Rid's View

AI: That Gotta Hurt

2010-01-13T19:39:00.003+08:00

Simon Cowell quits American Idol. . . that gotta hurt! Not for Simon, but for the show.

Both Fox and Simon said that the show will survive. I disagree.

I don't think the show will go off air, but it will not have the same rating or audience number as before. So what if Ellen DeGeneres is a judge now, the show will be funnier, but still not the same. Simon is the top reason for most people to watch American Idol; he's rude, but often right, and these what people like. American Idol without Simon Cowell is like ice tea without the tea, what's the point?

Moreover, I think Simon's X Factor will cast the net wider, because of so many ways, including the fact that it's a new show. And if Paula Abdul joins the panel, it will definitely put American Idol under the bus.

Contemporary Urge

2010-01-05T19:52:00.005+08:00

Ever since I was enchanted with Mia Michaels's dance routine, I've been having urges to do a contemporary dance; weird, huh?

As far as I can remember I've never known contemporary dance until I began to watch Fox's So You Think You Can Dance. There's something about the movements which often, especially Mia's, capture the emotion of the songs really well.

I want to be able to dance contemporary.

It's Easy to be a Critic, but. . .

2010-01-02T21:17:00.002+08:00

Yup, I think so, it's way too easy to be a critic, especially when you are Simon Cowell; but, unfortunately this blog post is not about him, it's about being a critic.

When you are in a democratic country like the USA or Indonesia, the chance of being blasted by critics are high. It's not wrong, but sometimes people just need to step back and look at the reality and the facts.

For example, the President of Indonesia, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, recently said that Indonesia was economically better off in 2009 despite of the recession. The comments that this article gets are provocative; most are really, ignorant comments. One comment said something like it's nice to be complimented but the facts are often wrong. And, I said to myself, this person has not even seen the report from the Ministry of Finance; how ignorant!

It's easy to be a critic, may be because we were taught to judge people from we were young. Remember, "Don't talk to a stranger!". The media have a lot to do in shaping the public's perception also. For example, I found that the media always attribute the words "Islam" or "Muslim" after or before the word terrorism or terrorists. They don't do that to other religion, and people still wonder why people fear Islam so much.

It's easy to be a critic, may be because they think democracy equals full liberty. That is an interpretation I found ridiculous. Democracy is not full liberty, there is no such thing. We live in a country governed by laws. The laws dictate what we can and can't do. Democracy is a governmental ideology, hence, what can and can't do is still on the hands of the government. Even when there are no governmental laws, there are still norms, ethics, that guides our behaviours.

It's easy to be a critic because our "hero" said so. Most of us are probably unaware about politics, and most just follow one party; and suddenly the party's opinions become bible--the opinions are always true. Look at how many Republicans think President Obama wanted to turn US to become an Islamic nation because Sean Hannity said so. Look at how many Republicans think President Obama never uttered a word about terrorism in his Cairo speech because Megyn Kelly said so; and those who believe were just too ignorant to even read the full transcript of the speech.

So, my point is, it's easy to be a critic, but stop, and look at the facts. Find the right information, digest and analyse the information that we have, then we can critic. In today's age of information, we should not be one step behind just because we are too lazy or too ignorant to find and analyse the information.

Indonesian Human

2010-01-02T11:37:00.003+08:00

A few days ago, I finished reading a book titled Manusia Indonesia by Mochtar Lubis. It's the full transcript of Mochtar's speech on 1977, along with some responses and responses to those responses.

The speech is a provocative and, of course, controversial. The main content of the speech is six characteristics of Indonesians. Well, five of them are bad characteristics, only one that I found positive. These are stereotypes of Indonesians; but, just like any stereotype, it's neither totally right nor wrong.

The speech was 32 years after Indonesia's independence, and there are some particular sentences that I found intriguing; one of them is Mochtar's hope that there will be manusia pancasila by 2000. However, when I look at how the youngsters now act, it seems that the stereotypes are even more true.

I will not dwell to explain or describe the six characteristics. I will be posting an article about it for Diaspora, I just need to find an angle for it.

Just one more thing. . .

Happy New Year!!

Dearly Missed, the Hero of Democracy & Pluralism

2009-12-31T12:03:00.002+08:00

Innalillahi wainnaillaihi rajiun,

Just one night before 2009, Indonesia has lost yet another icon with the legacy of democracy and pluralism.

Former President K.H. Abdurrahman Wahid, also known as Gus Dur, passed away last night from heart complication.

Despite his position as a religious leader, Gus Dur was the hero of pluralism. For him, everyone is equal, race and religion has never stand on his judgement of people. Even his death unites the polarised political environment.

He will be dearly missed.

Thought: Oprah & Sarah Palin Interview

2009-11-18T21:03:00.004+08:00

Two powerhouse interviewers, one subject. Barbara Walters and Oprah Winfrey were interviewing Sarah Palin, as Palin is on a media tour for her best-selling book "Going Rouge: An American Life".

This blog thread, however, is my thought on Oprah's interview. [Have not watched Barbara's yet]

Part 1

Oprah started the interview with three topics. Clearing the controversy about Oprah snubbing Palin on the campaigning months; Palin's first involvement with McCain's campaign team; and, the media.

So far, Oprah is quite fierce, very tentative I must say. I don't care about the snubbing part, so let's skip that. I was quite surprised, though, when Palin immediately said "Yes!" when McCain asked her if she's ready to be a VP. She also said she was disappointed with the treatment that the media gave her. I agree with that, I think Palin was being blindsided by the media. Am I surprise? No. She was a no one to those outside Alaska, and suddenly she was a VP candidate. She was very naive and she admitted that:

"I was naive to think that the media would leave my kids alone."

