumber dan mengamankan arsip-arsip wartawan.

 


    [1] “PH adalah negara paling bahaya kedua bagi wartawan -IFJ” Philippine Daily Inquirer, http://globalnation.inquirer.net/135916/ph-2nd-most-dangerous-country-for-journalists-in-past-25-years-ifj

    [2] Committee to Protect Journalists: https://cpj.org/asia/philippines/

    [3] Database CMFR tentang pembunuhan wartawan di Filipina http://cmfr-phil.org/mediakillings/charts.php

    [4] Database CMFR tentang pembunuhan wartawan di Filipina (by medium) http://cmfr-phil.org/mediakillings/charts.php

    [5] “No justice yet for victims of Maguindanao carnage”' Philippine Daily Inquirer, http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/752535/no-justice-yet-for-victims-of-maguindanao-carnage

    EngageMedia Presents Results and Opens up the Dialogue on Digital Security

    oleh EM News Nov 02, 2017

    Dozens of people from Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI) gathered in Jakarta on 24th-25th September 2017 to discuss about journalism and security. In recent years, concern for journalist’s safety, especially in the digital sphere, has become an urgent need. Journalists with many different backgrounds in Indonesia felt the internet poses new threats to them, especially through intensified surveillance and the usage of internet for negative purposes. They are complaining that formal laws do not defend them online. The organizer from the headquarters of AJI Indonesia, had invited over twenty branches of AJI, from cities in Sumatera, Sulawesi, Kalimantan, Maluku and Java to come together in Jakarta in order to formulate and share some of problems they are facing.

    During this event EngageMedia presented research findings regarding the (online) safety and digital security of journalists in Indonesia. We focused on Jakarta, but also shared some more general research results from the Indonesia based research and the research from Philippines. Executive Director of AJI Indonesia, Suwarjono and General Secretary Arfi Bambani Amri were among those participating.

    In our presentation we included a first draft of the short video we are developing for this research.

    Some questions that come up from the journalists:

    • What kind of threats are out there, are we talking only digital threats?
    • How to protect sources, how to safely communicate with them?
    • What kind of chat apps for smartphone are safe for you and your colleagues?
    • How to secure data? Is google drive safe enough to store sensitive materials?
    • How much law or State protection for journalists is there regarding digital threats?
    • How can Media companies help journalists to protect themselves? What kind of capacity building do they need?

    Results of our discussion and answers to some of the above questions:

    • We tried to explain that we may need to build a stronger security culture. We should not  depend on certain types technology and apps only, but also consider non tech aspect of digital security.
    • An approach to digital threat need to be more holistic. We know from experiences that tackling just a few aspects of a (digital) threat is not enough. Things are much more intertwined than we think at first.
    • Journalist need to do more research themselves. There are already many resources online, even in Indonesian (Bahasa Indonesia).
    • There are many individual experiences and best practices on how journalist can protect themselves. These need to be shared.
    • Don’t share sensitive materials that can be dangerous to yourself and others on the internet.
    • Journalist should be more careful using social media. They need to know precisely what type of information can be shared through social media.
    • Journalists associations and organization can pioneer workshops around security in general and journalist’s digital security more particularly.

     

    One thing for sure was journalists need more assistance and skill to defence their self and privacy. This can be overcome if they get more help from internal and external actors. On this occasion, some AJI journalists already ask for more techical detail assistance and this something that we also suggested that every journalist institution or even media company need to hold and build their own security procedure and standards.

    COCONET: Southeast Asia Digital Rights Camp

    oleh EM News Sep 18, 2017


    EngageMedia, the Association for Progressive Communications (APC), and the Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA) along with key regional allies, will be hosting COCONET, a Southeast Asia Digital Rights camp.

    COCONET, named after the coconut plant that is widely grown and used in the Southeast Asian region, also means Connecting Communities & Networks as it aims to enhance regional networking, and to build collaborations with organisations that can help expand and popularise digital rights issues. We hope to connect members of the digital rights community to media and technology-makers, as well as to grassroots digital activists, as a way to expand the social reach, and social movements, engaged with digital rights issues.

    EngageMedia, APC, and SEAPA have brought together a regional consortium to co-design and host the camp. This consortium includes SafeNet (Indonesia), Empower (Malaysia), Thai Netizen Network, Witness, Myanmar ICT Development Organization, and the Cambodia Center for Human Rights.

