The missing moral compass in our leaders

ARCHIVES 2013

By admin-s On Nov 26, 2013

The opposition must not just offer a change of personnel in Putrajaya but a new kind of real, moral leadership that sets high standards of right and wrong in public affairs and inspires others not to be law-breakers or obedient slaves, but to be responsible citizens who will not fear their government.

Zaid Ibrahim, TMI

Lately, quite a few of our newspapers have had to retract their stories and apologise as part of defamation settlements. The spate of suits filed against mainstream newspapers, including the “New Straits Times” – and the regularity with which that once-august institution has had to apologise – has become a national embarrassment.

All this implies that journalistic standards at the paper are, at best, questionable. Worse, it indicates a dismal lack of professionalism and the abandonment of the principle by which journalism is governed: the dedication to truth.

The basic duty of a reporter is to present a story with as much balance and objectivity as possible. Higher up the chain, editors will always be subjected to the interests of the outlet’s owners – and this is true the world over – but a certain minimum standard must be observed at all times.

The problem is that our minimum standards are in the gutter. Perhaps owners and publishers don’t care too much about ethical principles and good journalism. Perhaps what’s “fair” and “unfair” are bothersome and unnecessary details that clash with political will.

Now, most of us know that the component political parties of Barisan Nasional own most of the major newspapers in Malaysia. As such, it’s incumbent on these owners to address the present situation which is, to put it mildly, deplorable.

Journalists can’t exercise the standards they aspire to if their editors don’t or can’t let them. In our country today, it has become difficult to write and print fair, balanced, or even accurate and truthful stories without upsetting owners.

Sadly, it seems as if some journalists have had to transform themselves into “political warriors” who are concerned only with the political victory and power of their paymasters. Anything can be justified in the service of these twin goals.

Other journalists don’t have much choice. They must follow orders if they want keep their jobs, let alone climb the ladder. One can’t blame them for trying to earn a living in these uncertain economic times.

Can we look to the opposition for good examples? Unfortunately, not all their political leaders practise the same level of integrity and fairness they expect from government leaders.

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has so far seemed unable to use purely moral and ethical arguments against the Government in a way that Dr Martin Luther King and Gandhi struggled against gross injustice and dictatorship.

Even Nelson Mandela, branded a “terrorist” in his youth, grew into a compassionate elder statesman who harboured no ill-feelings against those who imprisoned him for 27 years.

Can you imagine any Malaysian politician today displaying even half that magnanimity?

Over the years, Anwar has not been able to inject into our political culture the same values that he accuses the Government of lacking. He has not been able to impart with conviction the belief that, as a society, we must possess core values that guide our entire community, including the practice of national and party politics.

He has been unable to provide the guidance that will enable the people of our country to discover their own moral compasses. Perhaps this is too tall an order.

Perhaps Malaysians are “not ready” for this kind of responsible democratic engagement.

What is Anwar’s own example? If you recall, on May 5 (polling day) this year, he tweeted that “PR has won….#ubah” while news spread of a 9pm press conference at the One World Hotel.

Pakatan Rakyat did not win. It was nowhere near winning a parliamentary majority.

Why was he so cavalier with the truth? Why did he say, weeks before the election that he would retire if Pakatan failed to win – when he had no intention of retiring?