Part 2

Interesting, very interesting.

This is where I start to disagree. The main topic for this part of the interview is how Sarah Palin was "constructed" by the McCain's aides to be a presentable VP candidate. Here's a very interesting point that Palin said:

"He's (John McCain) is a maverick, he's a bold man. The choice he just made is all about empowering woman, though. He's all about equality. He's about the everyday working class individual who can succeed in this country; and, he chose someone who reflects that. . . ."

If I were Oprah, this will be my next questions:

"But, a lot of people, including women, feel that Senator McCain choose you to reel in Secretary Clinton's supporters. Do you think that's partly true? Has it ever crossed your mind?"

These questions were not asked. Funny enough, the topic was a big controversy when Senator McCain announced his running mate. A woman whom a lot of people did not know about, while Hilary Clinton was just suspending her campaign. There's something fishy, isn't there? So, I really would like to know Palin's answer.

There's one more questions I would like to ask regarding the topic of "being made" by McCain's aides. But, I think I'll leave it until I watch Barbara's interview.

Part 3

Unprofessional? A journalist asking what newspaper does Palin read is an unprofessional? Annoyed when a journalist ask her stands on abortion repeatedly? Blaming that a journalist did not give her a chance to hear her stand on abortion.

Here's a question. Can you just name one newspaper? If a VP candidate is frustrated with a simple question, how would she deals with global issues? If a journalist repeatedly ask your stands on an issue, isn't that a repeated chance for you to clear the air?

To me, Sarah Palin is making so much excuses about the issue of Katie Couric's interview. Here's an interesting article to counter Palin's excuses: Palin's Katie Couric Lies

Part 4

This is, I think, the fun part of the interview so far. The topic, Levi Johnston. I think that Oprah nailed the question here. Oprah asked how Palin felt when someone who has been inside "the circle" is now outside talking bulls about her. I don't want to spend so much time here, but seriously think Palin was talking as a mom in this part. Very loving and caring, although, her thanksgiving invitation to Levi-- I don't buy it.

Part 5

"She's not retreating; she's reloading" - Sarah Palin's father

She's running for President alright. She didn't say it when Oprah asked the question (and when Oprah rephrase the question), but I think she's eyeing the presidency seat, or at least she has thought about it.

Anyway, this part is really interesting. Oprah was asking about Palin's decision to step down from the Governor's seat. She was implying that she did it to "save" Alaska from the troubles that her opposition brought. I'm not convinced, however; and, I don't think Oprah either. Palin could have done more in her seat as the Governor of Alaska, but, perhaps, the stress was too much for her. Either way, I'm not convinced.

To close this thread, I just want to say that Sarah Palin is quite a character. She is fascinating and, please, don't underestimate her. Even though I think that she was, or may I say is, not ready for the highest executive seat in the government, she is a force to be reckoned it. She is very likable and a "speaker" of a different approach from a conservative Republican.

FYI, I don't think Oprah was harsh to Sarah Palin. I would love to see Oprah push to envelope further thought.

My Thought on Tim 8 Recommendations

2009-11-18T09:44:00.003+08:00

Just finished reading the complete document of "Rekomendasi Tim 8". If you ask my thought on the recommendations, I think Tim 8 did what it supposed to do (even more) but it is expected. Nothing really stands out, but one thing--Century Bank saga.

Take a look at this:

"Tim 8 berdasarkan Keputusan Presiden No. 31 Tahun 2009, Tim 8 bertugas untuk melakukan verifikasi fakta dan proses hukum atas Kasus Chandra M. Hamzah dan Bibit Samad Rianto."

"Tim 8, based on Keputusan Presiden No. 31 Year 2009, Tim 8 is mandated to verify facts and law processes of Chandra M. Hamzah and Bibit Samad's case."

Based on the official mandate above, my perception is Tim 8 was established to independently look at the case of Chandra and Bibit--only this case. However, they went beyond the border and mentioned the Century Bank case. How did that happen?

"We received information while questioning relevant parties in the Bibit and Chandra case related to the KPK investigation *of the Bank Century debacle*," team secretary Denny Indrayana told reporters Tuesday.
"We believe there is a link between the two cases."
The Jakarta Post, Wed, 11/11/2009

Perhaps, there is indeed a link. But, can they prove it?

However, Denny said, the team, also referred to as Team 8, could not yet conclude to what extent the two cases were connected.
"It's part of the verification process we need to further probe," he added.
The Jakarta Post, Wed, 11/11/2009

At first, I thought that it's inappropriate for Tim 8 to include the case in the document. But, as I read it further, it's clear to me that the team has a strong suspicion to this, and they recommend a further investigation on it. I think, just like Martha Stewart say it, it's a good thing.

Moving on the content.

I already said that the recommendations are expected; which means that Tim 8 did what they supposed to do--verify and explore further what the public has known. And, it is an open recommendation, meaning that the public is encouraged to comment on the document.

I also like how, finally, Tim 8 actually recommends institutional reform, especially law institutions. Seriously, it's about time.

I do hope, however, that Tim 8 would explore further. It said that the police was "trying to hard" to make the case; and, I would like to know why rather than just "Yes".

Now, we just need to wait for the President's decision on the case.

Articles oh Articles

2009-11-05T21:00:00.002+08:00

Just a quick update.

For my feature article assignment, I decided to do the topic of "Obama and Islam"; talking about the progress that President Obama has (and has not, perhaps) done since his Cairo speech. I didn't know what I was thinking for taking that topic--my lecturer actually said that it's an ambitious topic. But, I thought, eh, I'll go with it.

OMG. I just send an e-mail a few minutes ago to one of the Imam in Singapore, asking for the opinions, and then . . . I just received a reply (wow, he's fast) and he agreed.

