The Kanjuruhan football tragedy and the government’s miscommunication

Things happen and they do so not in black and white. There are reasons and counter reasons as to why things happen that will be unveiled only by time and careful investigations.

Some things can be disputed. Were police and military provoked into using force by rowdy football fans? There was certainly some provocation, if the video clips of the night’s event are accurate. Was there fear among the security personnel that the crowd in the rafters would join the mob on the playing field? There were some spectators that were seen climbing the 2 meter high fence to get in on video clips.

These, however, did not explain why the security personnel had to fire tear gas at the crowd, or resort to beating them up with their truncheons and fists. There was also a memorable scene in which a military officer executed a flying kick at a spectator.

Acts like these would inflame the emotions of anyone, what more the soccer fans who are usually on the receiving end of administrative and enforcement injustice and foul play in their everyday lives. In addition they are wrong, using teargas on soccer matches are against FIFA rules and the stadium was overpacked.

But that was one incident that the authorities could easily blame on the commanding officer at the stadium. Indeed the head of the Malang police has been received of his duties over the incident.

The buck does not, and should not, stop there though. The head of the national police should take responsibility as this incident happened under his watch. Instead, he washes his hands like Pontius Pilot, and orders an investigation. As if he has no responsibility for the behaviour of his men. As if Ferdy Sambo and his gang’s activities in the police had nothing to do with him; as if the shooting of some FPI members under suspicious circumstances were the acts of some unrelated officials.

Instead he offers the children of the dead victims of Kanjuruhan a job in the Police if they wanted it. That ‘s surreal. We stuffed up and inadvertently killed your father at a football match, so you can grow up to be like us, guaranteed of a salary and acting with impunity.

Then there is the PSSI chief, Iwan Bule who welcomed officials who were “happy” (bahagia) at the emergency centre in Malang just after the tragedy. He too promised to launch an investigation.

What’s likely to happen is that some officials down the line will be the fall guys. They will cop the blame but the top officials will continue being sanctimonious about how everyone should play their part in ensuring safety, how reforms were needed (but are never implemented), and engage in a harmless bout of finger pointing.

So at the end of the day nothing gets solved. In time the anger will abate and it will be business as usual. But it is just a matter of time before another tragedy involving angry crowds and poor police crowd control happens. Sad and depressing. My heart goes out to the victims of Kanjuruhan and the victims of the countless incidents of bad and unfair security enforcement.

Why Bjorka should worry the Government

The danger of hacker Bjorka to the Government lies not in the information he purportedly hacked and leaked. The danger comes from the reaction of Indonesian netizens to any news or posts about Bjorka’s antics.

Bjorka

Check out Twitter and other social media news feeds and typical reactions are support for Bjorka and criticism of the government. Bjorka is, to many, becoming a folk hero like Robin Hood or V in V for Vendetta.

Rightly or not, the netizens’ reactions suggest Bjorka is being seen as someone flipping the bird to a government that is engaged in Double Speak, authoritarianism and Thought Control. The stuff that folk heroes battle against.

The perception of their reactions may be skewed. Netizens are known for their groundswell of rage against any authoritative figure. They may represent only the modern day chattering classes and no one else.

This is not to say, however, that they do not have a legitimate reason to rage against the Government, a sentiment that is ironically fed by the Government’s reaction to Bjorka.

So far the Government has fumbled and sent mixed messages about Bjorka. The dismissed him as inconsequential and that he has not really hacked anything important. Yet they rail against him and seen fit to set up a high level data security task force to curb activities of Bjorka and other hackers.

The Government also fed the netizen’s sense of contempt for authority from mishandling its reaction to data security leaks. Information Minister Johnny Plate’s response about needing to keep OTPs secure only exposes what many perceive to be a normalization of stupidity and incompetence in the highest levels of office.

The fact that he has not been held accountable for this and many other gross mistakes and misstatements in the past is increasingly being seen as a normalization of impunity.

