Youth Media & Politics A New Identity

© EPUB, Universiti Malaysia Perlis, 2017All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any forms by any means,electronic, mechanical, or otherwise, whether now or hereafter devised, including photocopying,recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system without express written prior permissionfrom the publishers.Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia Cataloguing-In-Publication DataYOUTHS MEDIA and POLITICS : A New Identity / Editor Aida Mokhtar Includes index ISBN 978-967-0922-07-2 (Print)e-ISBN 978-967-0922-51-5 (eBook) 1. Youth--Political activity--Malaysia. 2. Mass media and youth. I. Aida Mokhtar. 323.042083Published by Penerbit UniMAP, Universiti Malaysia Perlis No. 98, Blok A, Taman Pertiwi Indah, JalanKangar-Alor Setar, Seriab, 01000 Kangar, Perlis. MALAYSIAMember of Majlis Penerbitan Ilmiah Malaysia (MAPIM), Kementerian Pendidikan Tinggi MalaysiaTel: (04) 979 8131, Fax: (04) 977 5135Website: http://penerbit.unimap.edu.myE-mail: [email protected] e-book is best viewed with iBooks. Penerbit UniMAP shall not to be liable for any loss or damagecasued by any changes due usage of any application. The information provided within this e-book is forgeneral informational purposes only. While we try to keep the information up-to-date and correct, thereare no representations or warranties, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability,suitability or availability with respect to the information, products, services, or related graphicscontained in this eBook for any purpose. Any use of this information is at your own risk.

CONTENTSCONTRIBUTORS’PREFACEINTRODUCTION1THE YOUNG MALAYSIA VOTERSyed Arabi IdidPREVIOUS STUDIESCOMPARISONS OF STUDIES CONDUCTEDOUTCOMES OF THE STUDYPROBLEMS FACED BY THE COUNTRYCONCLUSIONREFERENCES2A SEMIOTIC ANALYSIS OF ‘INDIVIDUALISM’ AND ‘COLLECTIVISM’: THEGLOBAL ‘BERSIH 3.0’ WEBSITEAida MokhtarBACKGROUND2VOTING TRENDS IN GENERAL ELECTION 13CULTURE, CULTURAL VALUES AND WEBSITESCURRENT STUDYKEY SIGNS AND INTERPRETATIONSCULTURAL VALUES OF SIGNS AND SIGNIFICANCECONCLUSIONS

REFERENCES3NARCISSISM AND THE NEW CULTURE OF CITIZENSHIP:THEEXPERIENCES OF THREE MALAYSIA BLOGGERSShafizan MohamedNARCISSISTIC POLITICSREFERENCES4FRAMING ‘BERSIH 3.0’ BY MALAY PRINT AND ONLINE MEDIAChang Peng Kee and Nor Syazwani IsmailPREVIOUS FRAMING STUDIESCONTENTS ANALYSIS STUDY ON FRAMING ‘BERSIH 3.0’NEWS FRAMING PATTERN AND CONCLUSIONREFERENCES5SOCIAL MEDIA, POLITICS AND YOUTHSMohd Sobhi Ishak, Norsiah Abdul Hamid, Mansor Mohd Noor and Azizah SarkowiA PANEL SURVEYOUTCOMESMEASURING SOCIAL MEDIA PRESENCE OF DS NAJIB AND DS ANWARHOW DATO’ SERI NAJIB AND DATO’ SERI ANWAR ARE PERCEIVED ON SOCIALMEDIA?SOCIAL MEDIA APPLICATIONS DATO’ SERI NAJIB AND ANWAR IBRAHIM USECONCLUSIONREFERENCES

6SOCIAL MEDIA AND MALAYSIAN YOUTH’S PARTICIPATION ONFACEBOOK: AN EXPLORATORY CASEMohamad MD Yusoff and Omar M. ThabitTHE IMPORTANCE F SOCIAL MEDIASOCIAL MEDIA INFLUENCE IN MALAYSIASOCIAL MEDIA INFLUENCE ON THE YOUTHS IN MALAYSIACURRENT RESEARCH STUDYOUTCOMES OF THE STUDYOVERALL DISCUSSIONTHE INFLUENCE OF SOCIAL MEDIA ON MALAYSIAN YOUTHS AND POLITICSHOW THE MALAYSIAN GOVERNMENT IS USING SOCIAL MEDIA TOCOMMUNICATE WITH YOUTHSCONCLUSIONREFERENCES7ONLINE AND SOCIAL MEDIA FOR POLITICAL PARTICIPATION AMONGYOUNG ADULTSEzhar Tamam and Md. Salleh HassanPREVIOUS LOCAL STUDIES ON ONLINE AND SOCIAL MEDIACULTURAL, SOCIAL AND POLITICAL ENVIRONMENTTHE STUDYOUTCOMES AND IMPLICATIONSATTENTIONS TO POLITICS AND DISCUSSION OF POLITICS OFFLINE ANDONLINEMEDIA USE AND POLITICAL PARTICIPATIONCONCLUSIONREFERENCES

8THE MEDIATING EFFECT OF INTERPERSONAL INFLUENCE BETWEENMASS MEDIA INFLUENCE AND UNIVERSITY STUDENTS’ VOTINGINTENTIONSaodah Wok, Syed Arabi Idid and Rashid MotenPREVIOUS STUDIESPERCEIVED MEDIA CREDIBILITYTHEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND HYPHOTHESES OF THE STUDYCURRENT RESEARCH STUDYOUTCOMES OF THE STUDYCONCLUSIONREFERENCES INDEX