Okay, so done for now (I told you it's a quick update), need to take care of the interview :p

The question of 'S & S'S & S'

2009-10-18T22:36:00.002+08:00

Don't worry, it's not a spam or virus, it's a grammar questions. I was writing a movie review for an assignment, and I reviewed Surrogates (which is seriously terrible). It's lead actor is Bruce Willis, so when I wrote a the possessive noun for Bruce, I wrote "Bruce Willis' robot". Apparently, it's wrong. I gasped when my journalism tutor told me that. I didn't know, as I remember it, I was taught to put apostrophe ['] after "S" when the word is plural or end with "S".

But people, don't judge, I didn't know and it's a common problem from non-native (or native also) English speaker. My tutor said there's actually something wrong with it, but he doesn't know why people taught that wrong thing, so I wasn't really blamed for it.

But why I found the mistake on articles written by professional?

FOX News not a news channel? DUH

2009-10-18T22:09:00.002+08:00

So, FOX News is in a heated debate with the White House and, apparently, FOX News's competitors are enjoying every moment. The question that they ask is: "Is FOX News a news channel?"

I find it peculiar and surprising that this question is not asked earlier (as often as it is now anyway)—they usually ask: “Is FOX News ‘fair and balance’?”

So, what's up with that? Is it because the White House is leading the charge?

As a media student, we (the class and me) have talked a lot about FOX News being “fair and balance” and I, for one, am not surprised on the subjectivity of FOX News. I do not think that FOX News is actually a news channel. To me, FOX News is a channel where political commentators (who are Republican fanatic) come together and use the word “journalism” to create more credibility.

Journalism is a perfect word to create credibility since still many people think journalists are objective. I still remember Barbara Walters (I think one of the best female journalist) repeatedly said that no one really knows her political preference because she was trained to not give opinion. Yet, at times she goes out of the boundary.

So, just to “balance” this argument, I do believe that no news channel is 100% objective in its reporting (sorry to break the bad news). However, the level of subjectivity is different; and FOX News, sorry man, you are way up there. You have news but not so much “fair and balance”. And for the competitors, you are kind of late in asking the question.

What’s the point of this blog post?

It’s just me saying to all FOX News’s opposition: as much as I don’t like FOX News, don’t rub it in. Do you really think that by asking the question “is it a news channel” you will overshadow FOX News? Not a chance. Seriously.

Condolences

2009-09-30T20:53:00.004+08:00

My condolences to the victims of earthquake and tsunami in Samoa and Padang

...terlalu banyak teguran dipenghujung September ini, mudah-mudahan yang ditegur akan segera ingat dan insaf dari lupanya...

Indonesia 64th Independence Day

2009-08-17T22:36:00.005+08:00

Paskibra agustus 2006 KBRI Singapura, ,miss u all guys
-ratsyanuartanti via Twitter

I remember that day, I was the commander of the 2006 Flag Bearer team. I remember clearly how proud we were, when we carry, guard, and escort the Bendera Merah Putih -- our national flag -- and you can hear the sound and echo of our solid and united steps. It was those moments that brought us, even the trainer, to the verge, or perhaps, tears after it finished.

It was that simple moment that remind us, we are ONE Indonesia.

Happy 64th Independence Day, Indonesia!
I pray only the best for my country and nation

-17 August 2009

Little Bit of Thought

2009-08-04T22:55:00.004+08:00

Yes, I know, I didn't post anything in July. But hey, I'm back.

So much has happened since the last time I write something here, the election is now over (hopefully *finger crossed*), Jakarta was bombed again - thrice, and others. If you've been following my blog, I was obsessive with the election; I've even written reviews of the Presidential and VP debates. However, you would have noticed that I didn't even finished reviewing everything--but actually, I did review everything, I just didn't write it, why? I thought it was back to square one.

Since we are on the subject of election, last week on Public Affairs (PA) tutorial class, the class was supposed to pick a PA subject--we were supposed to represent a group/org. and create a lobbying tactics to achieve our aim. My group picked PDI-P, I thought it would be fun to represent the losing party since PDI-P lost the election and has been very fussy about it. I thought, you know what, we will focus on using political pressure; but, the lecturer wasn't sure if it's gonna work. I have my own arguments on why I choose that route (I didn't say it in class though, time is not enough)...

*hold on a sec, I think I should change this post's title from 'The Lighter Side' to hmmm... I'll think about that later*

I have never been so fond in Indonesian politic; one of the reasons is because it is just too dirty and too obvious -- they want power. As much as I want to believe that these people in the government and parliament are "good people" and "caring people", I just don't see the majority act that way. Yes, perhaps, certain people are, in fact, very thoughtful and dutiful to the people, but I think these people are minorities -- most of the time they are shunned. The media is not helping also, they are just too commercial to have really given exposure to these minorities in the government and parliament.

Indonesian political parties, as I see it, still have huge impacts on its members standing on the parliament and the government. You will not be seen as the member of PDI-P if you hate Megawati, and so on. But, the funny thing is, in most political parties, if their leader failed, it's his or her fault, but if he/she win, it's the victory of the whole party (so much for togetherness). That is one of the reasons why political pressure play a massive role in reserving victory in parliament and government.

Anyway, that was a little bit of thought from me (maybe this should have been my title). I'll try to post as often as I can.

Cheers!!

In Loving Memory

2009-08-04T22:46:00.003+08:00

Mbah Surip
Musician
(1957-2009)

I am not the type of guy who is into reggae, yet I found Mbah Surip to be inspiring, and honestly, a breath of fresh air. What I like about him? he seems to be always happy, yes, that, and also the fact that he is real -- a real person, a real musician.