    The Camp

    EngageMedia has previously organised six similar camps: four in Indonesia, one in Malaysia and one in Myanmar. These camps focused on bringing together video-makers and technologists and resulted in both short-term and ongoing networks, as well as innumerable post-event collaborations. The camps range from three to seven days and are set in a remote location where participants quickly move out of their comfort zones, and develop trust and relationships with their co-campers. You can read about the most recent camp in Myanmar here.

    The camps are organised using a participatory methodology to generate ownership over the process, content and outcomes, and to encourage everyone to take responsibility for the event's success.

    Who can participate?

    Please note that this camp is specifically targeted to people from Southeast Asian countries (Brunei, Cambodia, East Timor, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam), but we're also open to participants from other countries in the Asia-Pacific.

    We're looking for the following kinds of people to join us:

    • Internet Rights advocates
    • Activists (those who are working with grassroots communities' issues and are using online platforms)
    • Techies (who are aware of political issues of technology and are interested in embedding themselves in social movements)
    • Media Makers (creative content creators who advocate social change – journalists, bloggers, video-makers, photographers, theatre practioners, painters, etc.)

    Collaborators

    Funders

    Mozilla Sida

    TFDInternews logo

    COCONET: Call for Applications

    oleh EM News Nov 07, 2017

    Coconet Logo

    When: 22-26 October 2017
    Where: Bali or Yogyakarta, Indonesia
    Deadline: 10 August 2017

    EngageMedia, the Association for Progressive Communications (APC), and the Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA), are pleased to announce a call for applications to COCONET: Southeast Asia Digital Rights Camp.

    COCONET (Connecting Communities & Networks) aims to enhance regional networking, popularise digital rights issues, and expand digital rights campaigns and movements by connecting policy advocates, researchers, digital campaigners, media-makers, and technologists.

    COCONET is a peer-based event where everyone will participate: bringing knowledge, experiences, and skills to share.

    A full description of the event can be read here.

    Who can participate?

    We're looking to gather 75-100 participants for the camp. Whilst Southeast Asia (Brunei, Cambodia, East Timor, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam), is the key target, the event is also open to participants from other parts of Asia and the Pacific. Please note that scholarship support will prioritise applicants from Southeast Asia.

    The following are highly encouraged to apply:

    • Activists working with grassroots communities with strong experience in using digital platforms
    • Activist technologists, open source advocates and digital security trainers
    • Internet Rights policy advocates
    • Researchers and academics
    • Social change media-makers including film-makers, journalists, bloggers, photographers, designers, and artists.

    Applications are now closed.

    Featured Filmmaker: Jason Soo

    oleh EM News Nov 07, 2017
    We interview Jason Soo, a filmmaker from Singapore whose work highlights activists and activism over the course of its history.


    1. Tell us who you are as a filmmaker and how you began your career as one. What first attracted you to work with documentary film?

    I studied visual arts but cinema is my first love, so to speak. Then it also became clear to me that in Singapore, art remains a relatively elitist activity, while cinema is the mass medium of choice. I try not to make a distinction between fiction and documentary. A documentary film is a fictional construct. And there’s as much truth in fiction films as in documentaries. You could also say that truth is an effect of fabrication.

    2. Can you tell us about some of your more notable films?

    The film I’m currently working on has a 54-minute version that was awarded Best Southeast Asian Feature at Freedom Film Festival back in 2015. It’s based on the arrests of 22 people by Singapore’s Internal Security Department in 1987. The detainees were accused of being involved in a Marxist conspiracy, physically and psychologically tortured, and then coerced into making public confessions.

    3. Which would you say is your favorite, among the films you've made? What is the background to its story?

    It’s not exactly a favorite, as you’ll see why, but back in 2014, I was asked to make a short film to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the May 13th, 1954 student movement in Singapore. On May 13, about 1,000 middle school students had gathered at the foot of Fort Canning Hill. They were there to support a student delegation that was calling for a postponement of compulsory military conscription. The student delegation was scheduled to meet with the British governor at the Istana (Presidential Palace) nearby. Unfortunately, riot police was called in and around 30 students were injured.

    However, the short film dramatizes not the events of May 13, but the subsequent student occupation of Chinese High School a few weeks later in June. In these three extraordinary weeks, the students not only took over the school but organized themselves for communal living. To do this, they set up groups and committees to take charge of matters such as academic studies, recreation, art, food, laundry, sanitation, medicine, security, public relations, etc.