CONTRIBUTORSSYED ARABI IDID ([email protected]) is a Professor in the Department of Communication,Kulliyah of Islamic Revealed Knowledge and Human Sciences in the International Islamic UniversityMalaysia (IIUM). He was Dean of the IIUM Research Management Centre in July 2001 and was laterappointed as Rector of the IIUM from 1st June 2006 until 31st May 2011. He was at UniversitiKebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) for 22 years before joining the IIUM in 1999. Before joining UKM, Dr.Syed Arabi Idid was a reporter with BERNAMA from 1968 to 1971. He holds a BA (Universiti Malaya),MA and PhD (University of Wisconsin, Madison).AIDA MOKHTAR ([email protected]) is a Lecturer in the Department of Communication of the IIUM.She obtained her PhD from the University of Stirling, United Kingdom (UK) in 2011. Her PhD researchstudy was a case study on PETRONAS corporate television advertisements that were supervised andcreated by the late Creative Director, Yasmin Ahmad. She examined the advertising production processfrom the multiple stakeholder perspective on responsibility in advertising for her PhD study. Her researchinterests are social advertising, advertising regulations, television advertising, corporate advertising,Islamic advertising and Integrated Marketing Communication (IMC). She is a member of the InternationalCommunication Association and American Academy of Advertising.SHAFIZAN MOHAMED ([email protected]) completed her BA in Multimedia Management at theMultimedia University (MMU), Malaysia in 2003. She completed her MA in OrganizationalCommunication at the IIUM in 2005. She is currently Lecturer in the IIUM. Her research interest revolvesaround the effects of new media technologies which include online public spheres, the Internet and onlinecommunities and online social movements. Her PhD research focuses on the cultural dimension of onlinealternative media in Malaysia focusing mainly on political blogging. The research study applies a culturalapproach to understand how online alternative media provides a democratic space for political bloggers.CHANG PENG KEE ([email protected]) is currently an Associate Professor in Communication and theDeputy Director of Alumni Relations in UKM. He earned his BA (Hons) in Communication from the sameuniversity. Chang joined the corporate world in 1992 and became a Public Relations Manager with apublic-listed company for 12½ years. Chang did his MBA (General Management) at the University ofBath, United Kingdom. He left the company in 2005 for the completion of his PhD in MassCommunication in Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM). He joined UKM as an academic in 2008 and wasentrusted to head the Communication and Information Management Programme before assuming thepresent position. His research areas are public relations, media framing, and political communication.NOR SYAZWANI ISMAIL had just completed her Masters of Social Sciences (CommunicationManagement) programme in October 2012. She earned her BSocSc (Hons) in Political Science also fromUKM. Nor Syazwani is currently working in the Ministry of Youth and Sports, Malaysia.MOHD SOBHI ISHAK ([email protected]) is a Senior Lecturer and the Head of MultimediaTechnology Department, School of Multimedia Technology and Communication, College of Arts andSciences, Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM). He obtained his Bachelor of Information Technology (Hons)from UUM, a Master of Science in Communication Technology and a PhD in Mass Communication from

UPM. His research interests are: the influence and impact of media on religious, society, and politics.Besides having presented numerous papers at national and international conferences he has alsocontributed articles to journals and chapters in books on the media. He was involved as a data analyst in aseries of studies on the Malaysian General Elections (GE) from GE11 to GE13. His expertise is inquantitative research methods and advanced statistical analysis of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)using AMOS and SmartPLS.NORSIAH ABDUL HAMID ([email protected]) is a Senior Lecturer and currently the Deputy Deanof the School of Multimedia Technology and Communication, UUM. She holds a PhD in InformationScience from UKM, a Master of Science in Communications Studies from the University of Leeds, UK,and a Bachelor of Information Technology (Hons) from UUM. Her areas of teaching, student supervision,research and publications are the impact of ICT and media on society, information society and knowledge,and media studies on women and gender. She has been involved in various research projects andpublications at the university and national levels, as well as presenting papers at seminars andconferences nationally and internationally. She is also actively involved in writing chapters in books,journal articles, and national and international proceedings. Current research projects include research onthe development of the social media model for young women and girls focusing on empowerment andrisk, as well as book publications related to the knowledge society from the Malaysian perspective andalso social media in ASEAN member countries.MANSOR MOHD. NOOR ([email protected]) is a Professor in the Sociology of Ethnic Relations. Heserved as Principal Research Fellow and Head of Ethnicity and Employment Cluster at the Institute ofEthnic Studies (KITA), UKM. He obtained his first degree from Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), aMaster of Arts from the University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand and PhD in EthnicRelations from the University of Bristol, United Kingdom. Among his major publications are, ‘The Studyof Ethnic Alignment: A New Technique and an Application in Malaysia’. Ethnic and Racial Studies,Banton and Mansor, 15 (4) 1992:599-613; ‘Crossing Ethnic Borders in Malaysia: Measuring the Fluidityof Ethnic Identity and Group Formation’ Akademika 55 (July) 2000: 61-82 (Journal of Anthropology andSociology National University of Malaysia); co-author of Ethnic Relations In Malaysia, Aziz & AbdulRahman Mohammad Iskandar Lee Ainudin, 2006, Kuala Lumpur: Pearsons; ‘Understanding and ManagingReligious Extremism in Malaysia’, ENGINEERING, Journal of Ethics, Justice and Governance, Vol. 1(2005); and, ‘Multiculturalism or Indigenous Canopy? Making Sense of the Different Trajectories ofPluralism in Southeast Asia ‘WINDOW Sciences Scientific Journal of Socio-Cultural and Economics, 6(2) 2011:53-66.AZIZAH SARKOWI ([email protected]) is Lecturer at Darulaman Campus Teacher Training Institute.She holds a PhD in Education (Programme Evaluation), Master of Science in Information Technology, andBachelor in Information Technology (Hons) from UUM. She has been involved in research projects andpublications on web evaluation and teacher’s education quality, as well as presenting papers at seminarsand conferences nationally and internationally.MOHAMAD MD YUSOFF ([email protected]) hails from USM, Penang and has more than 30years of teaching experience in the Department of Communication in UKM, and currently a leadinginstructor/lecturer in the Master of Integrated Marketing Communication program at USM, IPS WismaSejarah, Kuala Lumpur. He has published more than eight books to his credit and numerous articles,essays in local and international journals. A leading expert on IMC and Advertising, he is currently a

