Redefining Cultural and National Identity through Popular Culture:
Young Indonesians Talk about the Global and the Local of Television
Inaya Rakhmani
Abstract
Over the last ten years, loose regulation and fierce competition in the Indonesian
television industry has resulted in a web of cultural ambiguity in television
programmes. I argue that, in order to understand how audiences respond the cultural
representations through television, it is important understand the identities of the
viewers. My research objective is to study identity construction and the role of
identity in the activity of viewing television. In order to achieve its objective, this
research used the methods of media ethnography, an empirical description and
analysis of cultures which includes extensive fieldwork in a selected local setting.
Research findings revealed a result not limited to how the respondents read media, but
also how television is meaningful for them as means to remain attached to (chosen)
types of identity.
Key words: Globalisation, localisation, glocalisation, cultural identity, national
identity, global identity, television representation
Introduction
Attempting to understand Indonesia’s complex television system demands the
attempt to understand its history. At its height, the New Order administration (19961998) in Indonesia was focused on the promotion of national unity and integration
through all means (including the media). In this process, cultural minority and
ideologies that are perceived as a threat to national stability were ignored. To achieve
national integration, more often than not the New Order administration would defy
the ‘pluralistic’ notion upon which the country had been built (Kitley, 2000: 2-8).
Following the end of the New Order, Indonesian nationalism as a general
phenomenon is experiencing many interesting changes. After years of nationbuilding ‘homogenising’ acts by the state, there is a general sentiment of discarding
1
the New Order national culture and re-defining Indonesian identity in a different
way. On a (popular) cultural level, the re-defining of Indonesian identity is apparent
in film and television. The Indonesian film GIE, for example, tells the story of
Indonesian-Chinese student activist Soe Hok Gie who voiced great concern about the
turmoil which occurred in Indonesia during the transition from the Old Order (19461966) to the New Order. GIE was phenomenal in the sense that it was the first
political film to portray a character of Chinese descent since the New Order had
banned Chinese tradition in favour of national culture. The re-evaluation of
Indonesian identity is also noticeable in the television industry, which has lately
experienced a revival, going from a single state broadcasting station to ten thriving
commercial stations in ten years.
The regulatory barriers that were initially developed to protect national culture
from the dominance of foreign cultures no longer exist. Global culture, with the help
of cultural globalisation, has thus been introduced to local content, and local content
is furiously being re-defined in terms of nation-ness. The topic of Indonesian
television programmes has become more and more associated with the mixing of
various cultures. This complex ‘web’ of ‘Indonesian’ culture, and therefore identity,
in television programmes is an interesting topic to be further studied. How is culture
apparent in Indonesian television programmes? What culture/s is/are actually being
portrayed? Moreover, how do audiences ‘read’ these portrayals? To answer these
general questions, I have conducted ethnographically-inspired research on young
Indonesian migrants in the Netherlands by employing theories on identity and its
representation as well as how (cultural) globalisation may play a role in the process.
Theories on (Cultural) Globalisation and Identity Representation
This research paper takes into account globalisation for two reasons. First,
understanding globalisation is important because of the specific situation of the
respondents chosen in this research; Indonesian migrants living in the Netherlands.
Defining globalisation is important in understanding how they negotiate culture,
nation and their relation to identity. Secondly, globalisation is an important concept
when studying the ‘global symbols’ that appear within localised texts in Indonesian
television programmes.
2
Roland Robertson defines globalisation as ‘a concept that refers to both the
compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a
whole (…) both concrete global interdependence and consciousness of the global
whole’ (Robertson, 1992: 8). Roberston’s use of the word ‘global interdependence’
arguably relates to the economic concept of dependency theory or interdependence by
way of market trade. I argue that ‘global consciousnesses’ could be seen as a ‘global
culture’ that is constituted by the development of a common understanding among
global citizens towards ‘the world’. This definition is useful to understand how
Indonesian migrants in the Netherlands respond towards the implications of the
globalisation of cultural products. For instance, respondents claim that the Indonesian
comedy show Extravaganza often uses U.S. films as the theme of the show (Charlie’s
Angels, James Bond 007, etc) but at the same time they perceive the show to be
‘Indonesian’. I suggest that in this example, cultural globalisation has shifted what it
means to be ‘Indonesian’.
It is important to understand the aspects of globalisation in order to
comprehend its cultural implications (Golding, 1994: 7-9). The first aspect is the
decline of the nation as a cultural force (people begin to identify more with
supranational cultural affiliations than with those of the nation), and as a political and
economic force. Second, new levels of organisation both at the supranational level
and at the regional level take over the functions previously performed by national
governments. The third aspect is the ‘syndicalisation of experience,’ which refers to
the emergence of major cultural and commercial symbols in the form, most obviously,
of internationally traded branded goods. And fourthly, Golding points to the role of
major international languages, particularly English, as the vehicle for international
culture. The main concern is to highlight the patterns of inequality that these global
processes reinforce, both within as well as between societies (French and Richards,
2000: 14). These four aspects of globalisation strongly relate to what has been known
as ‘cultural imperialism’. The notion of cultural imperialism is that powerful, First
World capitalist societies impose their values and beliefs on weaker, poorer Third
World societies. Some theorists further argue that the media, which deliver
predominantly U.S. cultural content, act as the engine progressing cultural
imperialism.
I would like to argue that treating media and/or cultural imperialism as an
absolute determinant is implausible. In 1992, Marjorie Ferguson argued that cultural
3
imperialism was oversimplified, referring to it as a myth (Ferguson, 1992: 69-93).
Interestingly enough, she did not completely oppose the concept of cultural
imperialism by ignoring the existence of global markets (since it is evident on various
layers of society from political force to cultural products). However, she challenges
the assumptions concerning the role of ideas, images, and beliefs – how they are
created and sustained in the modern world. She calls the ‘homogenising effect’ of
globalisation as the ‘myth of global cultural hegemony’, noting that it ‘infers that the
consumption of the same popular material and media products (…) creates a
metaculture whose collective identity is based on shared patterns of consumption
(Ferguson, 1992: 79-80). One of the most interesting aspects of her ideas is that she
questions the emergence of a global, cultural homogeneity. Though a global
homogenising effect may exist in the proliferation of U.S. culture in the media, it is
hardly the case that every culture around the world has been homogenised. In
Indonesia for instance, the existence of U.S. culture within the television industry
cannot be denied. Popular U.S. television programmes such as Friends, Heroes, and
Crime Scene Investigation are aired on national television. However, a 2006 AC
Nielsen analysis of Indonesian television viewers revealed that the top ten most
popular programmes based on numbers of viewers remain Indonesian television
programmes.i According to the thesis of cultural imperialism, what should occur with
the acceptance of U.S. television programmes is their dominance over local television.
However, in Indonesia, based on the AC Nielsen ratings, this is not the case.