This is because these days almost no one in high office is being held accountable for anything, either through their own actions or for something under their watch.

Hence you have Ferdy Sambo running a mafia within the highest echelons of police and no one high is being held accountable. In other countries the Minister for Law and the Head of Police would have to resign for letting something like this happen under their watch.

The normalization takes place because their is no longer any effective political opposition. The media, already reeling from the onslaught from social media, is cowed and does not ask questions. Foreign journalists, those pesky foreigners who ask pointed questions, are not being issued permits to work here.

Just about the only avenue for proper dissent these days is on the internet. But even here, Big Brother is at work. The word “Buzzers RP” is used with fear and loathing by netizens because they are seen as the Brown Shirts of the elite to muzzle any criticism.

When all avenues for healthy criticism and dissent seem blocked and controlled, people like Bjorka become admirable.

In all the stories of folk heroes fighting against authority the pattern is always the same. Tyranny and control up to a point where everyone is fed up. They do not know what to do. Then someone emerges who can tweak the nose of the authorities.

The people love him, the authorities overreact and attract more hatred. They start making mistakes and drive more people to support the Bjorka figures.

Then an idea of resistance is sown and from there it grows and grows.

Will this happen in Indonesia? Unlikely, but never say never….

Tone deaf, in a very black and white way

Comments that in most societies would leave the audience aghast get a laugh and applause in Indonesia. Even when a member of the audience is the President of Indonesia himself.

PDIP Matriach Megawati, when addressing her party’s convention first took issue with Tukang Bakso (meatball vendors). She said she told her daughter Puan not to end up with a Tukang Bakso and the audience – including Jokowi – laughed. Puan tittered.

The comment that takes the cake, however, was when Megawati was talking about the Papuans. She said they were black but lately it was better because many of them were beginning to be fairer (because of mixed marriages with non Papuans) …”they have begun blending and becoming very Indonesian”.

As if you can’t be “very Indonesian”because of the color of your skin is black. As if a Tukang Bakso has no dignity and ability to care and love someone.

Such elitist, racist tone deafness. And the President laughed as all these remarks are made. A few days after his love-fest pawn to Megawati on how beautiful and charismatic she was. CRINGE.

Who can speak for the G20 spokesperson?

What qualities, skills and experience do you need to be an effective spokesperson?

For chair of the G20 Summit Indonesia all that’s needed to become the spokesperson for this prestigious event is evidently looks, youth, pop iconicity and privileged education.

Photo of celebrity Maudy Ayunda who was appointed as G20 spokesperson. Her appointment is being criticised as a way for Indonesia’s president to woo the youth population. Photo: Facebook

Credit: Facebook

The appointee, 27-year old Maudy Ayunda has a plenty in the looks department but is she savvy in handling tough questions that surely comes with the job?

“At her first briefing, she appeared to ignore questions about Putin’s attendance. Organisers told journalists to ask about her personality instead,” reports The South China Morning Post.

The paper further adds: “As part of a team of spokespeople, her role is to report the G20 meeting results that are relevant to Indonesia while sensitive issues would be handled by other representatives, Ayunda said in response to Bloomberg questions.”

One wonders what PR Professionals and feminists would think about this interesting role carved out for Ayunda.

Who’s really responsible for the trashing of Ade Armando?

OK, let’s get this out of the way: Unspun believes that voilence in retaliation for words is almost always not justified.

Having said that, I cannot help but to think that Ade Armando and the society that has elevated him into a public icon of sorts has brought the violence upon themselves.

Armando is of course the lecturer and social media influencer who got beat up badly when he attended a demonstration on April 11. He literally lost his pants in the beating and he was hospitalised after students and police rescued him from the mob.

Many Indonesians took to Twitter to express their disagreement with his views but also condemned the violence as excessive. Others pointed to the excessiveness of the khadruns.