subject matter expert on communication and advertising for the Ministry of Communication andMultimedia, KDN, SPRM and Institut Integriti Malaysia. As Chair, and Deputy Dean of the School ofCommunication, USM, he was awarded the most prolific viva voice’s chair for the past 2 years from2011-2013. Trained in marketing communication at Michigan State University (MA) 1979 and (ABE)1999, he is currently working on the formulation of the National Advertising Policy and assumes assubject matter expert in the aforesaid task force by KKMM. Currently, he is completing his forthcoming9th book on ‘Malaysia and Indonesia’s media: Issues and challenges.’OMAR THABIT ([email protected]) hails from Jeddah, Saudi Arabia and has graduated with aMaster’s of IMC from USM. He obtained his BA in Marketing from Lim Kok Wing University, KualaLumpur, Malaysia. He is currently doing research studies on IMC; exploring celebrity endorser and itsrelevance to brand value and effective message design.EZHAR TAMAM ([email protected]) is a Professor of Communication in the Department ofCommunication at the Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, UPM, Serdang, Selangor,Malaysia. Currently, he serves as Deputy Dean (Research and Innovation) at the Faculty. He received hisMA from Michigan State University and PhD from the University of Oklahoma, United States of America(USA). His research interests include intercultural communication and media studies. He has published ina number of journals including Mass Communication and Society, Journal of Intercultural CommunicationResearch, Asia Pacific Journal of Education, Asia Pacific Education Review, InternationalCommunication Gazette, and Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities.MD. SALLEH HASSAN ([email protected]) obtained his Bachelor in Agriculture Science from theUniversity of Malaya, Master in Development Communication at the University of the Philippines at LosBanos, and PhD from Ohio University, USA, in Mass Communication. His research interests are in theareas of development communication, mass communication and ICT. Currently he serves as the VicePresident of the World Communication Association. He is also a member of the InternationalCommunication Association, Asian Mass Communication Research and Information Centre, InternationalAssociation of Agricultural Information Specialists, and life member Society for InternationalDevelopment and Malaysian Association of Social Sciences.SAODAH WOK ([email protected]) is Professor in the Department of Communication, IIUM. Sheobtained her PhD from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA in Mass Communications. Herresearch areas are organizational communication with special interest in organization diversity, humanrelations, and communication networks; in media studies with special interest in new media; and inwomen studies. She is an ardent researcher and has conducted research consultancy work for thegovernment and for the private sector. She has written books, chapters of books, journal articles and haspresented papers at international and national conferences.ABDUL RASHID MOTEN ([email protected]) is a Professor of Political Science at the IIUM. Heearned his BA (Hons) and MA from Dhaka University Bangladesh, MA from Villanova University,Pennsylvania, USA and PhD from the University of Alberta, Canada. He has been lecturing in manyuniversities (Bangladesh, Pakistan, UK, USA, Canada, Nigeria, and Malaysia) for about 40 years. Heserved as an advisor to Marshal Cavendish International (Singapore) and is on the Research Board ofAdvisors to the American Biographic Institute. He is the recipient of many awards including IIUM BestResearch Award, International Islamic University Malaysia, 2007. He specializes in Comparative

Politics, Methodology, Islamic Political Thought and Institutions, and Electoral Studies. He has authoredand edited 28 books and monographs and contributed over 100 articles to internationally refereedjournals. His latest edited book is Government and Politics in Malaysia (Cengage Learning 2013). He isthe Editor of the International Journal of Islamic Thought, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

PREFACEWith the large presence of Malaysian young voters in the 13th General Elections, it appears that thephilosophies of the political campaigns was cave emporiums or beware of the buyer or young votersbelow 40 years old. Akin to marketers, political campaigners needed to have better insight of youngvoters as prospective customers for their campaigns to be effective. A customer-oriented marketingstrategy is best than the passé product-oriented approach. Care must be applied when making productclaims. Not only should they be truthful but also good for the people encouraging marketers to go alongmoral lines. Conjuring political messages that resonate with the target audience is ideal. New young voters had tobe in awe of political parties peddling their wares first before customers could be bought and loyaltyearned. The young voters were an important market as they could determine the outcome of the 13thGeneral Elections and future election campaigns. Social media is important for young voters as itempowers them. They are able to be heard through their expressions on social media without muchrestriction but of course any freedom perceived should be undertaken wisely bearing in mind theimplications of what they say on other people. The Internet allows them to pull political information asand when they need it. Caution needs to be prescribed to young voters who immerse themselves in theinformation available on the Internet. Although abundant, the political information amassed from differentsources could turn out to be false. This book has addressed the need for more research studies on Malaysian young voters in the 13thGeneral Elections. It was inspired by a seminar organized by the International Islamic UniversityMalaysia that encouraged deliberations on youths, media and politics making up the new identity of theMalaysian political landscape at the time.