I know that now I sound like I know this guy, I don't, but what I do believe that he is a musician because of the music. I'm tired of seeing Indonesian musicians where it's all about being the prettiest, the coolest, the richest -- few seems real. And Mbah Surip is one of those few real musicians.

He was at the top of his career as a musician, unfortunately, his time is up. He will be missed -- I Love You Full!!

image: r0ch4.files.wordpress.com/.../mbah-surip-2.jp

The Indonesian Presidential Debate: Part 2

2009-06-26T11:09:00.004+08:00

Last night presidential debate's topic was all about poverty and unemployment.

First of all, the moderator, Ms. Aviliani, was the best moderator so far in the course of both presidential and vice presidential debate. She asked the right questions and still able to engaged the candidates for a debate. Of course, I don't think she succeeded in that thoroughly because the candidates didn't seem to want it.

Let's just say, I'm quite satisfied with the debate last night, it started to feel like a real debate (well, kinda). However, I really felt like it was only a "debate" between two candidates, SBY and JK. Megawati, well.. she was disappointing; if you see her campaign, it was all about the economy, yet last night, she lost her flare, energy, and focus. She just didn't deliver.

I would not go much deeper (because I have tutorial class coming up and I forgot to take notes, since I have to do the Media Structures weekly quiz in between debates). However, I would say that SBY made his case VERY solid at the opening. JK, on the other hand, was convincing in answering the questions; he was also aggressive and keep "attacking" SBY in particular. SBY was defensive but he didn't lose his focus; he was still able to answer the questions and respond to JK's "attack".

If JK-Win keeps positioning themselves in their current strategies. SBY would have a harder time winning (most predicted he would probably win), because PDI-P and Golkar are in coalition. If, later on, there will be two rounds of election, either PDI-P would probably diverted its mass to support JK-Win. Hence, SBY would be in a difficult position.

In Loving Memory...

2009-06-26T11:00:00.003+08:00

Michael Jackson
1958-2009

Farrah Fawcett
1947-2009

Ed McMahon
1923-2009

My deepest condolences to all affected families, friends, and fans...

The Indonesian Vice Presidential Debate: Part 1

2009-06-23T22:19:00.002+08:00

Just finished watching moments ago, and it's time for my take on the debate.

'Building the Nation Identity', and that's the topic of tonight Indonesian Vice Presidential debate. Following the critiques given to Komisi Pemilihan Umum (KPU), there were some changes in the format that I found quite surprising. So then it became a formula of:

A topic that I was most ecstatic about + different format (and moderator) = me enjoying the debate.

Do I think it was perfect? No. Was it good and enjoyable? Yes -- although I get agitated with one of the candidate (I'll tell you why later).

The debate started with each VP candidate talking about their vision and mission in correlation with the topic. Hence, there was an expectancy that the candidates would define their interpretation of what creates the nation identity. For this round, Prabowo started talking about seeing the nation identity on the poverty level of the nation. I thought that was an awful definition and quite a narrow answer. Wiranto stated his speech using Indonesian national song, and end it with another song. I thought, that was also awful (not the singing, because it wasn't a singing competition). He didn't define the nation identity; his introductory speech was vague. He just went round and round without making any point. Boediono on the other hand, gave an excellent answer -- so excellent that, straight away, I tweeted him and thanked him for his speech. He drafted four pillars of nation identity, and in it (no. 1) was the national culture. Finally, someone realizes the importance of preserving the culture. It's about time!

When it's time for answer and questions. I could really see the different views and personalities that each candidate has. I would like to thank Wiranto though for opening the dialogue when he bluntly disagreed and criticized Boediono's answer. Of all the candidates there, Wiranto was the one who was engaged with the moderator, the question, and the audience -- he did answers the questions right on the target. Boediono was very calm (made me sleepy), but his answers were substantial and significant -- I really like him. There was a moment when they were debating about religion in politic. Boediono thought that it shouldn't mix, while Wiranto thought that there were some substances that politic can include from religion. Boediono smiled, and when came the time for him to respond back, he said this:

"Saya kira kita melihat ada perbedaan antara kata dan perbuatan. Kalau kita jujur pada diri sendiri kita sudah aman dan damai tidak perlu banyak berdebat."

"I think when we see differences between words and actions. If we honest to ourselves we are already safe and peaceful there's no need to debate a lot."

And then the camera shot Wiranto's face, and I just laughed.

Anyway, did you notice that I didn't even mention Prabowo's answers. Well, he just wouldn't get away from the main theme of his campaign, which is economy. Sometimes, his answers just didn't make sense which really agitated me. Unlike most of my friends, I really did not close any possibilities on who I will choose for. But, seriously, Mega-Pro haven't delivered their arguments to me yet, I even thought their commercials are somehow misleading/unreliable.

Put my agitation aside, I enjoyed the debate. They were more open, and oh yeah, I should congratulate the moderator. He was amazing and the questions that he gave were fantastic. So, thank you Prof Dr Komaruddin Hidayat.

Anyway, even thought I said I enjoyed the debate. It wasn't a real debate -- more of discussion perhaps. But there are some improvements, and I appreciated that. I'm looking forward to the next one and my grade for tonight's debate: Okay.

The Indonesian Presidential Debate: Part 1

2009-06-19T19:31:00.004+08:00

note: I known that I said I'll post up a lighter thread, but the atmosphere now is not really calling for something light. So, let's just bear with it for a while..

First and foremost, I apologize for not posting this response to the first 2009 Indonesian Presidential debate last night; but, the debate last night was far less than ordinary that I didn't have great energy to write this thread. However, after seeing many reports and analysis in various media, I feel ready to finally have a say.