These are valid opinions but I think it misses the point of why the violence occurred – a point that implicates Indonesian society and the media because they have allowed public discourse to degenerated into a pissing match on Twitter, or whatever social platform platform is current for the day.

Consider Armando. What is his claim to fame? He’s a lecturer in communications but has he distinguished himself in scholarship? Has he published any noteworthy papers to qualify himself as an expert or authority in politics or society?

Armando is also often described as a social media influencer. What does that mean? That he tweets loudest and often on subjects? That he clickbait his content so they evoke emotions and increases their talkability? And since when does someone with a huge following on social media qualify to influence public discourse on important matters?

Yet there he was being quoted by the Press because of his provocative tweets, being asked to host or moderate talk shows, being invited as a commentator in politics and society.

By doing so the Press has failed in its duty to exercise judgement in the shaping of public discourse. Instead of giving a platform to only those who exercise common sense, moderation and clear articulation of values, and also skilled in the art of disagreement, they have, in building up Armando, unleaded on Indonesian society a troll in the guise of a thought leader.

With people like him on pedestals public discourse is now a shouting match over Twitter, YouTube and Instagram. It has also become an arena for gang warfare where might makes right. Armando and a few others like him, buzzers one and all, throttle measured public discourse in the name of free speech.

Confronted by the might of buzzers, rumoured to have government backing, you can begin to understand the pent up frustration and anger of those who position themselves on the other side of the fence. Add to that a very uneven enforcement of the law and you have a powder keg.

The April 11 beating up of Armando is one of the manifestations of this pressure building up.

Perhaps it is time for those in a position if real influence to reflect on the harmful path we are in and the need to bring public discourse back to where it can do most good for society?

When everyone sounds sassy and is an expert

Remember that iconic cartoon from the early days of the Internet in the New Yorker?

The Internet has moved on a lot since then. Apps and other services now make it so much easier to create and upload great looking content.

So much so that I think the saying “On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog” needs to be updated to: “On the Internet, everybody can look and sound like an expert.”

This is what I am seeing on my social media feeds, no matter if they are Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, Reels….

Everyone, even if they are green behind the ears and have not done anything to win them respect in the industry, is now capable and do try to come across as an expert dispensing tips, advice and listicles like they are going out of fashion.

They are aided in their quest for their 2 minutes of fame by platforms such as Glints and other headhunting outfits out to find a cheap way of generating relevant content.

So in the PR industry, for instance, you have consultants with less than a year’s experience lecturing their peers on media relations, engaging influencers, client servicing…every topic that is sellable to aspiring industry workers.

Then there are the masterclasses carried out by hoods who can’t even qualify as apprentices. Same MO. Young, ambitious people who don’t expect to be paid but grateful to be given a platform to show off to their peers.

No doubt some of these speakers are good and have fresh insights but most of them, I suspect, would be pedestrian.

So the question that needs to be asked here is whether this democratization of the ability to look and sound clever on the internet (for materials all you need is to do a Google or YouTube search on the subject matter and presto! You can sound like a pro!) – actually helps enlighten or dumb the audience.

What do you guys think?

Startups and their irresistible offers to our employees

If, like me, you run a small to mid-sized business then I’m sure you’d empathize when I say that the startups are the bane of our lives when it comes to staff retention.

Like voracious vultures their HR officers and talent scouts circle our businesses for any of our staff who show promise. When they spot them, they open their deep wallets and swoop in on these young workers with offers so they will find difficult to resist.

I’ve been wondering if these enterprises end up empowering these young talents or ruin the rest of their lives. The source of this musings is because I know of the daughter of a family friend that quit her present job because this startup offered her, a person who has been in the workforce for 3 years, about Rp60 million per month basic salary, plus share options in the company.

To be sure. She is bright and talented. She could cobble together a good-looking PowerPoint deck and present fairly convincingly. But when it came to managing people she was still green, unable to convey instructions concisely and clearly and making sure that her direct reports understood and executed her instructions well. She still had to, like good wine, mature. Her ego still got too much in the way and she became defensive under pressure.