INTRODUCTIONThe voting trend was controlled even more by the young voters in the Malaysian 2013 General Election(GE13) as they had a greater presence compared to the previous general election. Former Chairman ofBarisan Nasional (BN), Tun Abdullah Badawi, mentioned that the ruling party lost its two-thirds majorityin the Internet war during the 2008 General Election campaign (Tapsell 2013). In view of this, many BNofficials saw the need for the party to have a greater presence in cyberspace in GE13. The greater presence of young voters and more intense cyberspace war in GE13 marks the newidentity of politics in Malaysia. There was and still is a place for many in cyberspace; political parties,non-governmental organizations and others who want to have a say or find out more about the politicalscenario in Malaysia. ‘As public sphere, the internet could facilitate discussion that promotes ademocratic exchange of ideas and opinions.’ (Papacharissi 2002, p. 11) However, it does not mean thatcitizens are more informed or more willing to partake in political discussions. Although the Internet hasprovided Malaysians with a virtual space for political discourse, those who do not have access to theInternet are excluded from this. Social media use has been prevalent among youths in Malaysia thus theInternet was essential for influencing voter choice in urban areas for GE13 (Tapsell 2013). The commonthread of youths, media, and politics making up the new identity of Malaysian politics in GE13 goesthrough most of the assortment of chapters in this book. The eight chapters were churned from variousquantitative and qualitative research studies. The book opens with an examination of the political behavior of young voters in Malaysia. The nextchapter cautions those reading political messages as a study looked at the denotative, connotative andmythic meanings of key signs on the Global Bersih 3.0 website construed in terms of Hofstede’s culturaldimension; individualism and collectivism. Another chapter discusses on a study that found bloggingallowing a sense of belonging to be felt amongst those who resist the institutionalized political culture andthose who want to promote their own brand of politics. The next chapter focuses on the differentperspectives of reality found in Malaysiakini and Utusan Malaysia. An examination of the role of socialmedia in shaping the governance and political agenda in Malaysia is presented in another chapter. A studyof social media sites belonging to two Malaysian leaders who had election campaigns is also discussed.Communicating to youths is crucial and can be both politically constructive and destructive, asestablished in one chapter. Online and social media use and its relationship with offline and onlinepolitical participation among young Malaysians are also discussed in the book. The final book chapterlooks at the mediating effect of interpersonal influence between mass media influence and universitystudents’ voting intention.

THE YOUNG MALAYSIAN VOTER 1 THE YOUNG MALAYSIAN VOTER Syed Arabi IdidPeople express interest in the young, either as consumers of products and services or as voters. Interest inthe young is focused on due to their numerical presence, at least on paper. Their number makes marketersand political parties keen to know them better. Marketers and political parties have tried their best to winthe young over through various means so that they would consume their products or services or cast theirvotes in favour of the political party concerned. Marketers extensively study the young to know their income, their preference, or to have a socio-demographic or socio-psychological profile of them. It is the same with the political parties who need toknow the socio-demographic profile of young voters. On 7 June, 2012, Utusan Malaysia had an articlethat incorporated a photograph of a banner whose headline said, ‘Pengundi Muda Penentu PRU-13?’(When translated to English, it says, ‘The Young will determine the outcome of the 13th GeneralElection?’). Scholars and political analysts have statistics on the effects of the young on the outcome ofelections and by-elections. This paper addresses the concerns of the young in the electoral process, by first acknowledging theirnumerical presence as voters during elections. The young voters have played their role during theprevious elections and would continue to do so in the coming elections. But over the years the role thatthe young has been playing has changed. How do the young make their presence felt? Among others, theymake their presence felt by articulating contemporary issues through new technology and newcommunication gadgets. The young voters have been able to communicate on issues that are attractive andmeaningful to the general public. How do the young or adolescents gain their political or partyidentification? Party identification is the essence of understanding how citizens and the young interpretpublic affairs and make political decisions (Wolak, 2009). The young are able to articulate their thoughtsand ideas in the realm of politics. And Wolak (2009) says that articulation1 is derived from their parentsthrough the process of socialization.PREVIOUS STUDIESIn our previous study on the Malaysian youth, we found that political discussion among themselves washigh, with 60% talking about politics with their friends, 52% with family members, 46% with parents andonly 32% were talking about politics with political activists. Another study, albeit limited in scope, alsoindicated a high political interest among the young (Teo & Rashidah, 2011). Youths realize early about politics from 18 to 22 years of age. This age seems to correspond to those