    The student occupation exemplifies to me the collective spirit of the May 13 generation. The events of May and June 1954 went on to serve as a catalyst for the anti-colonial struggle that ultimately set Singapore on its road to independence. That such an unprecedented historical episode has been falsified or whitewashed from our school textbooks is a travesty.

    I have to say though, that the short film was hastily made in the space of two months and, in my opinion, does not express adequately the complexities of that period. But it’s such an important event that I plan to turn it into a feature film in future.

    4. What have you learned through the process of making films?

    What I’ll like to say here is a quote from Sokurov’s Moscow Elegy: “It's cinema that makes use of you, not vice versa. I think one's got to learn how to serve film, not to be its victim. It makes use of you, not vice versa.”

    5. What are the challenges for you working in Singapore, especially with its current social-political situation?

    If I had to isolate a single concrete challenge or obstacle, I would say that it has to be the absence of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

    The FOIA is crucial not just for documentary filmmakers but for every citizen. Because without equal access to proper information, how are we equipped to make decisions that affect all aspects of our lives – from housing, food, health, business, arts, education, etc.?

    A FOIA is a fundamental pillar of any true democracy. With a proper FOIA, researchers would have much needed information for informed analysis, and citizens would be able to scrutinize how government policies are decided. Imagine being able to read the minutes, or watch a live telecast of policy meetings at government ministries. That is when we would have taken a real step towards transparency and accountability.

    6. How does online distribution help your work, and what are your thoughts on online and offline distribution?

    I’m still trying to figure out this aspect of being an independent filmmaker. My strategy now is this: I try to focus my energies on making the film. The other aspects, I try to do as little as possible but enough to get the ball over the line.

    7. Do you believe that films can change society?

    I would like to say “Yes, otherwise, what’s the point?”  But in a situation like Singapore, real change, which is change in terms of what’s inside people’s heads, that may not happen overnight, or even in 5-10 years. It may not even happen in my lifetime.

    On the other hand, there’s a real urgency that change is needed. Just to cite an example taken from the economy: as ex-GIC chief economist Yeoh Lam Keong has mentioned, up to 500,000 people live in poverty in Singapore [out of a population of about 5.5 million] and the weakness of labour laws perpetuate the exploitation of even more low wage migrant workers.

    8. What are you working on now and what do you have planned for the future?

    Besides the projects already mentioned, I’m developing a film based on contemporary activism in Singapore.

    Find out more about Jason's work at the 'Untracing the Conspiracy' project site.

    EngageMedia at the Internet Freedom Festival

    oleh Andrew Nov 17, 2017

    Internet Freedom Festival 2017

    From March 6-10, EngageMedia attended the Internet Freedom Festival in Valencia, Spain.

    As one of the few global, civil society focused events, the festival was a refreshing change from the often highly branded multi-stake holder conferences. Here, amongst allies, the conversation went much deeper across a range of topics from digital security, free software, free media, journalist safety, policy issues and more. It also provided the opportunity for long conversations with allies, partnership development, and the hatching of plans.

    EngageMedia was part of several discussions and presentations including ‘Exploring secure and anonymous video capture and distribution’, ‘Architectures of Internet freedom movements in Southeast Asia’, and ‘Research on security digital perspective of journalist in Indonesia and Philippines’. It was gratifying to see such large representation from Southeast Asia, with a host of organisations from Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Myanmar and more.

    I led a session on secure video capture and distribution with the Guardian Project, Open Archive, Freedom of the Press Foundation and Small World News. The session explored the privacy and safety implications of commonly used video sharing sites, and the challenges of scaling open source alternatives. Sites such as YouTube have carved out a defacto monopoly on video distribution, one that is built on advertising and the collection of users’ data, or Surveillance Capitalism, in the words of Shoshana Zuboff. This creates insecure systems for those working in sensitive environments, and brings users into a web that doesn't respect their privacy. Using distribution platforms that are secure and anonymous to break important stories is increasingly difficult.

    There have been various attempts at creating more secure and anonymous systems, EngageMedia’s Plumi platform being one of them. In the larger game, however, we are massively out-gunned. The problem is difficult to solve given the large amount of resources required to build alternatives of that scale.

