The draft revision of the Broadcasting Bill has drawn public attention, particularly due to several provisions aimed at regulating broadcasts across various channels, including digital platforms.
While the revision is necessary to keep pace with the rapid development of technology and the broadcasting industry, several aspects of the bill remain contentious.
Dr. Rahayu, a lecturer in Communication Science at Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM), noted that several provisions in the draft bill need to be reconsidered, especially regarding the excessive authority granted to the Indonesian Broadcasting Commission (KPI).
“I see indications that KPI is being shaped into a superpower institution, regulating everything,” she said during the Sekolah Wartawan event on Wednesday, April 30, 2025.
One clause that demands scrutiny is Article 50B, which concerns the exclusive airing of investigative journalism.
The article fails to define what “exclusive” means, leaving it open to multiple interpretations.
According to Dr. Rahayu, this overlaps with journalistic authority and contradicts Article 4, Paragraph 2 of the Press Law, which states that the national press shall not be subject to censorship, bans, or broadcasting restrictions.
She also highlighted the bill’s definition of broadcast content.
Articles 7, Paragraph 1 and 8A, Paragraph 1 state that KPI has the authority to regulate and supervise broadcast content, including digital content produced by digital platforms as business entities, whether individual or institutional.
This raises confusion about the status of individuals and institutions, as the bill seems to treat them the same.
“Individuals should not be equated with institutions. Institutions can have legal status, but individuals cannot,” she explained.
Considering the rapid and massive growth of digital content, the draft bill also lacks clarity on how KPI will enforce this supervision.
In fact, content regulation is already addressed by the Law on Electronic Information and Transactions (ITE Law) and by the digital platforms themselves.
One notable proposal in the draft is Article 7, Paragraph 3, which grants KPI the authority to establish regional KPIs.
On the one hand, this could encourage the broadcasting of local cultural content and strengthen local media.
Unfortunately, the article does not explain the operational mechanisms, such as how these regional KPIs would be formed or how their finances would be managed.
“There is concern that this proposal could become a financial burden for regional budgets,” she added.
Dr. Rahayu emphasized that the Broadcasting Bill still requires further review of several inefficient articles that overlap with existing regulations.
She argued that broadcast regulations should not narrow the space for freedom of expression or threaten individuals on digital platforms.
“This bill, as I see it, punishes content creators rather than the platforms. Let the platforms handle moderation; they’re the ones responsible. The government can engage in dialogue with them,” she stated.
Looking at broadcast regulations in Europe, audiovisual laws provide clear distinctions between traditional television broadcasts and digital platforms.
These include support for local content, bans on discriminatory material, and advertising regulations.
The regulations distinguish between the two, for example, by setting different rules for tobacco advertisements on television and video sharing on digital platforms.
The key point is that these laws regulate organizers, institutions, and broadcasting companies, not individuals.
Furthermore, Dr. Rahayu noted an important aspect missing from the Broadcasting Bill.
Current regulations still focus largely on the national media industry, with little effort to support local broadcast media.
Since the digital transition, many local TV stations have struggled to survive or have even collapsed.
The government must protect the broadcasting industry, not merely impose bans or restrictions.
“After all, the existence of the media represents the voice of the people, and it needs to be protected,” she concluded.
Author: Tasya
Editor: Gusti Grehenson
Post-editor: Lintang Andwyna
Photographer: Donnie