Stuart
Hall
argues
that
the
‘homogenisation’
to
achieve
market
synchronisations that is expected from the force of globalisation apparently tends to
be a slippery slope (Hall, 1993: 356). Firstly, he acknowledges that ‘homogenisation’
does happen but suggests that identity is a force of resistance formed by local
allegiances which could be decoded as ‘cultural identity’. Secondly, he recognises the
nation-states that are ‘weakened but not destroyed,’ a situation which I would like to
refer to as ‘national identity’. Finally he mentions the ‘tricky version’ of the local that
has been reshaped by the global to operate within its logic, which I would like to refer
to as ‘global identity’.
The relationship of the ‘cultural’, ‘national’ and the ‘global’ is a complex web
of ambiguity. One of the ways to understand its logic is to understand how it may
surface in the ‘culture of the masses’ or popular culture. Along with (cultural)
globalisation, comes an effort to ‘resist’ or localisation. Localisation is expected to
4
‘deconstruct’ formerly autonomous culture.ii Stuart Hall suggests three possible
consequences of globalisation on cultural identities: erosion, strengthening and the
emergence of new identities or ‘new ethnicities’ (Hall, 1996: 273-336). The
fragmentation of cultural codes and pluralisation of styles suggests that localisation
refers to a ‘negotiation of space’ rather than the ‘destroying of locality’.
The concept of localisation can be approached in two manners. First is by
referring to it as a form of local allegiance, as argued by Hall. The second is by
considering the positivistic idea that these forms of localisation within the media have
been created by global corporations in order to establish a market. Theoristsiii refer to
this phenomenon as ‘glocalisation’. Conceptually, glocality is a notion of a nuanced
line between the ‘global’ and the ‘local’ which some contemporary theorists would
refer to as a ‘blending’ (Robertson, 1992: 20-22). Thus, glocalisation could be defined
as the ‘interpenetration of the global and the local, resulting in unique outcomes in
different geographic areas’.
In conclusion, theorists have argued that cultural globalisation has led to
localisation: a concept suggesting that the ‘residents’ of a local area will increasingly
make conscious decisions about which values and amenities they want to stress in
their communities. I argue that these decisions will increasingly be referenced against
global scapes and global cultural flow. Therefore, local resistance will occur in an
attempt to search for a shared identity. There is probably no rigid line between the
three identities (cultural, national and global) that relates to the ‘resistance’ of local
allegiances. They may overlap with one another or even create a new classification
that requires further studying. I argue that cultural globalisation will result in the
negotiation of space between the ‘global’ and the ‘local’ with an uneven balance
between the local and the (mostly U.S.) global culture. By considering the concept of
globalisation and its implications, there are several scenarios that might emerge
regarding television and audience. To provide a general overview, I developed a
matrix consisting of the possible scenarios that may occur.iv (see Fig. 1)
5
In scenario I, cultural globalisation may result in the proliferation of global (mostly
U.S.) television programmes. In Indonesia, popular U.S. television programmes such
as Friends, Heroes, and Crime Scene Investigation are aired on national television.
Another possibility within this scenario is the event of a ‘one-way flow’ of
glocalisation, where global media will adjust their content to suit local markets. An
example is the Fear Factor Indonesia, which original license is owned by the U.S.
television programme Fear Factor.
In scenario II, this ‘proliferation’ of global television programmes in the
Indonesian television landscape will result in a ‘globally shared meaning’ adopted by
the audience. For example, the respondents of this research claimed that their
favourite television programmes are predominantly U.S. television programmes (e.g.
Friends, Grey’s Anatomy, Crime Scene Investigation, Ghost Whisperer, etc). The
respondents’ favouring of ‘global’ television programmes over ‘local’ television
programmes suggests that the respondents understand and enjoy the cultural aspects
represented in these shows; thus they possess a ‘globally shared meaning’ with other
audiences who also view (and presumably enjoy) these programmes.
In scenario III, the audiences’ will ‘localise’ the television programmes they
view (local allegiance). An example is the 2006 AC Nielsen analysis of Indonesian
television viewers which revealed that the top ten most popular programmes (based
on numbers of viewers) are Indonesian television programmes.v This finding suggests
6
that despite cultural globalisation (the large number of global television programmes
in Indonesian television programmes), local audiences will favour local television
programmes because of its ‘locality’ (local language, cultural contexts and local
characters).
In scenario IV, cultural globalisation will result in a ‘two-way flow’
glocalisation, apparent in the example of Indonesian music band Dewa’s effort to
penetrate the ‘English-speaking market’ (English music video clips of Dewa are set to
be played in other Hard Rock Cafes around the world).vi I argue that an exchange of
moving images between Indonesia and foreign countries does exist (rather than the
idea that the U.S. media ‘glocalises’ their content to enter the Indonesian market).
Another possibility is the ‘localisation’ of global texts. For instance, the Indonesian
comedy show Extravaganza often uses U.S. films as the theme of the show (Charlie’s
Angels, James Bond 007, etc) which suggests that Indonesian television programmes
‘localise’ global text by attributing local language and local characters.
Methodology: A Brief Overview on (Media) Ethnography
This research project studies the role of television in the formation and transformation
of identity among a selected group of young viewers. Since my objective is to
examine identity representation through television in general and viewers’ responses
in particular, I will focus on ‘talk and text’ (the respondents’ explanation of their
television experience (talk), and which television programmes they find interesting
(text)). A qualitative approach has been put into practice to study this particular
community in its ‘natural’ setting in order to examine how its members perceive and
use television. The research question to be explored is: How is television meaningful
to Indonesian young people in the Netherlands? How does identity play a role in their
process of according meaning to television text?
According to David Buckingham, current trends in social science and
humanities research have indicated a move towards the investigation of television
consumption in its ‘natural’ setting as a ‘contextualised activity’ (Buckingham, 1993:
10-19). In this research I focused on a ‘close-knit’ group in its natural settings and
observed it in a ‘specific’ environment. It is ‘close-knit’ in the sense that the
respondents live and learn in one community. It is ‘specific’ in that they are
Indonesian citizens living in an Indonesian community in a more developed foreign
7
country. I think that how the respondents identify with this community and how their
community impacts their sense of self are important aspects of their identity
formation; thus, this is what I will explore.
Recent debates in social and cultural studies argue that to study television
audiences, one of the best methodologies to achieve such an objective is by
employing ethnographic research. In this research, I have deliberately chosen young
Indonesian migrants studying in the Netherlands to ensure that the ‘audience’ is
‘global, local, and national’ and is thereby well-suited for exploring the underlying
question of this research. In summary, I suggest that (media) ethnography is a means
to thoroughly comprehend the respondents’ ‘process of decoding’. I would like to
focus on the aspects of culture and identity in order to comprehend how the
respondents ‘decode’ representation in television. Therefore, particular attention is
given to the respondents’ ‘specific’ background and environment.
Ethnographic research entails participant observation over an extended period
of time. I visited SIN periodically for five months (1 September 2006 – 1 February
2007). During these visits, I gathered data through the observation of the respondents’
behaviour in class, recess, and their time in the computer lab. I conducted interviews
with their teacher as well as asked informal questions to the teachers and students that
could serve as ice-breakers to build trust between myself and the respondents.vii The
extensive observation I conducted for five months at SIN ended with a two-hour
group interview with the respondents. I chose to interview the students on the last day
of observation because it would provide an opportunity for the respondents to speak
in an unadulterated manner about their activities of watching television.