I was ready with my paper and pen, in front of my laptop, to take down a lot of points from the debate. It was, after all, the moment that I've waited since I haven't picked my "leader" yet. But, seeing the small amount of election coverage and the analysis that I've done previously on Indonesian television industry, I did not set my expectation above standard. Unfortunately, it was not reaching at all; I did, however, have some notes -- criticism, more or less:

The use of language
No, it's not about curse words. None of the candidates curses. I'm talking about the use of English words -- at times, the candidates use English words or expression, such as 'founding father' . Do you think many Indonesian people would have understand that? I'm afraid not.

By now, you either start to agree or think I'm making too much of a deal out of it. Let's be careful here, I'm not trying to degrade my nation's prestige; but, not all of us understand English or even Bahasa. I still remember when my Bahasa (Indonesian language) teacher told the class how pitiful it was for the those who did not pass their final year exam; it was not math which barred them from continuing, it was their proficiency in language. I believe, as the leaders of this country, you should be able to communicate effectively using the common ground, Bahasa Indonesia.

Why this is a concern to me, you may ask? From my observation, the Indonesian media are already too commercialized; they begin to see that being "western" is profitable because it's modern. The Indonesian people do not necessarily filter the contents of the media, because for years, they've been bombarded with messages from private corporations who try to gain profit with little control from the regulator. With still unsound education foundation, we are in trouble. So, are we trying to lose our identity then with infusion of English language? (I'll leave it here, because it's already another topic).

I'm thankful, however, that the candidates did not use it a lot; it was quite minimum. (Should I apologize for the fuss then?)

Answer the question please... It is not a comedy show
Another point that I have from the debate last night was the answers and the way the candidates answer the questions. I was twittering about it (other points) last night, and I still think that off all the three candidates, SBY was the only one who answered the question; the others, I feel, were just going around and did the typical politician answers rather than answering strategically.

Towards the end of the debate, I felt that the atmosphere changes from, supposedly, serious debate to one of those cheesy comedic shows. JK, particularly, was the one who tried to be funny. For several times, he said, because he is still in the government, he agreed with the policies. That's not the answers that we want. Those three are the candidates for the Indonesian President, not candidates of Vice President; in fact, the moderator specifically asked with the term "...if you are the President..."

I do understand that the candidates, specifically JK, tried to ease up the tension and building up the image of 'likable President'. Nonetheless, there weren't any tension, and other than SBY, they did not really answer the questions given as I don't feel they had enough research to make a point. They should have used the limited to time to answer the question strategically, rather than trying to become likable.

This year Indonesian Presidential debate is not over yet, last night was only the first part, there are more to come. The next debate will be done for the Vice Presidential candidates, and the topic will be around the nation's identity. I have particular interest in this topic, I would have love it , however, if the Presidential candidates who talk about it. Anyway, let's see what will happen next as the Indonesian is opening a new chapter soon.

Changes Coming...

2009-06-11T20:52:00.002+08:00

Alright, so.. what's up with this blog? why didn't I blog as often as I could have?

Well, the answer is quite simple, either I don't have the time or just lazy. I actually have a few thoughts that I wanted to write in this blog, such as the Obama's Cairo speech, the development of Manohara's case, the Omni's case, etc; but then, either I didn't do it, or I deleted it after struggling to find the right word.

Whatever the reasons are, the point is, I don't think I can keep up with the intention of having "serious" commentary blog. So, I decided to actually broaden the 'intention' and let me just write whatever I want to write.. very few (notice I use the word few not a few) people come to my blog anyway.

Hence, the new template and I'll post up more "soft" writing later on...

Review: Audition by Barbara Walters

2009-05-05T19:47:00.004+08:00

As a journalism student, I regard Barbara Walters as one the greatest female journalist in the world. Her intellect and hard work have brought us some of the most compelling stories ever told. She has also done interviews with famous -positively and negatively -people; from politicians to celebrities to everyday people who suddenly made the national news cover. In her book, Audition, she revealed her success and her life stories -- things that she regards as the 'total package'.

Audition is simply my favorite memoir ever, and is in my top list of books to read for Journalism student. Of course, the writing is excellent, no surprise there since she is a journalist; however, I found it surprising that Barbara is an great story-teller too and should I say, great memory.

What interest me about this book is how journalism (especially in the US) has been evolving throughout the year, and how Barbara get to where she is now. From how she got the name skinny-malinky-dink to how she has empathy for Monica Lewinsky; from her affair with an African-American senator to her ability to make people cry on her interview; from a writer on Today show to the creator of The View; all are revealed in this book.

Audition is now available in paperback*. A great gift for mother's day.

image from www.topnews.in
*with additional words and pictures

Manohara's Case: Liberal vs Conservative?

2009-05-02T13:51:00.004+08:00

It seems that Asia is currently coloured by a lot of controversies and issues. Thailand with their political instability, Singapore with its AWARE saga, and Indonesia with its Manohara's case. I do believe that the media are overexposing a lot of issues, and I'm tired of listening to all of it, and it seems to me, my stand on certain issues is firmer with these controversies. Today, after another episode of Silet focusing on Manohara's case, I think I need to speak.

It's better for you to understand the main issue, so click here to read a news article about it.

Simply, the controversy started when Manohara's mother, Daisy, reported that his daughter is kidnapped by one of Malaysian Prince from Kelantan kingdom. Over and over again, accusations are being thrown to the kingdom, including allegation of kidnapping, sexual and domestic abuse. The Indonesian people are furious over this controversy, especially when the allegation that the Prince was degrading Indonesian had surfaced. I, personally, was drawn to that anger . But as I follow the news (remember that the media is overexposing issues? this is one of them), I started to see that it might be the case of liberal versus conservative.