    The need and desire for such alternatives was clearly present in the session, and whilst the know-how is there, fundamentally the question is one of resources. Everyone involved will certainly be continuing their work to chip away, but we need to move beyond proof of concepts to much larger audiences to provide the secure and anonymous services journalists and activists need. This will require a lot creative organising, more collaboration and funders and others to come on board.

    The Internet Freedom Festival also saw us connect with our fellow Association for Progressive Communications (APC) members, always an enjoyable and productive experience. EngageMedia and APC are currently collaborating to produce CoCoNet, a Southeast Asia digital rights camp that is in many respects similar to the Internet Freedom Festival, however on a regional basis.

    We were also happy to connect with several members of the Video4Change Network at IFF, including the Organisation for Visual Progression, Small World News and SocialTIC.

    If you are thinking of attending the Internet Freedom Festival next year we’d very much recommend it!

    Featured Filmmaker: The Isaan Record

    oleh EM News Nov 07, 2017
    We speak with The Isaan Record, a media and video production organization in Northeastern Thailand about their hopes and challenges.


    Tell us about the people behind The Isaan Record. How did you start out?

    The Isaan Record is an online news magazine that tells the stories of Northeastern Thailand. Over the past six years, our small team of Thai and foreign journalists has published a wide range of news and feature stories, as well as number of short video documentaries.

    We are committed to delivering well-balanced stories with a focus mainly on human rights, democracy, development issues, and local politics in the Northeast of Thailand. We believe that a well-informed public is the foundation of a healthy democracy.

    Most of our stories are translated and published in both Thai and English. Recently, we have begun publishing articles in the local dialect, setting an unprecedented example in Thai media.

    Why did you choose to work with documentary films and what first attracted you to it?

    We have been producing short documentary films since the early days in 2011 when The Isaan Record was just starting off. Although our current team of in-house journalists focuses on written news and features stories, we regularly invite documentary filmmakers to contribute short pieces. We want to provide a platform for young video journalist to present their work to an online audience.

    In the past, the Northeast had a tradition of mobile cinemas and we recently started discussing the idea to bring documentary films about the Northeast to an audience in rural areas of the region.

    What is your favourite film among those you’ve worked on and what is the background to that story?

    Fields of Mine is one our favourites. It tells the story a rural community in the beautiful mountains of the Upper Northeast that is fighting against a gold mine project. On the one hand, Na Nong Bong Village is a fascinating example of community-based activism with a strong female involvement. On the other hand, the case represents many of the grievances faced by villages in the Northeast today including the exploitation of the region's natural resources by private companies and the state, the use of violence and legal mechanisms to suppress dissent, and the lack of public participation in development projects. The film is one of our very first documentary pieces, produced by Glenn Brown and Lizzie Presser, who founded The Isaan Record and managed it until 2012.

    Another film that has been popular with our audience is The Master Plan, a guest contribution by two American students, Paul Sullivan and Wilder Nicholson. The documentary addresses the long-standing issue of land rights in the Northeast and shows how the military government, that came to power in coup d’état in 2014, has been using deforestation policy as justification to evict forest communities across the region.

    What are the challenges for you working in Thailand or Northeast Thailand?

    Reporting from the Northeast of Thailand has been a very rewarding experience for our team. For our journalists it often seems easier to gain access to news sources here than in Bangkok. Organisations, government agencies and people are less used to media attention and usually people are forthcoming and easy to talk to.

    But we notice that things have been changing since 2014. The military regime not only suspended democracy and rolled back decentralisation that gave more autonomy to the provinces but it also put a lid on all forms of dissent. A climate of fear makes it more difficult to get peoples’ opinion on the record. We used to interview people on the streets on various political topics but these days everyone seems to be much more cautious when speaking out in public.


    What are you working on now and what’s your next project?

    We are running a three year project to build a journalism network in the region. The Isaan Journalism Network Project is a journalism program that trains northeastern Thais with the skills and capacity needed for rigorous, local citizen journalism.

    Thailand’s media landscape is skewed towards Bangkok and tends to represent the interests of the urban middle class. We want to encourage a shift in the Thai media’s focus from one that deals almost exclusively with Bangkok-centric news to one that more meaningfully incorporates the largest and most populous region in the country, the Northeast.

    We are also looking into ways to build partnerships with media outlets in other regions in the country, and hope that in the next few years we can be part of a network of progressive, non-Bangkok news organizations that as a whole would present a very different picture of Thailand.