A group interview was selected in this research, as it provides the opportunity
for interaction that is not limited to interviewer and interviewee, but also between
interviewees. Group interviews have certain advantages – they can reveal the
relationships between the respondents and also facilitate group interaction, which can
enrich the results. Although the school has 34 students in total, I decided to focus on
the 20 students that are registered in the lower (SMP) and upper secondary level
(SMA) because I thought this age group (14-18 years) would offer the best
opportunity for observation and interpersonal communication. The younger, primary
level students do not spend as much time at school as compared to the older students,
which limits the amount of time I could interact with them. Therefore I intentionally
chose to observe SMP and SMA students in this research.
8
I wanted to have a group interview where respondents felt they could be
themselves. Ten students were chosen because this amount is ‘exemplary’ of the total
amount of students registered as SMP and SMA students. Ten students, five male and
five female, were selected to participate in the final group interview. There was an
equal amount of male and female students participating in the group interview so that
the respondents would not feel like they were a minority or majority within the group.
Therefore, everyone could speak for themselves regardless of their gender.
The group interview was recorded by video camera to later be transcribed and
analysed textually. Yuliana, an undergraduate student of the Hanze Hogeschool,
assisted me with taping the interview, therefore ensuring that all parts were recorded
successfully. Video footage is more useful than sound recording, as it provides the
opportunity to: 1) Directly identify the speaker by image and audio as compared to
only audio, and 2) The video footages can also record the respondents’ facial
expressions, gestures, as well as other non-verbal communication. This can be
especially useful if during the interview it is unclear what the respondents are
implying. Facial expressions and gestures can thus act as aids to better understand
what the respondents mean; they certainly proved helpful in my analysis of the group
interview text.
Finding the Global in the Local: A Debate on Cultural, National and Global
Identity
The representation of identity in Indonesian television as I depicted it focuses on the
types and stereotypes of cultural, national, and global identity in Indonesia, whereas
representation of identity as the respondents depicted it relates to (new) issues such as
television format imitation and the use of New Media to seek identity. As ‘dislocated’
Indonesians, the respondents recalled Indonesian television programmes idealistically,
generating an ‘optimistic’ notion of how Indonesian television should be rather than
how it is. Cultural identity is no longer exclusive to the respondents’ own cultural
background (Javanese, Padangese, Betawi, etc), but instead includes the multicultural
status of the whole of Indonesia. More often than not, the respondents saw Indonesian
television programme(s) as low-quality shows that are only focused on achieving the
highest ratings, ignoring minority cultures and national identity.
9
The respondents showed a general concern over the limited cultural
representation portrayed in Indonesian television which, during the New Order
regime, supported homogenising, nation-building ideology. The respondents were
active in performing resistance against the imbalanced cultural representation in
Indonesian television by demanding more portrayals of non-Javanese cultures.
This form of ‘attachment’ to Indonesia that the respondents demonstrated not
only manifested in their resistance to a dominant culture over national ‘diversity’. It
was also apparent in their objections to programme imitation (“We should be creative
and make our own programmes, not imitate!”), their responses to the ‘global’ in local
television programme(s) and, most interestingly, the media they use to ‘seek identity’.
The respondents’ ‘talk of television’ reveals that they are active audiences who
dynamically ‘make meaning’ during television viewing and that their meaning is
related to their feeling of national identity.
The respondents’ resistance of an imbalanced cultural representation in
Indonesian television programme(s) does not only include ‘the way they see
Indonesian culture’ but also ‘how television plays a role’ in the construction of
cultural and national identity. In the group interview, respondents discussed as
follows:
[Everyone is talking at the same time. A male student mentions the
show Joko Tingkir to another student]
Indah:
Ical:
Int.:
Ical:
Avi:
Indah:
Int.:
Ical:
Avi:
Ano:
Aga:
[The show has] horrible effects! Like when they fly
around.
They need better effects, because when the characters
fly it seems really ‘fake’.
What do you think about the show’s theme?
It’s okay, I guess.
Well maybe it’s good because it’s a traditional show,
like legends and folklores. But they should develop the
show so it could seem more believable.
They should work on the quality of the picture and
modify the effects. Then I think it’ll be a great show.
(…)
Do you think thematically this is a good
Indonesian show?
Well, not exactly. It only includes Java.
Wait! Not Jejak Petualang!
Yes, they include even Irian!
(…)
But Joko Tingkir only includes Java.
10
This interview excerpt demonstrates what the respondents think of ‘Indonesia’. Joko
Tingkir is claimed as ‘not Indonesian’ because it only portrays the Javanese culture.
Interestingly, despite almost all of them coming from Java Island, they do not
generalise their own culture as national culture. Their national identity (as
‘Indonesians’) demands a multicultural representation in a television programme in
order for them to entitle it as a ‘good Indonesian show’. Their reference to Irian
suggests that Jejak Petualang is a ‘good Indonesian show’ because it includes even
the most remote areas of Indonesia.
The
respondents’
national
identity
is
connected
to
Indonesia’s
multiculturalism; therefore, Indonesian television programmes should include all
culture(s) that constitute the country. This relates to the nation’s slogan “varied, but
one”, which teaches citizens to respect the country as a ‘unison’ of ‘culture(s)’;
regardless of our cultural differences, we are part of one country. This notion can be
related to SIN as the ‘little Indonesia’ I suggested earlier. In this school, the
respondents (re)construct their identity based on the ‘shared meaning’ they have with
each other, which is being Indonesians. This ‘shared meaning’ is apparent in their
idea of a multicultural Indonesia that should be represented through Indonesian
television.
Avi:
Patrick:
Int.:
Laras:
Ical:
Avi:
Dian:
Int.:
Avi:
Ano:
[Indonesian television programmes are so
bad that] I want to make my own channel.
I want to make cooking shows. (laughs)
What does everybody else think?
[I] like Discovery Channel programmes. I
think [Indonesian] TV should air more of
Indonesian travel shows.
I’ve seen those shows, it only airs on
Saturdays.
There is one called Jelajah Nusantara.
Yes, TV7 has one. SCTV also has one.
Why do you want Indonesian TV to air
travel shows?
To show more of Indonesian territory.
Yes, about Indonesia’s natural environment.
In performing ‘national identity’ by the ‘inclusion’ of as many culture(s) in Indonesia
as possible, the respondents thought that Indonesian television should air travel
shows, which would explore the diverse regions of the nation. Firstly, the respondents
11
talked about what Indonesian television should air. Secondly, they focused on the type
of show Indonesian television should air (travel programmes). The respondents’
expectations of Indonesian television suggest that they possess an ‘idealistic’ idea of
what Indonesian television should be like. Indonesian television stations should air
more national programmes that provide opportunity for a balanced cultural
representation. The respondents’ expectation speaks of their national identity, for they
demand a sense of ‘solidarity’ from Indonesian television stations in showing
Indonesian programmes. Their expectation also speaks of their cultural identity in
their call for the inclusion of various Indonesian culture(s) on television, which they
see as possible through travel programmes.