First, we need to note Manohara's background and age. From the information that I gather, Manohara was brought up in liberal community. It is only right to assume that she was living quite a liberal life -- carefree. Whats more, she is barely 17 year-old; and what do we know about people in this age? lability. People in this age do not necessarily dream or even want to be constrained with a strict protocol. Curiosity is at its peak and to most youth in this century (and maybe in previous century), this is the time when they want to try out everything.

Another thing is to note that Manohara is married to a prince, a real-life prince. It seems that a lot of people forget that there are strict protocol when you step in to the royal palace. Let's take an example from the British Royal Protocol.

The audience would not raised questions without the consent of the courtiers. The monarch should be addressed properly with "Your Majesty" and the members with HRH style is "Your Highness". Children of the sovereign would have "The" before their names, example: The Princess Anne or The Prince Charles. http://europeanroyalty.blogspot.com/2007/12/royal-protocol.html

Remember when a lot of people were gasping because US First Lady, Michelle Obama, had her arm around Queen Elizabeth? That is why, I think the Kelantan royal family also has their own protocol.

Now, let's connect the points that we gathered. A liberal teenager is in a royal palace with strict protocol. One hypothesis then developed, she's not happy about not being a teenager. She doesn't like to be constrained in such tight places. This could explain that she is not happy being in the palace. Whether the allegation about sexual and domestic abuse is true or not, I can't say anything about it. So far, I have not seen any evidences nor do I know any have been put forward. There is though, a doctor that said he examined Manohara and Daisy's lawyer said the doctor had made a statement about possibility of sexual abuse. But again, the doctor has not confirmed and refused to confirm (correct me if I'm wrong here).

I am not taking stand. I'm not defending the royal family nor am I defending Manohara's family.

I see flawed from both families. I do not agree with many decisions and actions that the royal family has done. For example, I can't get my head around on why they just don't want Manohara to see her mother or at least let Manohara to call. Instead, pictures are shown that Manohara is "happy". As a person who study media, I don't think that the pictures prove anything. Hence, I am starting to think that they are trying to cover something, and God knows what.

As I was before, the Indonesia public seems to focus more on the royal family and what they have and are doing, or alleged to doing. Acceptable, because that is how the media have been framing this issue and some people just don't get it (that's how powerful the media are).

My focus, however, has switched from the royal family to the mother, Daisy. She has admitted to be one of the main factors who pushed Manohara on marrying the prince. I have a lot of questions to ask her about this, including, what was she after? why the prince? why the push? what was her consideration? did she know about the royal protocol? and many others ( it could have been Barbara Walter's Special).

There are still a lot of mysteries surrounding this controversy and I don't see any possible outcome. I don't have any idea why the difficulty of a possible meeting between both family, at least it would clear the air and the mystery. For now, again, we would have to wait.

This has been Rid's View: my blog, my view.

The Irony of 'Minta Tolong'

2009-04-29T21:41:00.003+08:00

I'm talking about a specific reality TV program on RCTI -- an Indonesian TV channel. The program is called Minta Tolong (Ask for Help). Basically, a crew of cameramen (hidden) follow a poor people roaming the street asking people to buy something from them for a specific price. They use real poor people not actors and these people really needs help.

I'll give you an example (a video you can follow right at the end of this post):
An elementary student's home was flooded, and all her books were destroyed; but she has an exam coming up and she needs the book to study. So, she took one of her t-shirt and ventured on the street asking people to buy her t-shirt for Rp 20,000. So, she goes on that journey, and finally when someone bought the t-shirt, that someone will get a bunch of money .. like seriously a bunch of money .. from a "stranger". This someone is usually a poor person also; in fact, I've never recalled other people other that low-income family.

Anyway, the point is ...

I do get the idea that the producer is trying to show, 'even the poorest person would still help people in need'; but then the irony kicks in.

Now, sometimes the people on the street would notice that this is a set up, and they try to help just to get the money. This is the situation that I also understand, because they need money and this show is a way for them to get that money. And it seems to me that the editing tends to antagonize them -- I found it unfair.

Sometimes, they also superimpose a text saying that this person wouldn't help and bla bla bla. But, sometimes the person really can't help. You can clearly see that the person is also struggling to find food and they kept on asking this person to help; and at the end the text is also antagonizing. Again, I found it unfair.

To me, there's a bigger picture that the show missed -- the poverty level is outrageously high and it's depressing. The editing of the show do not help getting this message across, in contrast, they tend to antagonize a lot of people. Also, the team do not always choose a logically-acceptable plot. Sometimes, they sell the wrong thing to the wrong people.

It certainly is a bitter-sweet show.

It has been Rid's view: my blog, my view

Expect Something from G-20 Summit?

2009-04-02T12:35:00.003+08:00

A cab driver, dropping off passengers a stone's throw from ExCel, the venue of the summit, said: "I seriously doubt they can do any good, even though I hope they can."
-China Daily

What is G-20?

The G-20 is a group of finance ministers and central bank governors from 20 economies: 19 of the world's largest national economies, plus the European Union (EU).

Alright, so moving on to my commentary...

The G-20 summit is opened today in London, and one of many things that they are talking about is obviously the economy (financial crisis). Interestingly enough, even before the summit starts, we can already pointed out the "negative-energy" or the "villain".

One main issue is about 'global financial rules' -- the term itself, I don't get it and I began doubting the summit.

From what I know [please forgive me if I'm not right, because I'm not an economist], each country has different financial approach. The US is famous for capitalism, others are more centralist. Recently, several EU members were arguing about protectionism and then, they failed to agree on a bailout fund. So, if there are already so much problem within a region, why do they have to come out with global financial rules?