who have left Form Five when they feel liberated from the confines of the school to have their ownthinking on politics. Age has been a variable to study the political process, voter turnout, and the effectsof voting on the political development of the country. Voting is one area that has been the concern ofdecision makers. Recently, the Chairman of the Election Commission expressed his disappointment thatnot many young people have registered, as many as he would have liked them to. The irony is that thenumber of voters going out to vote is declining in mature democracies and the number of peopleregistering as voters has not been encouraging either. In a democracy, voters are the major component of the political system. This is not an exception inMalaysia. People have been known to have fought and have died for the right to vote, but in Malaysia theright to vote came with the achievement of independence. Every Malaysian citizen above the age of 21has the right to register and vote during the elections. This meant that politicians, including primeministers, spend time and money to woo and win the support of the voting public to be in office or to enteroffice. Of course there are voters and non-voters in the political system. In Malaysia, 20 million areeligible to vote but only 12.9 million are registered as voters. Out of the registered voters, 5.1 million areaged from 21 to 39 or 21% are young voters (Utusan Malaysia, 2012: 10). In terms of race, 6.8 millionare Malay, 3.9 million are Chinese, 940,000 are Indian, 1.14 million are Bumiputera Sarawak and Sabahand 11,000 are classified as others. To confound the issue, in every election not all registered voters willvote. In the 2008 General Election, there were 10,922,139 registered voters and only 71% voted. Butvoter turn-out in Malaysia has not gone below 61% and has not declined over the years as experienced insome developed countries. In the United States, 49% of voting age Americans voted in 1996, a significantdrop of 6% from the 55.2% who voted in 1992. In 1960, 62.8% of voting age Americans voted. A similarpicture was found in New Zealand. A total of 78.4% voted in the New Zealand elections in 1996 but thepercentage fell to 75% in 1998 and to 71.7% in 2002 (Aimer & Vowels, 2004). It was somewhat the samein Britain. In 2005, the official turnout was 61.5 %. The turnout in 2010 was 65.1 % which washistorically low in what was a close election (Heath, 2011). Why are citizens reluctant to register as voters? Are non-voters different from voters? Non-voters aresaid to be apathetic but the majority has a clear idea of why they do not want to vote (Doppelt & Shearer,1999). Some have expressed disappointment over the political system, others see no point in voting asthey feel their votes do not matter. Some are plain lazy to register as voters while others feel the need tosnub politicians. Doppelt and Shearer (1999) found that age was the greatest difference between non-voters and voters. A total of 73% of non-voters were 18 to 44 years compared to 48% who were voters.To compound matters, 39% of the non voters were under the age of 30 compared to 16% of the voters. There appears to be a monotonic relationship between age and voter turnout. Several studies havementioned that older voters are more likely to vote than younger voters (Evans, 2004), but this trend is upto the age of infirmity as beyond that physical ability limits the elders from exercising their rights. But theyoung tells a different story. The lower turnout among the young is due to several factors, among them aretheir relationship with the political system, and the lack of integration with the political system. The youngmay not have acquired the habit of voting (Evans, 2004). Psychologically, the young have not beenbrought into the political and economic system, they have yet to pay taxes, or have yet to become parentsor homeowners and therefore, politics is not a central concern to them as yet (Nevitte, Blais, Gidengil &Nadeau, 2012). As voters age they tend to be habitual in their party preference. But this is not so with theyoung because their social situation is likely to change, and in the literature of party identifiation, their

loyalty is yet to be entrenched with a party and are therefore more likely to change (Evans, 2004: 176). Political interests among the youth vary. The Malaysian youth are said to be interested in politics butthis is not definitive. A finding after the 12th General Election mentioned that Barisan Nasional (BN) hadneglected to win the hearts of young voters while the opposition parties were mindful of the fact (NazniNoordin et al. 2010). They see a widening gap between the leaders in the United Malays NationalOrganization (UMNO) who are aging every year and the voters who are, by majority, young. To point outthe changing profile of Malaysian voters, a glaring point was made in the by-election in Kuala Terengganuon 17 January, 2009, where 45% of the 80,325 voters were below the age of 40. The voters were found tobe young in the by-election of Manek Urai, Kelantan on 14 July, 2009. Although age was a factor,candidate attributes were also important. Another factor besides age was considered important ininfluencing voter decision and that is a local born candidate. There has been limited literature dealing on the subject of youths, media and politics. There has beensome discussion on the use of media and political interest but this has been on the average voter. Kim andKim (2007) found that three motivations directed Korean adolescents in the use of media and politicalengagement. They used both the Internet and traditional media to gratify needs of guidance, surveillance,social utility and entertainment. In terms of media content, the adolescents used them with the motivationsof guidance and social utility. The Internet seemed to be the dominant place for political engagement but itis being used for guidance and social utility. In studies related to elections; income, education and age aredependent variables that are used to explain differences. In a study by Schmitt-Beck and Votmer (2007)the dependent variables were Democratic Support with the Performance of Democracy, the respondent’slevel of interest in, knowledge about and participatory involvement in politics, and, attitudes towardspolitical parties. The control variables were age, gender, and education. Age was said to be important togeneration-specific socialization experiences and changes related to the life cycle. Does media exposure have a direct impact on orientations toward process culture (politicalinvolvement in terms of respondents’ interest in politics, political knowledge, and participation inpolitics) and system culture (evaluation of the political system [attitudes towards political parties anddemocracy in general, and satisfaction]) with the performance of democracy? The use of the media hasbeen found to be significantly related to a number of other variables. It was found that citizens weremotivated to follow the political process and to be kept informed and be knowledgeable about politicalmatters that are highly related to the patterns of media usage (Schmitt-Beck and Votmer 2007). This hasbrought us to pose several research questions:a) Are the youth highly exposed to the mass media?b) Do the youth see a brighter future for themselves in Malaysia?c) Are the youth trustful of the mass media?d) Do the youth prefer party or candidate when they vote?COMPARISONS OF STUDIES CONDUCTEDThere were two studies conducted; one in March 2008 and another in March 2012. Comparisons shouldbe made on the two findings because of the time difference and also to regard the findings to be somewhat

