In the last five years, Islamic media, especially those in the form of websites, podcasts, or social media pages, have mushroomed. The trigger is none other than the Internet, both signal infrastructure or the level of public literacy that is getting better.
The Islamic media spring actually happened two decades ago, around the 2000s, after the collapse of the New Order regime. Then, magazines, newspapers, billboards, and so on blossomed. Which is nothing but the aftermath of the emergence of new Islamic organizations, such as Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia (HTI), the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI), and so on, and the like.
Social changes began to be felt in the next five to ten years, or around 2005-2010. Since the emergence of Islamic media, Islamic values have emerged into modern, capitalistic, industrialist, and pop culture styles and values. Then there are various expressions of Islam, such as the Hajj-Umrah program with a celebrity cleric, the Prophet’s herbal business, the SMS service for worship reminders, and investment programs labelled as alms or sharia.
At that time, there was a lot of fuss about who was Pancasila and who was Islamist. However, this kind of commotion has been going on since Mbah Hasyim’s time, although in a different form and continues to evolve. However, the fuss over this matter was less raging. Because, at that time, the hot issue was about Ahmadiyyah and about false prophets named Ahmad Moshaddeq and Lia Eden.
So, there was more fuss about the issue of pluralism but in the inter-religious dimension, along with the theological or social debates surrounding it, “similar” religions such as Islam, Ahmadiyya, Bahai, etc. Or, something completely different like Islam vis a vis Christianity, sometimes fanned by conservative-modernist Islamists. Discourses of this type become a discourse among Islamic media: magazines, bulletins, and so on, with all the pros and cons.
Long story short, we have arrived in the digital era, namely mid-2013 until now. Islamic media is again lively growing on the Internet. The cyber commotion began when old Islamic organizations such as NU or Muhammadiyyah were severely beaten by new Islamic organizations regarding social media control, which affected the congregation’s share.
At the same time, conservative-modernist, paramilitary or even transnational Islamic organizations are blooming after two decades of existence in Indonesia since the Reformasi era. Their ideas became dominant thanks to their expertise in playing social media and Internet platforms.
Apparently, this disturbs the peace of the Indonesian Muslim public. NU and Muhammadiyyah, in addition to feeling that they have a responsibility to eradicate; also in harmony with the authorities who are not happy with the Islamic political agenda or the transnational Islamic ideas these organizations bring.
The momentum then occurred during the Ahok incident and the banning of Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia in 2017. Since then, the dispute between Pancasila Islam and conservative-modernist Islam has entered a new escalation. As this escalation increases, so does the intensity of their media.
Digital literacy training, digital ethics education, socialization of religious moderation in cyberspace, and the like are intensively held, from seminar halls to Islamic boarding schools mosques. News portals and Islamic channels are no less lively. But the problem is, to a certain degree, it is not uncommon for this spirit to crystallize so that it ignores the principles of journalism or even the principle of open-mindedness.
For example, some Islamic media on the Internet, even from moderate circles, are still easy to find using dictions that cornered their ideological opponents (although these opponents are countless), apologetic, bombastic, populist, and glorification towards their own ideology. Products that contain such qualities are usually passed by the editors or editorial parties simply because of ideological alignment or conformity with the group’s mission.
This is not wrong, but it opens up great opportunities to pollute discourse in the atmosphere of Islamic media. Many contents with the same substance but with different bombastic wording are still published. This could be a question, will these moderate Islamic media spend most of their energy only on ideological issues? Isn’t there something universal they can give? If so, to what extent?
Several editors, I have ever met answered in various ways. First, some don’t really care about the journalistic principles or the principle of open-mindedness because they know that bombastic, apologetic, or repetitive dictions can attract viewers (which are actually not far from the same ideology).
In the view of communication science, this can be compared to the term “feeding” the emotions and beliefs of the audience. The logic works similar to click-bait. But, on the other hand, the media concerned also has “loyal readers” who continue to thirst for ideological pleasures. So, one paddle, two islands crossed. At this point, although it contains ideological education, the educational value or habituation of critical reasoning from a media deserves to be questioned.
However, some editors are cautious to check word by word to ensure the manuscripts they receive are solid. Thus, there are no broken logic, misleading substance, and new writing goals. Some other editors even allow the publication of ideologically contrasting texts but have high public educational value.
Indeed, amid an ideological war in which the stakes are the nation’s integrity, it is essential to promote and strengthen ideologies favouring universalism and pluralism. But, apart from that, it is equally crucial to ensure that the strengthening and promotion of doctrine do not lead to communal fallacies, where the ability to think convergently or from multiple perspectives (even from opposing perspectives) is lost. If that ability is lost, the risk of giving birth to aggressive people is also greater.
Remember, KH Wahid Hasyim, in his writing entitled Why I Choose NU (1953), took 4 years just to consider whether he should join NU or not, even though NU is an organization created by his own father. From the very beginning, this implies that the tradition of critical thinking and even the tradition of evaluating our own review has been exemplified by our ancestors.
In the context of Islamic media, it is a choice: do you choose to put forward an ideology without any measurable preparations related to the cognitive consequences of that ideological spirit? Or decide to prioritize format, content, or content that is more educative and open to sharpening the cognitive base of the people?