CONFLICT BETWEEN TWO VILLAGES ON TELEVISION SCREEN: ANALYSIS OF THE DISCOURSE OF BALI TV COVERAGE ON KEMONING-BUDAGA CASE I Komang Arba Wirawan I Wayan Ardika Anak Agung Bagus Wirawan Film and Television Study Program, Faculty of Arts and Design Indonesia Institute of the Arts Denpasar email: arbawirawan10@gmail.com ABSTRACT This study is intended to analyze the discourse of Bali TV coverage on the Kemoning –Budaga case, Bali, a conflict which took place on 17 September 2011, which led to discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village ‘desa pakraman’. Such coverage of the case was considered blaming the Governor of Bali, Mangku Pastika. He was reported to intend to disperse the traditional villages in Bali. The Bali TV and Bali Post, which are under the Bali Post Media Group ‘Kelompok Media Bali Post’ (abbreviated to KMB) continuously exploited the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village subjectively. The Governor of Bali, Mangku Made Pastika, did not accept that and prosecuted the Bali Post in Denpasar Court of First Instance ‘Pengadilan Negeri Denpasar’. The theory of discourse, the theory of agenda setting, the framing theory, and the theory of semiotics are used in the present study. The result of the analysis shows that the conflict between Kemoning Village and Budaga Village covered by the Bali Post was an extended discourse of the Bali Post printed media which was managed using a clear setting agenda for the social, political, and ideological interests of the KMB’s Ajeg Bali. The relation between the Governor of Bali, Mangku Made Pastika, and KMB, which was good in the beginning, changed into a serious conflict. It is interesting to explore the discourse of the Bali TV’s news release which aggravated the conflict in order to identify the subjective agenda of the news broadcasting policy and the counter discourse as the response to it. The main data of the present study are the discourse of the news released by the Bali TV on the Kemoning-Budaga case. The data were in the forms of the documents of the materials which were once presented. The Governor of Bali, Mangku Made Pastika, made use of the Department of the Public Relations of the Government of Bali Province and the media beyond the KMB such as the TVRI Bali and Radar Bali to present his counter discourse. The discourse on the Kemoning-Budaga Case shows a real example how the mass media do not pay attention to objectivity for the sake of power. Keywords: discourse, agenda setting, framing, and counter discourse, traditional village INTRODUCTION The press world, including television, has entered a new area in the era of reformation which started in 1998 for several reasons. The first reason is that the permit needed to establish a television station is made to be easier. The second reason is that all the television stations are free to produce news. Since then both the national television station and local television station have made news as one of their superior programs in order to improve their rating or to show their identities off. In the middle of September 2011 the Bali TV successively reported the news that the Governor of Bali, Made Mangku Pastika, would disperse the traditional village. Such news was exposed by the Bali Post and KMB. Mangku Pastika disagreed with the news and stated that the Bali Post was less professional as it spread false news. Even he prosecuted the Bali Post in court for having spread false news. There had never been any case of news coverage involving two great strengths in Bali; therefore, it is interesting to explore it from the perspective of mass media. This present study is intended to analyze the discourse on “the dispersal of the traditional village” in the Bali Post’s news coverage after the conflict between Kemoning Village and Budaga Village, Klungkung, Bali, took place. There were several reasons why the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village was chosen and interesting. The first reason was, in accordance with the Bali Post, that the discourse of the traditional village was considered damaging what is referred to as Ajeg Bali, a moral movement which is intended to conserve the Balinese culture, including the traditional village. The second reason, in accordance with Mangku Pastika, was that the discourse on the dispersal of the traditional village was considered subjective and less professional. The legal claim made by Mangku Pastika to the Bali Post, which had almost never taken place, attracted the public attention. The reason is that the Bali Post and Bali TV belong to one group and that the Bali TV viewers spread both in the urban and rural areas. What is interesting is that how the Bali TV constructed the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village. The theories used in the present study are the theory of discourse, the theory of agenda setting, the framing theory, and the theory of semiotics which are used eclectically. The theory of discourse was used to deconstruct the objective and meaning (Foucault, 2002: 228) of the construction of the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village on the Bali TV news. The theory of agenda setting was used to identify the working process of the press when preparing information on, opinions and issues about the discourse of dispersal of the traditional village which was used as the center of the attention paid to by the Bali TV and KMB (Tamburaka, 2012). The framing theory was used to analyze how the dispersal of the traditional village was presented in the journalistic practice by the Bali TV and KMB. The theory of semiotics was used to analyze all aspects and meaning of a sign in