of a longitudinal study. The study in March 2008 was significant because the study was conducted timelyfor the 12th General Election and the March 2012 study was conducted four years after that. The two nationwide studies selected registered voters as respondents. The respondents were selectedthrough the multi-stage quota sampling technique throughout the country, to reflect the voter compositionof the country. One hundred enumerators were involved in the 2008 study conducted in March 2008 and inthe 2012 study conducted from February to March, 2012. A total of 1,415 respondents participated in2008 and another 1,370 in 2012 for the face to face interviews that lasted between 30 to 45 minutes. Forthe purpose of this paper, we have taken respondents from the ages of 21 to 35, to reflect the youth age inthe country who are registered to vote during elections. Hence, the number of respondents within the agecategory was 668 in 2008 and 515 in 2012.OUTCOMES OF THE STUDYThe Demographic ProfileIn the 2008 study, there were 435 Malays/Bumiputeras (65%), 179 Chinese (27%) and 54 Indians (8%),compared to 276 Malays/ Bumiputeras (54%), 171 Chinese (33%) and 68 Indians (13%) who wereinvolved in our 2012 study. There were 346 males (52%) and 322 (48%) females in 2008 and 265 males(52%) and 250 females (48%) in the 2012 study. Education wise, 44% of the young voters had Form Fivelevel of education and below in 2008 and 45% in 2012. The rest had diplomas and degrees. In 2008, 37%of the respondents earned less than RM2,000 compared to 45% in 2012. Those who earned more thanRM4,000 were 12% in 2008 and 9% in 2012.Thinking of the FutureWe began by asking the youth what they thought would be the future of the country and the future of theirfamilies. The question was aimed to gauge their confidence in the development and well-being of thecountry. It was a close-ended question requiring respondents to provide either one of the four answersprovided, namely; ‘very bad’, ‘bad’, ‘good’ and ‘very good’ future. We combined the last two answers,‘good’ and ‘very good’ future, into one and derived the answer that the young voters were confident in thefuture of the country. In 2008, 85% said they had confidence in the future well-being of their families andin 2012, 87% said this. When asked about how much confidence they had on the future of the nation, 88%said the future was ‘good’ or ‘very good’ and in 2012, 84% said the same. Thus, overall, the young hadconfidence in the future of their families and their country in 2008 and in 2012.PROBLEMS FACED BY THE COUNTRYAmidst the setting of citizenry would be the concerns they have of the problems faced by the country. Theinformation obtained from the identification of problems faced by the country as perceived by the youngwould guide policy makers in terms of the direction that resources should be expended to solve or

alleviate the problems as highlighted by the citizens. An open-ended question was posed to respondentsasking them to identify the biggest problem that they perceived was facing the country. A list of problemswas highlighted by the respondents. The study listed the seven main problems identified by young votersas depicted in Table 1.1. Table 1.1: Identification of Problems. 2008 2012 Malay (%) Chinese Indian (%) General Malay (%) Chinese Indian (%) General (%) (%) (%) (%)Economy 32 35 33 33 19 29 33 23Crime 15 23 24 18 20 15 16 18Social Problems 11 10 6 10 14 8 10 11National Harmony 8 8 15 8 6 6 10 6Politics 9 3 4 7 11 5 6 8Leadership 5 6 6 5 9 16 6 11Illegal Immigrants 5 6 7 5 5 5 2 5 Economic problems as a category includes the cost of living, unemployment, cost of daily necessitieswhile crimes include corruption, house breaking, snatch thieves, kidnapping and robbery. Socialproblems are inclusive of abortion, baby dumping, mat rempit, and the taking of drugs. Political problemsinclude all the issues highlighted in the press such as accusations made against one another,demonstrations, while Leadership includes problems in the political arena among all the political parties.It can be seen that, the three main problems; Economy, Crime and Social Problems, added to a total sumof 61% in 2008 and 52% in 2012. These three were worrying problems to the young in 2008 andcontinued to be problems to them in 2012. While the Economy has decreased as a problem from 33% in2008 to 23% in 2012, the Leadership problem has emerged a worrying issue among the young, the issueidentified from 5% in 2008 to 11% in 2012. For the young Malay voters, the problems identified by them in 2012 were Crime (20%), Economy(19%), Social (14%), Politics (11%), Leadership (9%), National Harmony (6%) and Illegal Immigrants(5%). For the Chinese, the problems identified by them were the Economy (29%), Leadership (16%),Crime (15%), Social (8%), National Harmony (6%), Politics (5%) and Illegal Immigrants (5%). For theIndian young voters, the problems identified by them were the Economy (33%), Crime (16%), Social(10%), National Harmony (10%), Politics (6%), Leadership (6%) and Illegal Immigrants (2%). Crimeand Economic Problems were two issues identified by the Malays and the Indians in 2012, but for theChinese, the two top concerns were Economic and Leadership problems followed by Crime. Table 1.2: Total Number of Registered Voters 2011. AGE TOTAL (MILLION) 21-29 2.3 30-39 2.8