In their viewing of Indonesian television programme(s), the respondents ‘read’
what is portrayed in the shows based on their national identity (recognising
themselves as Indonesians). During this activity, their cultural identity became a part
of their national identity, because ‘Indonesia is comprised by many cultures’ (“and
mine is one of them”). The approval they gave one another when they identified
themselves as ‘Indonesians’ (comparable to Amr identifying the Dutch as ‘colonisers’
and himself as ‘Indonesian’) suggests that the SIN community (re)constructs who the
respondents are. Another possible reason for the expression of difference from the
Dutch (and thus sameness with one another) is the respondents’ ‘dislocation’ outside
of their home country. Perhaps their dislocation led them to find a sense of ‘belonging
though far away from home’ in the creation of a little Indonesian community. I felt a
sense of attachment myself when I visited SIN and realised how much I missed home
through the familiarity of the language and their unconditional acceptance of me since
I am an Indonesian ‘like them’. It seems likely that the respondents share this sense of
‘belonging’ because they are ‘far from home together’. The ‘suddenly heightened’
national identity becomes a ‘filter’ which they used to read televised text.
During the interview, the respondents often mentioned popular Indonesian
television programmes of the comedy genre, such as Srimulat, Ketoprak Humor and,
one of the television programmes that generated the most discussion, Extravaganza. I
decided to focus on comedy shows because in the reception of this type of show,
cultural similarity is needed. Without the understanding of cultural context, limericks,
puns, language, and gestures intended for a comedic objective (in a comedy show)
would be irrelevant. Giselinde Kuipers notes three cultural factors that are especially
important in the reception of comedy programmes (Kuipers, 2007). The first factor is
12
the appreciation of television comedy as determined by humour style. Secondly, the
representation and stereotyping of social groups affects audience identification with,
and thus appreciation, of a comedy. Thirdly, comedy appreciation is related to
morality. In this sense, reaction of laughter constitutes what is culturally accepted and
unaccepted; therefore, comedy shows are an important type of television programme
that can act as a tool in understanding the cultural identity of viewers.
[Respondents say that Extravaganza is a good Indonesian
show. Discussion becomes so heated that they start
speaking at the same time]
Int.:
Ano:
Patrick:
Aga:
Ano:
Int.:
Avi:
Ako:
Int.:
Avi:
Ano:
Karima:
Avi:
Why?
Well, sometimes they show Indonesian
clothes.
Traditional Indonesian clothes!
Yes, Indonesian traditions, like tukang
jamu…
Sometimes there are men wearing peci or
sarung.
Are these the only things they portray?
No. Not Men in Black.
Yes, sometimes they don’t.
When they showed Men in Black, what did
you think of it?
Still funny.
It’s in the way they talk… I can’t explain it.
They have unique storylines.
Yes, so though the theme is not really
‘Indonesian’, suddenly they speak in a
Javanese dialect, in a medok way. So it’s
still funny.
The respondents mentioned several stereotypes that relate to Indonesian national
identity, such as tukang jamu, peci, and sarung. One of the most interesting identity
markers mentioned by Ano is the peci. I argue that Ano’s designation of peci as
‘Indonesian’, as a stereotype of national identity, is associable to the idea that peci is a
common headdress used by formal leaders in national ceremonies as a status symbol
for their position. Though the peci was initially a cap of Malay-Muslim origin, it has
become a national symbol, with secular nationalist connotations, made popular by
Sukarno.
The peci is usually made of black felt. Since the 1990s, it has acquired a more
secular, national meaning in the post independence period. I suggest it is because of
13
this shift of meaning (from a Malay-Muslim cap to a symbol of nationhood) that Ano
recalled the peci as a stereotype of Indonesian national identity. The symbol of the
peci is meaningful to Ano because of his own national identity. The show’s
reinforcing of national stereotypes in order to deliver comedy has reinforced Ano’s
own national identity. He thinks the show is funny because it ‘re-contextualises’ the
‘shared national meaning’ among Indonesian audiences. While the peci initially held
a ‘sacred’ meaning as the national headdress, it has now become part of popular
culture.
The end of the New Order regime signaled a change in certain aspects of
Indonesia’s national television programs, particularly the use of political dialogue or
cultural symbols. Now these aspects are often employed in non-nation building
contexts, which would have been prohibited under the New Order. As seen in Ano’s
depiction of the peci, the meaning of national symbols, which was portrayed in a
‘sacred’ manner during the New Order, has shifted. An example of the continuing
construction of national identity through television in Indonesia is the annual
televising of the national independence ceremony held at the Istana Negara
(Presidential Palace). However, the shift of many Indonesian television programmes
from a ‘nation-building context’ to one of ‘popular television’ is apparent in an
Extravaganza episode entitled Ekspedisi ke Bulan (Moon Expedition).
In this particular show, the same national ceremony was portrayed, but in the
context of entertainment. The episode concerns the first Indonesian moon expedition
that is ‘inaugurated’ by a national ceremony held before the launch of the space ship.
The episode included many stereotypes which are usually present in national
ceremonies such as a ceremonial leader, the national flag, the flag bearer, etc. Another
example is the episode Cerdas Cermat (Smart & Sharp), which was popularised
during the New Order on TVRI. Cerdas Cermat was a televised competition (school
subjects e.g. mathematics, physics, Bahasa Indonesia, etc) between teams of primary
school students. The television show portrayed students as hard workers who are also
‘the country’s future’, rewarding their diligence and merit with trophies. The show
also reinforced the national symbol, which is apparent in, for example, the Garuda
bird (the national symbol) behind the students. (see Fig. 2)
14
Fig. 2
The same competition was portrayed in Extravaganza, however in the format of a
‘game show’. Extravaganza portrayed Cerdas Cermat as a competition between
students who can answer the silliest questions. One of the themes in the show’s
Cerdas Cermat episode is guessing an Indonesian expression through a team mate’s
gestures (comparable to Canadian game Charades). The expression was ‘Guru
kencing berdiri, murid kencing berlari (When teacher pees standing, students pee
running)’ which of course invited the studio audiences’ laughter because of the
pantomiming of ‘pee’ and ‘pee running’. Interestingly, the students participating in
the game show wore a complete set of the national uniform for primary school
students: red trousers/skirts, white shirt and caps. (see Fig. 3)
Fig. 3
Without prior knowledge of these national identity markers (i.e. uniform and
Indonesian expression), the comedy would have been not as effective or even lost on
the audience. These symbols, which have been reinforced as a shared national
meaning, have shifted contexts while remaining ‘shared’ by the audience. Another
interesting stereotype of Indonesian national identity mentioned by Aga is the tukang
jamu. Tukang jamu, or herb seller, is a profession that is usually occupied by Javanese
women. The common tukang jamu wears her hair in a tight bun and a traditional
Javanese batik sarong, carrying herbs in a large basket on her back. (see Fig. 4)
15
Fig. 4
It is interesting how, although tukang jamu is notably of Javanese origin and not one
of the nation-building symbols, it still penetrated Aga’s idea of being ‘Indonesian’. It
is also interesting how this ‘cultural generalisation’ conflicts with the concern over the
disproportionate cultural identity representation in Indonesian television. It is apparent
that in the first interview excerpt, Aga’s opinion is led by previous comments
concerning Jejak Petualang being a good Indonesian show (because it covers ‘even
Irian’). After these opinions, Aga added that Joko Tingkir is not ‘Indonesian’ because
it ‘only includes Java’ (‘Irian not included’). However, in the second excerpt, when
other respondents said that Extravaganza portrays ‘traditional Indonesian clothes’,
Aga provided the example of the tukang jamu (as a traditional Indonesian type). The
inconsistency in Aga’s answer suggests that his opinions depend on what other
students think. It appears that a sense of ‘wanting to belong’ motivated Aga to
produce answers that are approved by his friends. In group discussions, this
‘overbearing’ weight of the majority’s opinion is reflective of how public opinion can
influence individual judgment. Regardless of this, both of Aga’s answers indicated
that the Javanese culture dominates cultural representation in Indonesian television.