Since I don't know the details about it, let's just say it's a good idea. But one thing come to my mind, France and Germany, what about them?

[French's President] Sarkozy, a man constitutionally uncomfortable unless the spotlight is shining on him, has even threatened to walk out of the G-20 proceedings rather than sign up to anything he doesn't consider tough enough on reining back tax havens, policing hedge funds and restricting the bonus culture.
-CNN

So, what does the quote above tells us?

Does it mean that the G-20 countries must follow the standards of French and Germany? Well, just FYI, it's supposed to be global financial rules, not French-Germany Financial Rules..

There are a lot of clouds surrounding the summit and I think, us (the public), do not understand what's going on, that it cast so much doubt for the average-Joe. What we need is assurance that they will be a positive outcome, and I don't think anyone has given us that assurance.

So, can we expect something from G-20 summit?

I, personally, do not expect that they would have a solid outcome from the summit. They are just so much doubt and conflicts. I do understand that they are trying to protect their countries from worsening (well, at least, I hope this is the reason), but to agree on a 'financial global rules', they will not meet a point when they are not open to it in the first place.

Perhaps, for now, we can only hope and monitor what will happen.

This is my view, in my blog.

Political Contract? Yeah Right...

2009-03-26T20:09:00.002+08:00

image courtesy of VIVAnews

Approaching election day in Indonesia, there is an emerging trend among politicians and political parties -- political contract.

In simple words, political contract refers to promises on paper and the politician involved will sign it. "

My response to that was -- yeah right, like that ever gonna happen.

There are two key words I need to highlight in this entry -- 'Indonesian Politicians' and 'Promises'.

As far as I understand, they don't go hand-in-hand. Of course for those who know me well enough will said, "Rid is always pessimistic about Indonesian politicians," which is true; but I'll tell you why 'Political Contract' does not sit well with me.

For example, let's choose political contract of PDIP, led by Megawati Soekarnoputri who is a former President of Indonesia. In that political contract, it said that PDIP's legislative representatives will work on three agendas: creating new jobs, setting affordable prices of staple foods and improving people’s welfare.

If for some reasons, they do not fulfill this contract, they will not run on 2014 election. I don't buy it -- so what? They will be others who will run from their party and again voice out the same bullbeep.

Referring to these three agendas, aren't these Megawati's agendas when she was our President? And what happened then? I'll leave it to that for a while ....

...
...
...

Ok, let's start again with another party as example. Partai Matahari Bangsa (PMB) [you don't have to know their English name, do you?]

Anyway, their political contract stated that all their legislative representatives must set aside 50% of their salaries for their party, if they get choosen.

My response was - AHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAH

First of all, 50% of their salaries? my observations concluded that many wanted the position because of the money. They're not going to give it away just like that; because if they really want to do it, they'll done it a long time ago. Even if they give 50% of their salaries, it still goes to the party, NOT the people -- why is that different from no money given? So, why is there even a political contract for them in the first place? I have my own hypothesis

---

I believe this emerging trend started because PDI-P [the first one who has political contract -- they get a national record for this] has gained more followers than others, so other parties start to have their own contracts to gain symphaty. The question now then, does it work?

That I don't know, I hope they don't.

When you have education, you'll see everything in different light; but education is a problem in Indonesia, not many have high education, all they care about is how to live; they don't know who to trust that they just couldn't see beyond the signed contract. This is also why, they don't particularly target young voters; why? Because young voters generally see beyond what they are served.

Another point about why there is such a trend is because there is no juridical limitation. If they don't follow the contract, they have no cases in court; They will only feel "shameful"-- but as far as I'm concern, Indonesian politicians are immune to that.

So, potical contract? Yeah right... this is just another trick, and I'm not buying it...

one more thing

Don't ask me which party am I voting for. None has convinced me to vote for them

Rid's View: my blog, my view

Who am I suppose to vote for?

2009-03-23T21:53:00.002+08:00

Indonesia will held its first round of election this upcoming April. As an Indonesian and I already met all the requirements, I have one vote per round to use.

But, being outside Indonesia and first-time voter (if I decided to vote for this round), I'm still confused and I'm not the only one.

First of all, I have no idea how my name is registered as voter, 'cause I've never registered before.I found out later that if I made my passport in the Indonesian embassy on where I live, I'm automatically registered as voter. So, I said to myself, "Okay, so what's next?"

Next step is to vote. This is where it's very confusing.

A little background: in the first round of election. We are to choose legislative representative.

The confusion is I thought I'm supposed to choose representative from a province; but which candidate from which province am I suppose to vote for? Who are they anyway? What do they do? Are they like the one who represent us in DPR?

I have no idea ..

Who am I suppose to vote for?

No you tell me if I should vote in the first round...

CNN Poll: Is Obama Doing Too Much?

2009-03-19T09:23:00.003+08:00

Well, 55% said yes.

This is a really interesting poll for me--people wanted Obama to solve the problems, yet they think for the first few months of his time in the white house, he's just doing too much.

However, the analysis found this:

"On the issues, 59 percent say they approve of how the president is handling the economy, 57 percent like how Obama's dealing with health care, 63 percent approve of how he's handling energy policy and 65 percent back him when it comes to education reform.

Of those polled. 66 percent like how Obama is dealing with foreign affairs, with 63 percent approving of how the president is handling Iraq, 67 percent agreeing with him on Afghanistan and 61 percent approving of how he's handling terrorism."

So, what do those tell you? People trust President Obama, they are just worried that he will lose focus. But I have faith in him, and so do the American people--well, most of them (no offence to Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coutler).