40-49 2.8 50-59 2.3 60-69 1.3 70-79 663,000 (0.6) 80-89 200,000 (0.2) 90 and above 43000 (0.04)Source: Utusan Malaysia, 7 June 2012: pg. 10.Media Use and Media CredibilityThe media and other sources of information play an important role to support the system of democracy.The information obtained from traditional media, new media or from interpersonal sources enables votersto make reasoned decisions when voting during elections (Dahlgren, 2009). But the mass media continueto be the main conduit for the dissemination of political communication. Media channels have transformedthe way members in the society think and discuss about news. Media organizations have gone beyondnational borders to capture the audience. In the colonial time and in the early days of independence, printand electronic media provided a service to the community but now commercialization seems to havetaken precedence over the provision of public service. The media landscape in the 21st century has changed dramatically from the 20th century. Theemergence of new technology, the growth of new audiences and, more so, the government’s media policy,have created a new meaning to the concept of news and the distribution of news. And, this has created abig impact on the way voters have obtained and sought information from the media; traditional media andnew media. Can the media provide a proper appreciation of democratic activism and behaviour both inelections and in political activities? Citizens in new democracies depend on the mass media forinformation to create a new political culture. Developed countries like the United States and Japan have arelatively high use of print media, while in other countries (Greece and Uruguay) very few citizens readnews media but instead keep up with recent developments through television. Malaysians are very well exposed to electronic and print media. Over 90% of Malaysian householdshave television sets at home and the majority of adult Malaysians watch television daily. In 2001, 84% ofMalaysians watched television and it was 82% in 2002 (Media Guide 2003). A total of 74% and 72% ofMalaysians listened to the radio in 2001 and 2003. A total of 50% and 51% read newspapers during thesame period. In April 2004, the study found that 62% of Malaysian voters watched television daily, 46%read newspapers and 24% listened to the radio every day. Indeed, the dominant media in Malaysia werestrongly supportive of Barisan Nasional (BN), when studies conducted in the 1990, 1995 and 1999, 2004and 2008 elections (Idid, 1994; Idid 2011; Idid & Chang, 2012; Idid & Saodah, 2012) supported thefindings that the contents of mainstream media were favourable toward BN. New information technology has caused the fragmentation of audiences and outlets toward morediverse news sources and newer media (like the Internet). The fragmentation of the mass market intonarrower segments is made possible with the growth of television channels, videotape recorders, tele-textand the Internet that have splintered the competition for news in the market place (Errington &Miragliotta, 2011). In the study of elections, scholars have given much emphasis on the use of mass media

mong voters. Given their level of education and income, the young voters were not frequent users of themedia, especially print media. Our youths lacked the financial resources to buy newspapers and perhapsthe time to read newspapers daily. In this study we asked respondents how many days they usedtelevision, newspapers and the Internet during the previous week. They could give their answer whetherthey had used it daily or along the continnum to had not used it at all. The study asked the respondents thefrequency at which they read the newspapers, watched television and used the Internet. The study found that, the use of traditional media by the youth seemed to have dwindled over theyears, with more of them using the Internet than using newspapers or television. There are a variety ofreasons why youths use the media, but getting information and entertainment are among the top needs. Figure 1.1: Usage of the Media. In 2008, a total of 40% used the newspapers everyday, but in 2012, only 36% used the medium daily.Television use showed a similar trend. In 2008, 58% watched television daily compared to 45% whoused it everyday in 2012. The percentage of young voters not using the media (television and newspapers)was also indicative of the mainstream media losing their appeal as daily purveyors of information amongthe young. In 2008, 2% did not use the newspaper and it was 6% in 2012. As for television, 1% reportednot using the medium in 2008 but it was 2% in 2012. The reverse trend was noted for Internet use. In

2008, only 9% used the Internet daily, compared to 30% in 2012. In 2008, 41% were not using theInternet, compared to 18% in 2012. What it meant was that young Malaysian voters were not using themainstream media but they were now using the Internet more frequently than before. The big jump in theuse of the Internet should be noted as young voters have found an affinity to the use of the mediumcompared to their less frequent use of traditional media; newspapers and television. If we analyze in terms of race, it is suggestive that fewer young Malay voters were using thenewspapers daily compared to Chinese and Indian voters. In 2008, 36% of the Malay young used thenewspapers daily, but in 2012, the percentage had gone down to 30%. This was in comparison to theChinese young where 44% of them read the newspapers daily in 2008 and an equal percentage read thenewspapers everyday in 2012. The jump in the use of the Internet by race is more evident of the mediumhaving its place in the young media landscape. In 2008, only 9% of the Malay young voters were using theInternet on a daily basis and this percentage increased to 29% in 2012. A total of 10% of the youngChinese voters were using the Internet daily in 2008 but in 2012, it was 27%. Likewise, it was 7% for theyoung Indian voters in 2008 and the percentage was 38% in 2012.Media CredibilityScholars have reported a growing distrust of institutions in society. According to the Spring 2011Eurobarometer survey across the European Union, 63% distrust their government and 60% distrust theirparliament. In some other countries, (Portugal and the UK), there is significant cynicism towards theirown political institutions. Again in the Eurobarometer 2012, 53% said they tend not to trust the press andanother 45% said they had no trust of television. Over the years, politicians and media scholars havefollowed the findings on trust or on the credibility of the media. In the United States, the confidence in themedia was high in the 1970s but by the 1980s the approval rate of on press performance began to drop. By 1988, only 15% had a great deal of confidence in the press. The Pew Research on the Press(2010) found that in 2010, the average positive rating was 62%. A decade ago, the average rating for thenews organizations tested was 71%. Since 2002, every news outlet’s believability rating has suffered adouble-digit drop, except for local daily newspapers and local TV news (the Pew Research Center forthe People & the Press, conducted in July 19-22 among 1,001 adults). Despite the greater freedom of the media, many Americans do not trust the media. Several reasons hadbeen given; among them was the superficiality of reporting. During the elections, the press are more likelyto focus on the ‘game’ aspects rather than on the substantive issues of the elections. It is these issues thatvoters are interested in to enable them to make wise decisions when they cast their votes. Media’spropensity to interpret rather than report the events may have also contributed to the low trust on themedia. Media credibility has drawn the attention of scholars who were interested in how credibility wasconceptualized, measured and how it was then related to other variables of interest. Both electronic and print media play a vital role in disseminating information. As more people use themass media as their main source of information, the media must maintain their credibility on what theypresent to the public. The basic assumption of studying source credibility is that it influences the effects ofthe message it presents (Lee, 1978). Therefore, media exposure and information seeking habits of theaudience are guided by their perceived media credibility. Credibility is conceptualized by different names