Someone like that, in a world not distorted by startups and e-commerce companies, would find it difficult to command a monthly salary a third of what she’s being offered in the communications industry.

To her credit, she sought some advice before she accepted the offer. Asked what I thought, I had one question for her: “What skills and experience of yours, do you think, their generous offer is based on?” She never gave me a clear answer but said she was fearful that an opportunity like this would not come again.

Pressed to elaborate what I thought I said she should not be to worried about missed opportunities. Indonesia today is awash with investors pouring money into startups, even those with dubious business models. They would still be around in a couple of years.

If she spent this time in a conventional business where she could be mentored properly she would, at the end of this period, be so much stronger professionally. She could then command an even higher salary then but more importantly she would be more equipped to handle the other aspects of a competitive professional environment – the internal politics, the art of managing upward, and the measured responses required when things go terribly wrong.

On the other hand, if she joined a startup now, she could end up like so many of the highly-paid young and talented people in startups today – good to look at and listen to, but not too closely, or the superficiality or immaturity will start to show, contributing to bad decisions, tamper tantrums and anxiety.

My pitch, however, lost out to the prospect of drawing a fat paycheck, a grand sounding title and the allure of working in a startup. She decided to join them in the end.

I didn’t feel too flustered by that because she was not working for me and she might be able to land on her feet after a few stumbles. But I can’t help wondering whether, on the whole the startups are doing any favors to these young talents and the industry with the irresistible offers.

Helping out journalists when they need it

What I wrote in the Maverick blog today. Journalists are getting Covid and this causes many of them financial difficulties.

Many companies expect their help in publicising their messages in good times. Now when times are tough, they need out help

https://maverick.co.id/uncategorized/plight-of-the-information-front-liners/

How to get vaccinated if you’re a senior foreigner in Jakarta

There have been some confusion whether foreign residents in Indonesia are eligible to be vaccinated under the Government’s program covering certain groups including seniors (that 60 and above).

What nudged me to get vaccinated was a message from a friend who was married to a foreigner, saying that her expatriate husband got vaccinated at the Board for Development and Empowerment Human Health Resources (BPP SDM Kemkes) in Kebayoran Baru.

All that was needed was for you bring along your KTP (Identity card). No need for P+as sports, KITAP etc.

The room where you wait to get tested

So this morning I trooped to the place early. By 8am, their opening time, there were already dozens of people there seeking vaccination.

I showed my KTP to a couple of officials at the entrance and was directed into a hall where you get registered for vaccination. There are two groups here. Those who booked for a vaccination via locket.com and those walk ins like me.

The registration process was orderly and quite efficient with a name being called every 2 minutes or so. When my turn came there was a complication because they saw that the entry under citizenship in my KTP was not Indonesian.

Confusion, an official was called. He took a photo of my KTP and said he’d check. Then nothing happened. he disappeared.

Finally, I approached one of the officers to explain my situation. A bit more confusion but when the supervisor was traced down she said it wasn’t a problem for foreigners to be vaccinated.

So I registered, that took all off 3 minutes and went to the next section where they took down your details, asked you a list of questions on whether you have any underlying conditions, and had your blood pressure taken.

You then move to a nearby table and there two nurses gave you the vaccine shot.

This is where you get your shot

Then its to the “Observation Room” where, if you don’t faint or transform into an ogre, they call your name after 30 minutes or so. You get your forms from them and go into the adjacent room where you get your vaccination certificate.

There is one more step after this and its to set an appointment for your second jab. They had an officer there with an iPad to do that. All very fast. Once you agree on date and time and she keys it in, you almost instantaneously get a Whatsapp message on the details of your next appointment, complete with a barcode for the officials to scan when you come next.