communication, words, pictures and so forth (Hoed, 2011: 3). It was also used to interpret the meaning of the text, expression and visual in the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village. RESEARCH METHOD This present study was designed to use qualitative approach and phonological approach using the paradigm of critical research, namely, the thinking paradigm which views massages as the struggle for power, politics, and ideology. Fairclough (2009) stated that a discourse was manifested through various forms in general and language and other symbols in particular. Therefore, a discourse cannot be viewed as the reflection or the representation of an entity and a social relation; it should be viewed as a construction (Saparingga, 2000: 1). The present study was conducted at several places in Denpasar such as at office of the Local Indonesian Broadcasting Committee ‘Komisi Penyiaran Indonesia Daerah Bali (KPID)’ and at the office of the Bali TV. A number of interviews were also held at several places in Denpasar. The main data of the present study was in the form of the dispersal of the traditional village which was broadcast by the Bali TV. This issue appeared after the conflict between Kemoning Village and Budaga Village, Klungkung, Bali, took place. The data were in the form of the materials which were presented and documented. The supporting data were also obtained from the printed media clippings and online media. RESULT AND DISCUSSION Among many issued printed mass media, the Bali Post and Radar Bali are very popular, and among the electronic media especially television media, the Bali TV and Dewata TV are very popular. The Bali Post’s owner established what is referred to as ‘Kelompok Media Bali Post (KMB)’ (the Bali Post Media Group). The Bali TV as part of KMB is highly influential as it has been the first private television station in Bali. It has many viewers as it presents the programs which are used as the microphone of the KMB’s ideology, namely, what is referred to as Ajeg Bali. The relation between the Governor of Bali, Mangku Made Pastika, and KMB, which used to be good, was becoming a serious relation. The conflict resulted from the news that the Governor of Bali, Made Mangku Pastika, was reported to intend to disperse the traditional village. The Governor could not accept that. The Bali Post successively reported the dispersal of the traditional village as if it had blamed the Governor’s position. Finally, the Governor of Bali made a summation and prosecuted the Bali Post to court. The court of first instance ‘Pengadilan Negeri (PN)’ and the Appellate Court ‘Pengadilan Tinggi (PT)’ granted what was claimed by Mangku Pastika; however, the Supreme Court ‘Mahkamah Agung’ granted the appeal made by the Bali Post. First, the framing and agenda setting of the Bali TV contributed to the creation of the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village. Second, the media cultural factor, the economic and political factor, and the ideological factor also lead to the creation of the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village. Third, the Governor of Bali, Mangku Pastika, used the public relations division of the Government of Bali Province and the media beyond the KMB such as TVRI, Radar Bali, Bali Express, and Warta Bali to present this counter discourse. The Bali Express newspaper did not expose the dispersal of the traditional village at all, and Warta Bali implied that the Governor never disturbed the press freedom. The production process of the creation of the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village resulted from the attempt made by the Bali TV to delegitimize the Governor of Bali through framing, and the continued agenda setting of the dispersal of the traditional village. The reproduction of the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village contained the struggle between the ideology of the media power and the ruler’s power. They competed to win the public opinion, which became split; some supported the Bali TV and some supported the Governor of Bali. The Bali TV’s power produced the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village by choosing the speakers who supported its ideology. However, the Governor of Bali won the public opinion by inviting an expert in national communication named Tjipta Lesmana as the counter discourse was set as part of a seminar which was widely covered by the local media. Second, the factors which supported the process of the creation of the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village, which caused the Governor’s position to be widely questioned, resulted from the selected processes, the results of interviews, and the pictures (visual) which were framed. The superlative titles of texts such as “Cok Rat Mangku Pastika Jangan Emosi”[Cok Rat Asked Mangku Pastika Not to Be Emotional], “Komitment Gubernur Jaga Bali Dipertanyakan” [The Governor’s Commitment to Saving Bali Is Questioned], “Berjia Kesatria” [Be Brave], “Gubernur Mestinya Minta Maaf” [ the Governor Should Apologize] did not reflect any accurate event or reality. The Governor and Bali TV fought against each other in order to obtain sympathy and support from the Balinese society. The Governor stated that he never stated the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village. However, the Bali Post stated the opposite by presenting Tjok Gede Agung as the speaker. That means that there were two discourses which competitively struggled for the public opinion; some agreed with the discourse the dispersal of the traditional village and some did not. The reason was that each party viewed the event from different angles. Third, the