“If People Don’t Know What You’re Doing; They Don’t Know What You’re Doing Wrong.” – Sir Humphry Appleby

 

A friend of mine has just posted an article that he wrote on Linkedin, which reminded me of that wonderful British TV series, “Yes Minister,” which told tale of a politician and his civil servants. One of the jokes that people used to tell, was that “Yes, Minister” and “Yes, Prime Minister,” told you everything you needed to know about how government’s function. One the great teaching moments came in a scene when the chief civil servant explained why government secrecy was necessary. He said “If people don’t know what you’re doing; the don’t know what you’re doing wrong.”

In the British context, this remark is something of a joke. While Britain and much of the Western world are far from perfect, issues like government corruption are often things that don’t hit home for the ordinary person. It’s a slightly different matter in developing countries, where issues like corruption become part and parcel of everyday life. I live in Singapore and although I don’t really “feel” the possibility of government corruption in my daily life, I’m just a short bus ride away from Malaysia, where getting shaken down for bribes once in a while is fairly common.

I bring this up because a lot of “democratic” societies (for the purpose of argument, Singapore will be included), are now looking at things at putting on caps on basic freedoms like freedom of the press. One only has to think of the way media publications need licenses or worry about losing advertiser support or the sudden strengthening of libel laws to see how media controls are being subtly imposed.

In Singapore, our system of media management was based on Lee Kuan Yew’s main argument that “he” would set the agenda. His consistent point to media outlets around the world was “nobody elected” you and so, our local media scene has been infamously tame when it’s come to questioning government or for that matter of fact, anyone in any position of authority – ie chairmen and CEOs of companies. I believe the phrase used in Singapore is “responsible.”

So, thanks to this “conditioning” it becomes very easy to assume that when things get reported, that something bad is happening. I remember trying to explain to Thambi Pundek aka The Young Muslim Politician from Pasir Ris GRC who guzzles Pork on a Ramadan Day, that democracy and the loosening of control on the media was good for a country. He countered that this was not necessarily true and gave the example of Malaysia under Mahathir and Malaysia under Abdullah Badawi.

His logic was simple. Corruption scandals appeared in the media under Badwai when they didn’t appear under Mahathir, therefore corruption had increased. To be fair to Thambi, he’s not the only person who thinks this way. One judges the state of the world by what’s happening and the only way you know what’s happening is by what you read or hear about in the news.

However, as my friend from NardelloNardello argues, this is not necessarily true and the slew of reports of the corruption in Indonesia’s state owned enterprises might actually be a good sign rather than a bad one:

https://insights.nardelloandco.com/post/102j8em/frequent-corruption-investigations-of-indonesian-state-owned-enterprises-may-be-a

 

 

He has a point. Just because something isn’t reported, it doesn’t mean its not happening. We need to remember; publicity is not good for crooks. Would you, for example, advertise that you were stealing?

I mean, there is an argument to say that things aren’t reported because they aren’t happening. However, if you live in a part of the world where you can get slapped down for saying things that someone in power doesn’t like, the argument that things aren’t reported because publishers and broadcasters have figured that the cost of reporting is simply not worth it (being sued to bankruptcy, beaten up, harassed, murdered etc).

Let’s remember, that journalist have a legal and moral obligation to tell the public about what’s going on. Yes, there have to be certain laws in place to ensure that journalist write facts and that there is a certain amount of objectivity in their reporting. People should not be “slandered” because they were p***ed off with someone they didn’t like.

However, journalist do play an important role in making sure people know what’s going on. When it comes to things like “corruption,” that role becomes even more important because people then become aware that they’re being screwed over. Let’s face it corruption is like a lot of things. People get comfortable with it and accept it as fact of life and you need public pressure to get people out of their complacency. How does that happen? The usually when people are aware of what’s going on.

So, the next time you see a slew of corruption scandals being reported where there were none before, it’s not necessarily a sign that corruption has increased. Its more likely to be sign that corruption is finally being exposed and change for the better is on the way.