Fatwas are islamic decrees handed out by the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), they help followers in the world's biggest muslim majority country know what is forbidden by Islam and what is not. Fatwas always manage to cause a stir, especially after Pokémon Go, homosexuality, and even speed bumps have been labeled haram.The latest sin in the council's crosshairs has been the rise of online hoaxes and fake news, this has lead to fake news being labeled as haram. Now there's a fatwa debate over the people who sometimes spread fake news stories, 'buzzers.'Last month, Pemuda Muhammadiyah, one Indonesia's largest islamic organization, recommended a fatwa against buzzers who weigh in on politics. They cited the bad influence buzzers have on the general public and that they sometimes help spread false news stories online.Social media is a particularly powerful tool in Indonesia, Jakarta has most Twitter traffic in the world, and the easiest way to use the power of social media is with a buzzer. Buzzers can be anyone who is paid to tweet about a certain topic or media campaign. The accounts range from massive celebrities to everyday people with a couple hundred followers.In the pluralist nation, fatwas issued by MUI are not legally binding. There's even been a fatwa against corruption, but corruption still plagues the country in spite of it being officially marked as haram. People ignoring fatwas are not breaking the law, but they can be seen as doing something publicly taboo.I met Wisnu Prasetyo Utomo, a media observer who works at Remotivi. We talked about the effectiveness of the possible fatwa, the lack of definition of what buzzer really is, and the biggest buzzers in Indonesia.Do you think a fatwa is necessary?It's not without reason, but they're overreacting. The fact that they went as far as to recommend a fatwa on political buzzers suggests that there's a general concern about them. I think people are starting to get sick of buzzers. It's a collective concern, it's not confined to members of Pemuda Muhammadiyah.What I mean by overreacting is if a fatwa is something to be obeyed by all muslims, then there should be thorough analysis on the issue. There's been no analysis, there's not even a proper definition of what a buzzer is. We must be clear and explain the issues behind posting political content on social media, whether it's about debates during the gubernatorial election or things that end up being fake news. What problems do these buzzers actually cause? They're just jumping to conclusions out of panic, it may not be the right solution. It's possible buzzers are not the root of the problem.Do you think buzzers are able to influence public opinion?I think buzzers are influential, however, they use the wrong methods. Those who spread hoaxes aren't media illiterate, they should know what they are doing. Goenawan Mohamad and Aa Gymcontribute to spreading hoaxes, yet they never apologized for it. Buzzers are important, but the way they do things is a problem.Aa Gym and Goenawan Mohamad tweet frequently, does that mean they are categorized as buzzers?The definition is vague. Is a buzzer someone who expresses their opinion and receives monetary compensation, or is it someone who expresses their opinion and receives no compensation whatsoever? For example, there are some celebrities who support [Jakarta Governor] Ahok—and don't receive monetary compensation. When they just express their support are they buzzers? Today, it seems, everyone and no one can be a buzzer.One example is former president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY), he has millions of followers. So what happens when he endorses one or two candidates? If we consider SBY as a buzzer, then the definition expands. In that case, Goenawan Mohamad and Aa Gym's tweets might as well be haram.As an alternative to a fatwa, do you think putting together a code of conduct would be a better solution?I think it still wouldn't help because there are people who support a [particular candidate] and still wouldn't consider themselves a social media star, but in practice they are. When we talk about being a buzzer as a profession, there should be a code of conduct. However, SBY has the potential to be a buzzer because of his millions of followers, but can we apply the code of conduct to SBY? I don't think so, therefore I think buzzers don't need code of conduct.Do you think codes of conduct will limit our freedom of expression?That's the one of consequences, I suppose. Because that means the code of conduct applies not only for paid buzzers but also voluntary buzzers. Otherwise, it wouldn't be fair— because sometimes whether or not a buzzer is paid is irrelevant to the scope of their influenceDo you think problems caused by buzzers is related to them misusing the internet?I don't think it's about ethics. It's simply the consequences of social media. The collective ethics are irrelevant on social media because each and every user has their own standards and style. I personally think people can say whatever they want to as long as they do not provoke violence. People can make offensive memes, but shouldn't make any that consists of pedophilia. We simply cannot force buzzers to be polite and correct.So buzzers cannot be disciplined?I don't think so. We can regulate their content, whether or not it's a hoax. When it comes to hoaxes, we already have the laws for that. So we don't need to make laws on buzzers because Indonesia already has too many rules.If buzzers are labeled haram, do you have any suggestions on the kind of profession they can turn to?Nobody would admit they're a buzzer, they might as well become a politician. That job would be good test of how big their influence really is.Online, people might change their minds [because of buzzers]. But it might not translate to their attitudes and actions. So that makes us wonder how do we measure the effectiveness of buzzers? Is it through people's opinions on social media? Is it if it becomes a trending topic? Do all of these indicators manifest themselves in the ballots on election day?Which is more annoying, buzzer or Twitter celebrities?I think Twitter celebrities, they're just a bunch of smartypants. They comment on anything. Anything! Sometimes they use their influence to hit on their followers. That's annoying. Buzzers might not have a code of conduct, but at least their goals are clear.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