Benedict Anderson offers suggestions to interpret this ‘anomaly’ of
nationalism (Anderson, 1983: 6-7) (the dominance of Javanese culture in Indonesian
television and the generalisation of Javanese culture as ‘Indonesian’). Anderson’s
basic assumption is that ‘nationality, or, (…) nation-ness, as well as nationalism, are
cultural artefacts of a particular kind’ and proposes the definition of nationalism as
‘an imagined political community’ – and imagined as both inherently limited and
sovereign’. Anderson’s idea of nationality as cultural artefacts of a particular kind
relates to Javanese culture being the dominant culture in Indonesia. Similar to the
example of Joko Tingkir, (which Aga thinks ‘only includes Java’), the television show
Srimulat is also exclusively Javanese. The comedy show is delivered in the Javanese
16
language (with Indonesian language subtitles) with actors and actresses wearing
Javanese traditional clothes.
One of the most interesting aspects is that the programme is aired on national
television, which means that it is received by viewers throughout the country who
may not be of Java origin or be able to speak Javanese. The fact that no other
programmes of indigenous nature are present on other stations or within that station
(RCTI) suggests that Javanese culture dominates cultural identity representation in
Indonesian television.
The ‘generalisation’ of one culture (that is part of a nation) as the ‘national’
culture is visible in Benedict Anderson’s argument concerning the cultural roots of
nationalism. The aspect of cultural roots that is related to the ‘generalisation’ of one
culture is the dynastic realm. The Javanese kaum priyayi (the elites of Java) was the
community employed by the Dutch colonisers to sustain power during the
colonialisation period (Supartono, 2006). During Dutch colonialisation, rakyat jelata
(common people) believed that the elites of Java are the descendants of the Gods and
that their ruling would bring salvation. I think that these specific cultural roots are the
foundation of imagining Indonesia by means of the Javanese as the dominant culture.
Supartono argues that the dominance of Javanese culture in national identity caused
the interruption of anti-colonialisation progression or postcolonial movement. During
the New Order, national development was focused on Java Island as the centre of
government and industry, which resulted in a disparity of welfare. The dominance of
Javanese culture in national identity is, I argue, also apparent in Indonesian media
(television) through the Srimulat show. Indonesian nationalism is indeed an example
of Anderson’s thesis of imagined communities.
The respondents ‘read’ the representation of an imagined community through
television in a problematic way. On one hand, they thought that several television
programmes are ‘not Indonesian’ because they do not include ‘all of the country’s
culture’. But on the other hand, they generalise stereotypes from the Javanese culture
as stereotypes of ‘Indonesian’ national identity. Although this conflicting view is
generated only by Aga, none of the other students corrected him by pointing out that
the tukang jamu is not an Indonesian stereotype but a Javanese stereotype.
I suggest that the respondents have a multicultural vision of Indonesia because
of the Indonesian education system (comparable to the example of the ‘expression’).
However, this vision does conflict with the indoctrination of a ‘national culture’
17
during the New Order’s attempt at integration. Therefore, I think that the respondents
are going through a ‘re-contextualising’ of national identity in which they separate
their cultural identity from their national identity. At some moments, they realise that
‘I am Javanese’ and ‘I am Indonesian’, which are two different types of identities. But
during problematic moments, such as being faced with television representations of
‘homogenous identities’, they view their identity as a web of ‘cultures’. At these
times, ethnic culture and national culture collide in a way that questions, ‘Am I
Javanese or Indonesian?’. My observation was conducted in one moment of time in
the respondents’ lives, and identity construction is admittedly a continuous process of
self-validating. Therefore, there is no saying whether the respondents will separate the
‘cultural’ and the ‘national’ within themselves or continue a ‘web of ‘cultur/nation’-al
identity’.
The respondents’ national identity falls into scenario IV of the global/local in
television/audience matrix. I argue that one of the reasons of the re-contextualising of
national symbols is the ‘global format’ of popular comedy shows. Game shows and
variety shows (Extravaganza is comparable to U.S. television programme Saturday
Night Live) are television programme types that are notable in North American
television culture (Canada and the U.S.). Cultural globalisation has provided the
programme formatting for popular Indonesian television programmes which led to the
‘re-contextualisation’ of national identity (sacred to pop culture). In its process, this
‘re-contextualisation’ is a form of ‘localising’ an otherwise ‘global’ format, by
attributing local content ((cultural and) national identity) to ‘a’ global format.
Translating the ‘global’ into the ‘local’
The translation of the ‘global’ into the ‘local’ in Indonesian television
programmes also fit into scenario IV of the global/local matrix. Indonesian television
programmes ‘localise’ global ‘text’ by attributing local languages, cultural settings
and contexts. The respondents did not only address the issues of the cultural and the
national in Extravaganza, but also the global. Avi stated that the show once portrayed
Men in Black as its theme. Avi stated that Men in Black is not ‘Indonesian’ but at the
same time she thinks it is funny. In other words, comedy does not have to be
‘Indonesian’ in order to be ‘culturally accepted’. The cultural acceptance of nonIndonesian humour indicates that Men in Black is an example of how the ‘global’
18
intersects with the ‘national’ in Extravaganza. For the respondents, Men in Black
contains ‘shared meaning’. This ‘non-Indonesian shared meaning’ suggests that the
respondents have a multifaceted sense of self-identity. They are Indonesians and
participate in ‘global culture’ at the same time. Stereotypes that were originally
specific to (in this example) the U.S. culture have become globalised through global
reception, thus becoming part of who the respondents are; they are themselves – like
the movie – negotiations between the global and the national. This negotiation of
‘space’ (global and national) resulted in a cultural consensus, which is apparent in the
‘new identities’ of the respondents. New identities, in this case, come in the form of
the respondents’ ‘multifaceted sense of self-identity’, both adopting the global and the
national. Therefore, the respondents consciously ‘self-validate’ themselves according
to the cultural products out of which they make meaning.