    Access more content by The Isaan Record here.

    Kali Code Village stands up to the Tobacco Industry

    oleh Kartika Pratiwi Apr 13, 2017

    In February, a collaborative project between EngageMedia and Viral Strategies launched an anti-tobacco campaign in Kampung Kali Code, Yogyakarta. This event was organized by health experts and media campaigners in reaction to the tobacco industry, which exploited the village for their advertisement media without monetary compensation.

    A few months ago, a tobacco company painted the village in red, blue, yellow and white for a project called “Show Your Colors”. A conservative analysis by Vital Strategies estimates that the company has enjoyed brand exposure worth more than US$220,000 per month as a result. According to a 2011 survey, Indonesia is the second-largest cigarette market in Asia after China, and has the highest male smoking rate in the world at 67% of the population (Asian Tribune).

    “Show Your True Colors” is a counter-campaign against aggressive tobacco marketing by re-painting the village with anti-tobacco, glow-in-the-dark graphic murals, that were designed by graffiti artist Koma. The murals were painted on the walls and rooftops of houses, so that pedestrians on the bridge above of the village can easily view them. This initiative aims to not only raise awareness about healthier environments and the risks of smoking, but also to remove the exploitative tobacco branding in Kali Code.

    As part of the community empowerment agenda, activities were not only undertaken by the campaign organizers and artists, but also involved the people of Kali Code. Teenagers from the village participated in a video workshop for three days at EngageMedia, and produced six videos that were screened on the night of the launch event.

    Now, Kali Code is showing its true colors – the color of its people, and not of the tobacco company.

    Press Freedom Investigation in Papua Highlights Challenges for Local Journalists

    oleh Tara Nissl Feb 15, 2017

    Photograph by WAN-IFRA/Una Sunarti


    Eight journalists from eight Indonesian media outlets traveled to West Papua last week to investigate media freedom and the safety of journalists in the region, after an international delegation
    called on Indonesia to address press freedom violations in 2015.

    The World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers (WAN-IFRA) launched the investigation on January 30 in Jayapura, Merauke and Timika, where the Media Freedom Committee-Indonesia followed local journalists from Papuan news organisations for five days.

    WAN-IFRA’s Asian Regional Manager Eko Maryadi said: “We expect the program to send eight reporters from Jakarta, from non-Papuans to do reporting, that they can understand the issues, difficulties, and problems faced by journalists in Papua.”

    The Committee reported eight key findings:

    • Government officials and security personnel are discriminatory towards OAPs (“original Papua persons”)
    • Journalists are stigmatised as pro-independence or pro-Homeland, leading to intimidation and fragmentation among the journalist community
    • Environmental damage through development programs are underreported due to heavy restrictions on the press
    • Strengthening journalism in Papua relies on an improved code of ethics, understanding of the journalist profession, use of technology and a business model that maintains the independence of the press
    • Journalists need to actively change the media perspective of Papua
    • 11 out of 16 foreign journalists who recently gained access to Papua were monitored by intelligence officials
    • Sexual harassment of female journalists in Papua is underreported
    • The quality of public services and competition depends on equitable access to communication infrastructure and information technology

    More detailed reports were documented on the Committee’s blog, featuring daily updates and interviews with journalists from Tabloid Jubi, Papua Salam, Mongabay.co.id and many more.

    Journalists from the Papua South Post shared stories about police and government intimidation, including two publication bans in 2007 and 2008, being threatened with criminal law, and a prohibition on reporting on President Joko Widodo’s Merauke investment program.

    A journalist in Timika recalled a terrifying experience of being held at knifepoint and then stabbed. Another pointed to the difficulties faced by female journalists and the prevalence of sexual harassment.

    The investigation marks one month before Indonesia will host the World Press Freedom Day in Jakarta on March 3, an honourable hosting position that the Pacific Freedom Forum (PFF) criticised Indonesia for holding due to ongoing restrictions and violations in Papua.

    In July 2016, PFF Chair Titi Gabi urged Jakarta to “ensure that there is open access to West Papua for foreign media, and an end to abuses against local media.”

    Whether any changes will be made in the near future is questionable. Just recently, Suara Papua’s website was blocked for SARA and publishing “negative” content, despite the government insisting that it does not censor journalistic websites.