The Observation Room

Apparently that center vaccinates about 1,000 people per day. Throughout I found the process was very efficient and the officials polite and informative. The social distancing could be better but no cause for alarm.

So good job Kementerian Kesehatan and the officials who work there. Apparently they vaccinate about 1,000 people per day. And thanks Indonesia for the vaccine.

Meghan and the color of her son’s skin

There’s a hilarious scene in one of Jackie Chan’s Rush Hour series where he follows Chris Rock into a joint run by black brothers.

Chris, being black, goes something like “Wassup Nigga” and gets a friendly reply. Then Jackie, who plays the role of a cop from Hong Kong who knows little about American culture tries it on his black hosts – with disastrous results.

That scene of how its OK for a black to call another a Nigga while someone else of a different shade couldn’t, is, for me, emblematic about how Americans and much of the west approach color: with a hypersensitivity bordering on the ridiculous.

Color to us coloreds, or if you want to be politically correct about it, the pigmentally advantaged, is a fact of life. We talk about it all the time, joke about it, acknowledge it and the fact that darker hues are generally not that desirable even among huge swarthy of the swarthy.

But to whites, or shall we call them the pigmentally disadvantaged, and those who have drunk the liberal kool aid, all talk of color is somehow abhorrent and racist. It’s as if we are all expected to tiptoe around the room not acknowledging that there is a colored elephant in the room.

It is this mentality that has conditioned the shock and awe that greeted Meghan Markle’s revelation to Oprah Winfrey that someone from the Royal Family asked if her son might pigmentally gifted.

Why is it racist to wonder what shade the baby would come out, since the mother is partially Indian, is beyond the reasoning of many mixed couples and multiracial families.

The English language, does not different between racialism and racism. Perhaps it should. The former an acknowledgement that the world is not monochromatic and needs to be perceived in all its hues and shades; the latter a description of prejudice because of someone’s skin tone.

When I was working in Malaysia in The Star many decades ago, before the country descended into its racial stereotyping and tropes to what it is today, we all used to be totally aware of our race.

We’s rib each other mercilessly and tell racial jokes to each other, have good laugh about it and ed up in Rennie’s for a beer or eight. At the end of the day we were all racialists, in the sense that we were not color blind.

This did not shield us from the realization that beyond our racial stereotypes and traits we were all humans and friends. We could live with those difference and we did.

Clubhouse is all the rage – and the likely site of the next business crisis

Don’t get me wrong. I think Clubhouse, the audio chat app that is taking the world and Indonesia by storm is fantastic.

Here you have an app that makes interaction easy among people with same interests. And because its audio only it also creates a feeling of intimacy and ability to network during sessions.

Another added benefit is that since it is organized usually as an informal and chilled-out chat, there is little preparation needed.

The result: Every Indonesian what fancies themselves as connected has signed onto the service and many have already organized Tchaikovsky rooms from a few people to a few hundred. Either that or they are desperately waiting for an invite to get onto Clubhouse.

The ease and informality of these chat rooms are Chatroom’s great strengths. But they also harbor its great danger – the likelihood of uncontrolled blabbering, under the mistaken notion that its an informal chat and there are little consequences to speaking your mind.

Users of Clubhouse or any social media application should always remember that whatever you do or say there can be recorded or copied and shared to a wider audience. There is little control once words are written, images are shared or words are uttered and you can never be sure who will be listening in, first hand or second hand.

Today I saw a chat room discussion on PR matters in which a spokesperson for a company that was recently in a crisis-like situation agreeing to talk about their recent experience.

Sharing is great but when your company has just undergone a reputation all crisis and nerves are still tender, one wrong word or phrase can plunge it back into the couldron.

I am sure that there will be a crisis or two arising from Clubhouse chats.

This is not to say that people should avoid something new like Clubhouse . They should try it and use it by all means but they should never underestimate how whatever happens on social media can often be taken out of context.

No matter how new or sexy the technology, skill, deliberation and awareness are still needed.