Anyway, I understand why people think this way, but again, we can't blame President Obama for doing so. All the policies that he's proposing are the first steps to resolving these problems, and it's not like all the problems are his fault--remember George W Bush? I rest my case...

Click here for the full article

This is Rid's View: my blog, my view

AIG Outrage

2009-03-17T23:38:00.002+08:00

I know that I haven't written anything in days (thanks to my assignment), but it didn't mean that I did not want to write anything. For example, the recent tragedy in Germany and America--but, my assignments didn't allow me to spend time and do so. But this TRAGEDY in America is an outrage. I realize that I'm not an American, but this is an OUTRAGE.

By know--if you follow the news--you'll probably know about the AIG executive bonuses. Yes, you read it right--EXECUTIVE BONUSES. In this recession time, where the average Joes are tightening their belts so they can survive. Those executive freaks at AIG get bonuses. Moreover, these bonuses came from US$170 billion in bailout money--money from the people. That money is to save the corporation from bankruptcy, because actually they are on the verge of bankruptcy. In case they haven't noticed, the company has lost US$62 billion. HALLO!!! WHERE'S YOUR DIGNITY!!!

Please pardon me for wearing a lot of capital letters today, but I am really angry; and I'm not even affected by this, or am I?

They said that they have obligation on the contract to pay bonuses. I mean, really? Don't these executives have heart? Everyday people are losing their jobs, they are trying so hard to earn money, and these executives got bonuses--$165 million in bonuses and compensation. Ironically, these are the people who get AIG to lost billions of dollar, and they still want to compendate them because hte contract tells them to do so. Outrageous, I say...

Seriously, I don't know what to say anymore. So, I'll let my favorite Judge to close this thread:

Edited transcript from CNN:

We took King Cam to the streets to see what all of you are talking about. Most people wanted Judy to answer one thing in particular.

Debbie: I was just wondering what you think about the AIG bailout and giving over $160 million in bonuses?

Judge Judy: We now own, you and I, 80 percent of AIG. And the excuse given for paying out these bonuses were that they were contracts and you can't void those contracts without consequences. And I think it's sort of interesting that you can't void contracts because these people were engaged in actions that were irresponsible, reckless and caused substantial damage.

How can they void the contracts of police officers and firemen and other civil servants who they're forcing to take furlough days despite the fact they have contracts? They're forcing them to take furlough days to make up budgets.

King: Are we going to get it [AIG bailout money] back?

Judge Judy: I don't think you'll ever see it back. I think that these people know that money is never coming back. But it seems to me if a company isn't working, there comes a point where you have to say that's what Chapter 11 is for.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu

2009-03-10T22:28:00.002+08:00

I don't really have anything to say about this, just watch it, Ok?

Videos from Phillyfinale on Youtube; but obviously, it's from Craig Ferguson.

The Pregnant Bunny

2009-03-09T21:36:00.003+08:00

A pregnant bunny?! That's what I'm talking about? Well, it's not just any bunny, it's the bunny from Moonlite Bunny Ranch -- a legal and licensed brothel in Nevada, USA.

To fully understand what I'm talking about, please watch the view below. Now, take note that it is only the first part (total of five parts), but you'll get the idea.

So, a 20-year old pregnant woman applied for a job at the brothel, and she got it. It's very surprising to hear that, but I do understand her struggle. What I don't understand is, where's the family? They abandoned her? This I find disturbing, well one of many disturbing things that I found throughout the episode. And let me tell you this, it took me about 3.5/5 parts of the episodes to finally said, "I have enough!"

I feel sad and angry for this particular bunny. Sad because her story really touched me, and from her reaction throughout the show and in the clip, I know that she doesn't want to do it. But she has no choice because her family ABANDONED her. I feel angry because of the family; it's really frustrating, I just can't figure out why the family did such a thing.

I believe that prostitution is wrong, and the bunny could have done something else. However, the bunny did pointed out a point. She basically said no one would hire a six-month pregnant woman, and even if that person did, low pay and she has to take maternity leave anytime soon. This is an irony.

If you see the comments, a lot of people thought that Tyra was being judgmental towards the bunny; but, I fully understand Tyra's frustration and I'm kinda in the same side of Tyra -- it was not a good decision. The bunny was six-month pregnant and she has to satisfy the libido of those shameless men. One of the men is actually being filmed and came to the show -- I mean, please child, I really want to slap him. But then again, it's not his fault, he came to a legal brothel, he's legal which means he is free to do whatever and he paid.

So, the question is, who's fault is this? Is it the brothel's owner, the bunny, or her family? A tough question to answer, but one thing that we can learn from this. Don't even think of having sex if you're not mentally, physically, and financially able to become responsible of what will become. Otherwise, you can end up like the bunny. And if you decided to have sex, there's such thing as condom and birth-control. It might not work 100%, but at least minimize the chance of being stupid.

On that note, I have shout-out to Bristol Palin, "YES! There's such thing as successful celibate. You just have to be smart enough to do it."

But remember...
After all this is Rid's view: my blog, my view.

It Shall Start

2009-03-08T23:45:00.000+08:00

Almost March 9 now, I thought I want to wait, but nah, I'll post something now..

I've been wanting to start this blog since I've found out I procrastinate a lot and I have an opinion. Most of the time, my opinion comes because of ABC's The View. Those who live in USA would probably know this. 4 to 5 women sit together and discuss all things from their personal life to the politics; I like it, especially when Joy and Elisabeth really get on each other [not literally of course].

Anyway, I've been wanting to talk about a lot of topics. From the Octomom to President Obama's stimulus bill, from Dewi Persik to the quality of Indonesian TV programmes. All of those things.

So, tomorrow, I shall start posting about my view.

After all, this is Rid's view: my blog, my view.