Chris Barker defines culture as being ‘a zone of shared and contested values’
that can occur through televised representation (Barker, 1999: 83-84). The
respondents understand the comedy portrayed by Extravaganza in the ‘zone of a
shared yet contested value between the global and the national’. The ‘penetration’ of
the global into the national is not a sign of cultural imperialism; instead, it is a sign of
the respondents’ multifaceted identity (global and national). Albert Moran argues that
identity is always a matter of negotiation; identities are only constituted in and
through people’s relations to each other. Thus, I want to develop a dynamic view of
identity by focusing on the ability of groups to recompose and redefine their
boundaries
(Moran,
1998:
175).
The
respondents’
reception
of
the
re-
contextualisation of national identity in popular Indonesian television suggests that
they do redefine their national boundaries. Marie Gillespie argues that the
interconnectedness of cultures brought about by the transnational flow of images,
commodities, and people lead to the formation of a global culture, dominated by
transnational corporations and increasingly Americanised and commercialised
(Gillespie: 1995: 7-11). Although I do not share Gillespie’s cultural imperialistic
perspective, I think that her suggestion provides an explanation as to how the stories
of the ‘West’ came to be introduced to Indonesian television programmes. However,
cultural imperialism (cultural homogenisation) is not overtaking Indonesia via the
implementation of Western stories. It is rather part of a broader issue: the negotiation
of a global culture that is always partly deferred by features of ‘localisation’, like the
translation of plot and use of local language.
19
The challenge of ‘localisation’ is apparent in Avi’s recollection of Men in
Black being cited with the Javanese accent, medok (localising ‘global text’ by means
of ‘local dialect). The ‘translation’ of Men in Black into ‘local’ culture by way of
dialect is arguably rooted in the culture industries which produce or translate. When
speaking of translation in its broadest sense, it is often associated with Yuri Lotman
and his work on a semiotic theory of culture (Lotman, 1990). According to Lotman,
translation is fundamental to human thinking; it is the transformation of information
from one language to another. This is a creative process which includes translating
texts, perpetually producing a text that is ‘more than and other than the original’. The
translated text includes the original message, new messages to be read by the
receivers, and a kind of ‘language lesson’ about the codes that are at work in the text.
Furthermore, translation is a process of creation that grows apart from the context of
the original text. Textual translation provides the opportunity of generating a range of
texts that are, to some extent, original.
The translation of Men in Black, through the attribution of the Javanese accent,
is in concept similar to localisation. Avi thinks that the Men in Black episode of
Extravaganza is not ‘Indonesia’, but it is ‘culturally acceptable’ (funny) because of
the attribution of the Javanese accent. The medok citing of Men in Black is seen by
Avi as an effort to ‘localise’ an otherwise ‘global text’. Therefore, localisation efforts
are (re)formed through Avi’s search for a common identity (medok) in Men in Black.
Programme Formatting: A Cultural Debate
Nuraisyiah wrote an article in the Indonesian newspaper Pikiran Rakyat (The
People’s Ideas) about the recent phenomenon of Indonesian sinetrons imitating
foreign (mostly Asian) dramas:
(…) many of the television programmes we consume daily
are apparently unoriginal. It is clear that for many
sinetrons, Asian dramas are the potential source of
imitation. Sinetrons that are highlighted with young stars
evidently copy several Asian drama series. (…) Although
the source of the story was never mentioned, many
Indonesians undoubtedly recognise where the story was
copied from. It then becomes a question, aren’t there any
story ideas that could be developed independently without
20
having to “adapt” existing products? Could it be that the
producers and film makers are more concerned about the
highest profit possible as opposed to saving Indonesian
television programmes from the trend of plagiarism?
(Nuraisyiah, 2007)
This ‘trend of plagiarism’ was one of the topics that fascinated the respondents the
most. According to Michael Keane, the practice of imitation has existed since the very
early Confucian scholars advocated imitation over creativity (Keane, 2004: 9-17). In
effect, this act established the foundations for what now constitutes formal
‘plagiarism’ within contemporary media markets. The respondents explained the
phenomenon that is ‘the trend of plagiarism’ in Indonesian television programmes
interestingly:
Avi:
Int.:
Patrick:
Avi:
Indah:
Int.:
Avi:
To be honest, most [Indonesian] sinetrons
are a result of plagiarism. Like there’s this
one that plagiarises dorama and Korean
dramas. If not, some also plagiarise
Hollywood dramas.
Why are you concerned with this?
Because they’re not creative!
Because it shows that we don’t have any
creativity. It’s as if we have no original
ideas, no innovation. (…) About the ‘hot
topic’ of 1 Litre of Tears, (…) [the
imitation] offended [Indonesian viewers]
because they adapted the original story into
a sinetron about a Japanese girl with the
same disease. Different with LAKE HOUSE, a
Hollywood movie, that clearly mentions that
they adapted this from a Korean movie titled
ILMARE. (…)
Also because it means we aren’t creative.
We have no ideas, cannot be innovative.
Lots of our television programmes are
merely imitations. (provides examples)
Why do you think it is like this?
Because they aren’t innovative enough to
empower Indonesian writers and instead
they steal ideas from other shows. They
plagiarise doramas or Korean dramas.
Avi is concerned about the ‘blatant disrespect’ for intellectual property that surrounds
the ‘borrowing’ of plots by Indonesian television programmes. If this debate were
21
limited to the issue of imitation as a copyright breach, it would be a much simpler
matter. However, the cultural debate of programme imitation also includes the
possibility that it is a consequence of ‘collectivist legacies’, with culture as a product
of shared experiences that can never be traced as personal property. The ‘culture
industries’ have created a relationship of dependency between creativity, mass
production, and economic interests; instead of the basic idea of a ‘shared experience’.
It is almost impossible to claim a cultural product to be a single person’s property
since the process of production is ‘a mixture of transforming pieces borrowed from
others’. If this is the idea underlying the cultural production of television programmes,
where is the line between imitation and plagiarism?
According to the Collins Dictionary of the English language, plagiarism is
‘the act of plagiarising’, which means ‘to appropriate (ideas, passage, etc) from
(another work or author)’. Plagiarism involves literary theft, stealing by copying the
words or ideas of someone else and passing them off as one’s own without crediting
the source (Park, 2003: 137-162). However, when referring to this definition of
plagiarism, the imitation of various Asian drama series by Indonesian television
programmes does not fall within this category. Leo Sutanto, representative of
SinemArt, one of the biggest Indonesian production houses creating such sinetrons,
claims that what SinemArt does is not a form of imitation per se.
His argument is that the story concept used by Taiwanese or Korean drama
series is a ‘general recipe’ (resep umum) and that they also are inspired by other
sources. Therefore, he argues, there is no need to quote the source of SinemArt’s
storyline (Irwansyah and Sukanto, 2006). RCTI’s corporate secretary, Gilang
Iskandar, also responded to the protests concerning television adaptation by claiming
that the television station has legally adapted the drama series My Girl into Benci Jadi
Cinta (From Hate to Love) after the buying of its copyrights from South Korean
television station SBS Corp (Iskandar, 2006). Plagiarism is in fact the taking of
another author’s work as one’s own, but two of the biggest producers of Indonesian
sinetrons have admitted to imitation, but not to plagiarism, which goes further than
imitation by taking another author’s work as one’s own. These producers do not
appear to have committed plagiarism, because they have not taken credit for the
original work. Therefore the ‘trend of plagiarism’ among Indonesian sinetrons is more
adequately described as ‘imitation’.
