The way a sex-stained story is covered by the press often tells us more about the worldview and ideological bent of the newspapers concerned than the actual incident itself.
The recent so-called expose by a number of the mainstream newspapers of the infamous Kuching "sex-in-the-park" involving a schoolgirl is a case in point. Behind this somewhat soft porn journalism lies a series of factors working in tandem with each other: the sensationalism-profit-patriarchy-prurience partnership, if you will.
It was sensationalist because the alleged protagonist, the school-going girl, was characterised as almost a sex fiend, ever-ready to do an oral sex to her male partner in broad daylight and in a public place such as a park. This "news angle" is calculated to send many a male reader in particular agape and, of course, salivating. As in the case of many other sensationalist stories, this one is expected to translate the gaping mouth into rising circulation and profits.
That the "female player" was highlighted to the point of eclipsing her male counterpart in the reporting suggests a double standards in terms of journalistic treatment. In other words, why was the male partner made to appear passive (because not much was said of him by the press) as if he was made to bear the sensual brunt of the femme fatale ?
KDN's Filem Censorship Enforcement Unit head Elias Mat Rabi shows the X-rated video to journalists ( Berita Harian , June 16)
Was it because the editors were so outraged by the sexual misconduct of the girl that they decided to make her case a "warning" to others of similar wavelength and intent? Was this news approach chosen in conformity with a male bias that is largely dominant in many media organisations and also in the larger society?
Why was the misdeed of the girl be made to seem more "sinful" than that of the male partner? And why were not the other couples caught in the act not highlighted by the press? (Mind you, a corps of local journalists was given the "privilege" to view the sullied video so that they would get the "right picture".)
A quick recollection of our recent history would only reinforce our suspicion that most media organisations, let alone the larger society, are very much male-dominated. An incident that was indicative of this scenario involved an underage girl who, allegedly had sexual relations with a prominent politician, was subsequently "paraded" by the mainstream media for weeks to the extent of depicting her as someone who was only out to invite "trouble" ( Perempuan cari pasal ).
What is involved here is not only gender slant, but also power play. For these factors would help us to fathom why the senior politician concerned was practically left "untouched" by the media concerned.
Similar journalistic treatment, i.e. double standards, has been given to women who are caught committing close-proximity acts ( tangkap basah ). The male partners are quite often made "silent".
Given such a social context, one can understand why three women's organisations, namely All Women's Action Society of Malaysia (Awam), Women's Candidacy Initiative (WCI), and Women's Development Collective (WDC), were utterly disgusted by the questionable reporting of the Kuching incident ([#1] Outcry over biased reporting on sex tape [/#], June 16).
Besides, many readers were given the impression that females in many of these illicit sexual encounters make, in the eyes of many editors, "good copy" and, thus, have an "entertainment value". This approach also suggests strongly that women are frequently perceived as sex objects. Many media organisations would jump at this "opportunity" as if, after a long hiatus, to regain their manhood.
Another explanation that can be attributed to this smut journalism is that the deprivation of crucial elements of investigative journalism in the local media, at least in recent past, apparently has made the media less sensitive to, if not concerned with issues of high public importance and interest. For example, the serious allegation male in the recent Anwar Ibrahim trial that Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad halted the former Anti-Corruption Agency chief from mounting an in-depth investigation of a very senior government official failed to "titillate" the local media. In fact, the media kept mum about it.
Neither could the recent debate on Chief Justice Eusoff Chin's overseas trip, allegedly with one prominent lawyer, manage to excite the local mainstream media - although this case has raised alarm and concern among many Malaysians.
Sceptics, on the other hand, would go as far as insisting that the media overblowing of the Kuching sex episode provided a convenient diversion away from the society's pressing issues of the day. Surely sex in the park is much more enticing than, say, legal wrangle in august chambers.
In an endeavour to appear concerned about sexual misconduct among Malaysians, particularly the young, a mainstream newspaper suggested that the relatively easy access to pornographic materials in the black market was one of the causes for their depravity.
While the smut items could be one of the contributory factors that have caused hormones of the young to gallop, the sleazy journalism that made itself known in the earlier trials of Anwar is no less culpable. It might have at least "sensitised" the impressionable minds to all things sexual. After all, were we not reminded almost daily, for instance, of the semen-smeared mattress that was allegedly used by Anwar in his trysts? And didn't "sodomy" become an instant household name?
Steps should be taken by the parties concerned to discourage and disallow trial by the media of certain people, particularly if such an act only vilifies the dignity of young women. In addition, certain media personnel should exercise self-restraint so that personal prurience may not camouflage as public preference.
Women's position in society and their rights cannot be protected, much less enhanced, if the mainstream media still succumb to the ignoble tendency to exploit women, particularly those in vulnerable positions, in this journalistic manner.