Governor of Bali, Mangku Mastika, who felt being blamed, did what he could do to face the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village which was strongly and critically constructed by the Bali Post, starting from using the right to answer, prosecuting the Bali Post, and making a counter discourse in order to straighten out the news released by the KMB which was considered being not in accordance with the fact. The counter discourse was made using the media beyond the KMB such as the TVRI Bali, Radar Bali, Bali Express, and Warta Bali. The Governor also held meetings attended by the society leaders in order to clarify the event by showing the video recording of the plenary session held by the Regional Legislative Assembly ‘Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah Bali (DPRD)’ and the witnesses who watched the conflict between Kemoning and Budaga. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION Based on what was described and analyzed above, it was found that the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village covered by the Bali TV after the conflict took place between Kemoning and Budaga, Klungkung, was an extended discourse of the Bali Post printed media which was managed using the clear agenda setting for the social, political, and ideological interests of the KMB, namely, what is referred to as the KMB’s Ajeg Bali. First, the news coverage was not objective and was in accordance with the journalistic ethics as it presented misinformation and could disturb the people. The analysis of what had happened to the discourse covered by the Bali TV and the KMB mass media after the conflict between Kemoning and Budaga took place showed the subjective and less professional journalistic work as facts and opinions were combined. The Bali Post journalist and the Bali TV journalist did not ask the key source, namely, the Governor of Bali, Made Mangku Pastika, for his confirmation. The only his statement was quoted. Such a practice was considered incorrect by the Press Board ‘Dewan Pers’ as an obligation as specified in article 3 of the Journalistic Code ‘Kode Etik Jurnalistik (KEJ)’. Second, the less professional press work could lead to a counter attack to the press itself through a counter discourse and even to being persecuted to court. When the Governor of Bali, Mangku Pastika, felt that he was blamed for the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village, the Governor did his best to make a counter discourse using the mass media beyond the Bali Post, Bali TV, and KMB. In addition, he also prosecuted the Bali Post to court. Although in this legal process Mangku Pastika was the loser, the step he had taken was a lesson for the press that it should work professionally, and for the people that the press did not always present facts objectively. First, it is suggested to the media management that it should work professionally. Second, it is suggested to the social and its leaders that they should more critically read the content of the news. In addition, they should also understand the real construction of the television discourse. That is important as the discursive practice applied by the editorial staff is the television program which is also the activity of constructing events. The news program tends to be constructed by the national and local television stations. The society leaders, whom are used as the speakers, should give their comments more critically (based on data and facts) and understand the matters which are discussed. That means that the comments they give do not support any particular interests. In addition, it is expected that they should give their opinions carefully. Third, it is suggested to the government that, when facing any conflict with the press, it should be wiser as it plays a strategic role in supervising the press community. Such a supervisor should be intended to improve the quality of the journalists through the programs which can improve their competencies in producing news. The government should facilitate the training which is held to improve the professionalism of the press institution. Finally, it is suggested to the researchers in the future that they should explore the cases of the subjective news coverage in the framework of giving good media education to the society. This study only focuses on the case of the discourse of the dispersal of the traditional village which was responsible for the conflict taking place between the Bali Post, Bali TV and KMB and the Governor of Bali, Mangku Pastika. There are many matters pertaining to the media which are already over and are not recognized as problems. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The writer would like to thank and respect Prof. Dr. I Nyoman Darma Putra, M.Litt., as the supervisor, Prof. Dr. I Wayan Ardika, M.A. as Co-supervisor I, Dr. I Gede Arya Sugiartha, S. Kar., M.Hum., as Co-supervisor II. The writer would also like to thank all the informants from KMB, Radar Bali, Bali Express, and Warta Bali. BIBLIOGRAPHY Chandler, Daniel. 2007. Semiotic: The Basic. USA and Canada: Routledge. Eriyanto. 2002. Analisis Framing: Konstruksi, Ideologi, dan Politik Media. Yogyakarta: LkiS. Fairclough, Norman. 2009. Critical Discourse Analysis. The Critical Study of Language. Sydney: Macquarie University Foucault, Michel. 2002. Power/Knowledge: Wacana Kuasa/Pengetahuan. Jogjakarta: Bentang Budaya. Hoed, H. Benny. 2011. Semiotik dan Dinamika Sosial Budaya. Jakarta: Komunitas Bambu. Sparringa, Daniel. 2000. Analisis Wacana: Teori dan Konsep Wacana. Surabaya: Fisip Unair. Tamburaka, Apriadi. 2012. Agenda Setting Media Massa. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.