22
Regardless of the fact that Indonesian sinetrons relentlessly imitate Taiwanese
and Korean drama series, (see Fig. 5 and 6), in the process reducing reward and
recognition for creators, television formatting has always been about imitation.
Licensed formats reward imitation and provide a ‘legal’ exchange of cultural products
between agents. I think that licensed formatting can create a culturally acceptable
means of fostering exchange between and within national media systems. In the
Indonesian television industry, the re-formatting of television programmes is an
instrumental step in promoting industry development, regardless of the perceived
‘degeneration’ of creativity.
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Similar to the example of Extravaganza’s Men in Black theme used in Extravaganza,
the imitation of Asian dramas is more a product of ‘translation’ (the use of Indonesian
language, Indonesian actors and actresses, Indonesian scenes and cultural settings).
This is perhaps the reproduction of an original text by adapting it into a new cultural
setting (Lotman, 1990: 144-145). The exchange of television formats is similar to a
dialogue where the mechanism of translation is a process that not only involves single
messages (with individuals acting as transmitting and receiving agents), but can also
involve large bodies of texts being exchanged between cultures.
Lotman’s concept of the ‘dialogue’ allows a much more interactive process
within which cultural exchange occurs. This ‘dialogue’ also provides meaning to the
23
idea of ‘glocalisation’ and ‘localisation’ in cultural globalisation. For example,
Korean dramas are known to be inspired by Japanese novels and mangas but on the
other hand, they have ‘inspired’ the production of Indonesian sinetrons. Unlike the
thesis of cultural imperialism, in the ‘cultural exchange’ between Indonesia and
countries producing the imitated dramas, there is no ‘dependence’ of one producing
country on one receiving country. In this sense, the phenomenon of programme
format imitation by Indonesian sinetrons remains a challenge to the thesis of cultural
imperialism. In summary, cultural exchange has occurred between these Asian
nations, whether it came with the purchase of copyright or not.
Some of the respondents, though, did not really see a cultural exchange taking
place; in the fashion of cultural imperialism, they saw Indonesian television as at
times ‘dependent’ upon and an ‘imitation’ of other nations’ shows. Avi, Indah, and
Patrick showed great concern towards the trend of imitation among Indonesian
sinetrons. Their objection towards this form of imitation is because they see it within
negative connotations (“Plagiarism is bad because it means we are not creative
enough!”). This issue disturbs them because the Indonesian sinetrons’ ‘unoriginality’
disconfirms their ‘national identity’ of being members of a country with a unique
multicultural background. Interestingly, Avi stated in an earlier interview excerpt that
Extravaganza ‘localises global text’ by, for instance, implementing the Javanese local
dialect. Therefore, ‘global texts’ can be culturally acceptable (funny) because they are
‘translated’ into local contexts. But in the case of the sinetrons, the ‘translated
product’ (from mostly Asian dramas to Indonesian sinetrons) was not culturally
acceptable for the respondents. Although it is plausible that they did not see the Asian
dramas as aspects of ‘global culture’ and thus part of their ‘global identity’, their
watching of these drama series suggests that they should be a part of their ‘shared
meaning’. I suggest that the ‘relentless’ form of imitation of a global culture, without
adequate (according to them) ‘translation/localisation’, disturbs the respondents
because it ‘weakens’ their national identity (“Who are we if we look too much like
them?”).
Conclusion
Media scholar Michael Richards claims that national identity is challenged, partly by
the demise of the nation-state, but mainly due to the expansion and influence of global
24
media (Richards, 2000: 29) I agree with Richards in the sense that cultural
globalisation has indeed changed the Indonesian television landscape. Thirty years
ago all of the television programmes aired on national television were ‘Indonesian’.
Now, subtitled popular English (mostly, but not exclusively, U.S.) programmes are
aired daily. Likewise, global culture has also permeated local television programmes.
For instance, the adaptation of the U.S. film CHARLIE’S ANGELS in the Indonesian
television programme Extravaganza, which attributes local context to the global text.
My own research project explored how current Indonesian television is meaningful to
young Indonesian migrants in the Netherlands, a scenario which is global in a
geographical sense, yet local in community.
The research project revealed interesting findings. In regards to their cultural
and national identity, the respondents seem to have ‘re-contextualised’ the meaning of
‘being Indonesian.’ Firstly, they ‘read’ identity stereotypes in Indonesian television
based on their national identity. For instance, one of the respondents, Avi, claimed
that Extravaganza, though not always ‘Indonesian’ in not strictly applying
‘Indonesian’ themes, is still ‘culturally acceptable’ because the show has attributed
‘local meaning’ to ‘global text’ (the Men in Black plot was funny because actors
delivered it in a Javanese dialect). I contend that this is an attempt to ‘localise’ an
otherwise shared global meaning.
Secondly, the implementation of the ‘Javanese accent’ in the Men in Black
episode, along with the respondents’ claim that this made it ‘Indonesian’, suggests
that there is a generalisation of ‘a’ (Javanese) culture as ‘Indonesian’. The
overwhelming presence of the Javanese culture in television, and the corresponding
absence of any other culture, reveals the dominance of one culture in making the
country’s national identity. Based on the respondents’ statements, Javanese culture
remains the dominant culture of Indonesia’s national identity. I suggest that the
respondents are going through a ‘re-contextualising’ of national identity, separating
their cultural identity from their national identity. At some moments, they realise that
‘I am Javanese’ and ‘I am Indonesian’, which are two different types of identities. But
during problematic moments, such as being faced with television representations of
‘homogenous identities’, they view their identity as a web of ‘cultures’. At these
times, ethnic culture and national culture collide in a way that questions, ‘Am I
Javanese or Indonesian?’. My observation was conducted in one moment of time in
the respondents’ lives, though, while identity construction is a continuous process of
25
self-validating. Therefore, there is no determining whether the respondents will really
separate the ‘cultural’ and the ‘national’ within themselves or continue a ‘web of
‘cultur/nation’-al identity’.
The respondents’ national identity does not only act as a ‘filter’ when viewing
‘the cultural’ but also ‘the global’ in ‘national’ television programmes. This is
apparent in one of the themes raised by the respondents concerning the originality of
Indonesian sinetrons. Respondents showed great concern over Indonesian sinetrons
that imitate foreign (mostly Asian) dramas. However, their concern may be invalid,
because the ‘translation’ of text is in itself a production of a new message that is more
suitable to Indonesia’s cultural settings (speaking in Indonesian language, portraying
local actors, etc). Additionally, television has always been a form of imitation. After
all, culture is the result of exchanging meaning; it is difficult to claim specific cultural
products as personal property. Therefore, I suggest that the respondents’ objection to
the ‘unoriginality’ of Indonesian sinetrons is because it disconfirms who they are as
Indonesians (“Who are we if we look too much like them?”).
Identity representation in Indonesian television programmes is a topic that will
always need further study. I think it would be interesting to conduct a comparative
study on the perception of Indonesian audiences residing in small and large cities of
global identity representation in television programmes. The more removed an
audience is from globalised large cities, the less exposed they are to global culture,
and so they may react differently to global identity on television than urban citizens.
The young Indonesian students who were observed in this research were all exposed
to global culture (firstly by being migrants and secondly for having access to various
types of media); therefore, they are worldly and familiar with the global texts of film,
and television programmes, along with the adaptation of these global cultural products
to Indonesian television. How would a person who is not familiar with global culture
respond to the ‘localising’ of global text? Would they realise that this is not
‘Indonesian’? Would they separate ‘us’ (Indonesians) from ‘them’ (Westerners) in
television programmes like the respondents in this research have?
I also suggest comparing the Indonesian viewers residing in the country with
Indonesian viewers residing in other countries in terms of their perception of
Indonesian television programmes. Would they be attached to their national identity
like the respondents in this research? I think it would be interesting to study whether
gendered identity influences preference in media consumption.
26
During the group interview, one of the respondents, Ical, argued that tayangan
mistik (mystic television programmes) are ‘bad for Indonesian viewers’ because they
validate irrationality. He further claimed that it is ‘against religious beliefs to believe
something other than God’. Although Ical’s comment was not elaborated upon by
other students, I think it would be interesting to study how religion can relate to
cultural and national identity, especially concerning the dominance of Islam in
Indonesian television. For instance, every day the adzan (the calling of prayers in
Islam) is aired on every television station, exposing Islamic practice to any Indonesian
happening to be tuned in. I think these projects could be developed from my research.
I hope that I can conduct a research on (one of) these topics in future projects.
Bilbliography
Benedict Anderson (1983). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and
Spread of Nationalism. New York: Verso.
Chris Barker (1999). Television, Globalization and Cultural Identities. USA: Open
University Press.
David Buckingham (1993). Children Talking Television: The Making of Television
Literacy. London and New York: Routledge Falmer.
Marjorie Ferguson. “The Mythology about Globalisation”. European Journal of
Communication. Vol 7 (1).
David French and Michael Richards (eds.) (2000). Television in Contemporary Asia.
London: Sage.
Marie Gillespie (1995). Television, Ethnicity and Cultural Change. London and New
York: Routledge.
Peter Golding (1994). “The Communication Paradox: Inequality at the National and
International Levels”. Media Development. Vol. 41 (4).
Stuart Hall. ‘Culture, community, nation’. Cultural Studies. Vol. 7 (3), 1993. pp. 356.
Hall, Stuart and Paul du Gay (eds.). Questions of Cultural Identity. London: Sage,
1996.
Adel Irwansyah and Mirshe Sukanto. “Serial Asia Rasa Lokal (Asian Series Local
Taste)”. In: Tabloid Bintang Indonesia (Indonesian Star Tabloid). Available online
via: http://www.xanga.com/arukas06/527416380/menentang-sinetron-jiplakan.html
(last seen on 24.04.2006).
27
Gilang Iskandar. “Adaptasi Drama Serial ‘My Girl’ (The Adaptation of ‘My Girl’
Drama Series)’. In: Kompas Online, 13.10.2006. Available online via:
http://www.kompas.com/kompas-cetak/0610/13/opini/3022084.htm (last seen on
24.04.2007)
Philip Kitley (2000). Television, Nation, and Culture in Indonesia. USA: Ohio
University Center for International Studies.
Giselinde Kuipers (2007). „Sitcom Audiences and Humor Styles: A Comparative
Study of Humour and Social Background“. Research Proposal for the NWO Talent
Program. Online available via: http://users.fmg.uva.nl/gkuipers/projecttxt.html (last
seen on 17.04.2007)
Yuri Lotman (1990). Universe of the Mind: A Semiotic Theory of Culture. London:
I.B. Taurus and Co.
Albert Moran. Copycat TV: Globalisation, Program Formats and Cultural Identity.
UK: University of Luton Press, 1998. p. 175.
Albert Moran and Michael Keane (eds.) (2004). Television Across Asia: Television
industries, programme formats and globalisation. London: Routledge Curzon.
Chrisna Nuraisyiah (2007). “Indonesia dan Film (Indonesia and Film)”. 09.01.2007.
In:
Pikiran
Rakyat
Online.
Online
available
via:
http://www.pikiran-
rakyat.com/cetak/2007/012007/09/belia/selancar.htm (last seen on 24.04.2007)
Chris Park (2003). “In Other (People’s) Words: plagiarism by university studentsliterature and lessons”. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. Vol. 28 (5).
Roland Robertson (1992). Globalisation: Social Theory and Global Theory. London:
Sage.
Alex Supartono (et.al) (2000). “Membayangkan Dunia Baru yang Lebih Baik Media
Kerja Budaya. Vol. 3, 2000. Online available via: http://mkb.kerjabudaya.org/mkb032000/mkb-pokok-032000/pokok-2-032000.htm (last seen on 25.04.2006)
This paper is a summary of parts of my MA thesis, entitled ‘The Pursuit of Identity
through Television Viewing: A Study of Young Indonesian Migrants in the
Netherlands and Their Views on Indonesian Television’, for the Research Master
Programme in Media Studies I undertook at the University of Amsterdam (20052007). I am currently the development and operational manager of an Indonesian
production house which supplies news stories to foreign news agencies as well as
produces video materials (documentaries) as part of public awareness campaigns. I
28
also help teach ‘International Communications’ for the Communication Science’s
Regular Bachelor Programme, University of Indonesia.
i
Data obtained from AC Nielsen, 2006. Analysis on television entertainment programme in Indonesia
(target audience: all, scope: nine large cities in Indonesia).
ii
For further reading concerning this view, see Douglas Kellner. Globalization and the Postmodern
Turn. Available online via: http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/courses/ed253a/dk/GLOBPM.htm (last seen on
28 May 2007)
iii
For further reading: Arjun Appadurai (1996), Roland Roberston (1992) and John Tomlinson (1999).
iv
The matrix is developed from the model for strategic thinking introduced by Paul J.H. Schoemaker.
For further reading concerning Schoemaker’s model, see: Paul J.H. Schoemaker. ‘Scenario Planning: A
Tool for Strategic Thinking’. Sloan Management Review, Vol. 36(2). ABI/Inform Global, 1995.
v
Data obtained from AC Nielsen, 2006. Analysis on television entertainment programme in Indonesia
(target audience: all, scope: nine large cities in Indonesia).
vi
Ervan Nugroho writing about the phenomenon of the Indonesian music band Dewa going
international, “Klip Video Dewa Diputar di Hard Rock Sedunia (Dewa Video Clip to be Played in Hard
Rock Cafés Around the World)”. In: Republik Cinta: Sebuah Republik Impian (The Love Republic:
Imagining a Republic), 24.07.2006. Online available via: http://www.republikcinta.com/joomla/index.php?Itemid=70&id=0&limit=9&limitstart=108&option=com_content&task=bl
ogcategory (last seen on 19.01.2007)
vii
These are the means of observing daily activities as suggested by Hammersley and Atkinson (1995).
29