and measured differently. Some scholars termed credibility as ‘trust’ others called it ‘believability’.Media credibility is assessed on the quality of a report. A number of factors contribute to being a‘credible’ source of information, namely, objectivity, accessibility, freedom to report, currency of thereport, and relative expertise. The sum total is the degree at which the audience members believe thesource of information (McCombs, Holbert, Kiousis & Wanta, 2011). Studies conducted since 1990 found that Malaysians have some incredulity of the mainstream mediabut their perception of media credibility has changed over a period of years. Idid (2011) found that thetrust of the media was correlated with the popularity of the ruling party and that this trust has beendeclining with the Malaysian public over the years. Another matter of concern was the trust that the younghad of the media. Trust was used as a dimensional measurement for credibility. The study noted acredibility identity in the use of media among the young. The young seem to have a declining trust onmainstream newspapers and television but an increasing trust on the Internet. For example in March 2008,the trust on newspapers was 85% and on television was 84% but in March 2012, the trust on the twomedia declined to 80%, a drop of four points. The increase in trust on the Internet was 13 points as only51% had trust on the Internet in March 2008 and the trust increased to 64% in March 2012. Figure 1.2: Credibility of the Media.

Trusting the newspapers was felt strongly among the young Malays rather than among the Chinese andthe Indians. In 2008, 84% of the Malays expressed trust on the newspapers, but in 2012, the trust haddropped to 78%, a six point drop. In 2008, 87% of the young Chinese said they trusted the newspapersand in 2012, the trust only dropped to 85%, a two point drop while among the Indians, the trust was feltby 81% in 2008 and it increased to 82% in 2012. The young Chinese and Indians tend to trust thenewspapers more than the Malays. The trust in television tells a different story as the three race groupsexpressed more trust in the use of the medium. A total of 83% of the Malays expressed their trust oftelevision in 2008 and it was 80% in 2012. Likewise, it was 87% and 82% for the Chinese youths and89% in 2008 and 76% in 2012 for the Indians. In the analysis of trust in the Internet, the study found that the level of trust among young Malay votersincreased to 16 points, the trust was 49% in 2008 and 65% in 2012. Among the young Chinese, trust in theInternet was 53% in 2008 and it was 64% in 2012, an increase of 11 points. There was not muchdifference among the Indians. There was a 57% trust in 2008 and it was 56% in 2012. What it meant interms of information was that the young were shying away from using the mainstream media and if theyused them, it would be with a high level of scepticism. The Malays had a high level of distrust overnewspapers and both the Malays and Chinese expressed high trust in the Internet. The three race groupswill read the newspapers or watch television, but the incredulity factor will be injected into their thinkingprocess to accept or to reject the information that is given. Another point to remember is that the medialandscape has changed from the 1990s. Now, there are various sources of information. The people and theyoung are not dependent on mainstream media for information (and entertainment) as the media audienceis now fragmented. There are various sources of information so much so that the mainstream media arebeing considered as other sources rather than the main sources of information.Party or Candidate?Making a choice between party and candidate during election time has always been a subject of academicinterest. The main study on voting, arising from the Michigan project is the work on the ‘American Voter’Campbell, Converse, Miller & Stokes (1960) asserted that, the principal motivation behind voting in theUnited States is party identification and it is evident as a long-term psychological reason for theattachment of one of the two major political parties (Democrat or Republican). The love for a party ispart of the socialization process in childhood and adolescence when individuals absorb the attitudes andvalues of their parents, but in later years imbibing the values of their peers and, perhaps their officecolleagues are the main reasons for voters when choosing a particular party. The core concept and thestudy on party identification later explain about party choice and the development on the theories ofvoting. In studies conducted in the United States, studies on party affinity explain why individuals stick toone party with few variations. People stick to one party and vote for that party regardless of whether theyunderstand the manifesto or the party’s stand on issues. In the United States, the study seemed focused onparty identification as an enduring, emotive attachment (Catt, 1996; Evans, 2004). The orthodox literatureon voting assumes that the party label is important and that voters choose a party they liked best. The study on party identification takes a slightly different angle in European electoral studies wheresocial groups and ideological position are said to be better determinants of votes than any psychologicalattachment to party as social-cleavage is regarded as a better explanation of voting behaviour (Evans,

2004). In the approach to the study of electoral behaviour, scholars from the social cleavage school,questioned the conceptual basis of party identification positing that party identification is too proximate tovoting behaviour itself and hence may function instead as ‘an artefact of electoral choice per se’ (Gunter,Montero & Puhle, 2007:11). Nevertheless, the literature on party identification has left a big space in theconceptualization of the term ‘party’ itself. In the literature on party identification, scholars meant party tobe either a choice between Republican and Democrat, leaving no option for another answer choice. In thispaper, the term party is not meant to be an identification of a particular name of party but rather to seekvoters to identify the basis of making a choice between party and candidate. In this instance, there is alsolittle available literature on the idea of choosing either party or candidate. Scholars seem to agree that the attitudes and the perceptions of voters toward candidates areimportant in drawing in or pushing out votes from parties. A supportive voter sees an election as a time tostand up and show support as a member of a political party. A voter sees in an election a chance to votefor a particular candidate. Likewise, a voter may favour a party but when faced with the candidate hedislikes, he might decide to vote against his party of affiliation. On the other hand there might also be acandidate from an opposing party that appeals to the voter and the voter becomes a ‘rebel’ and votes forthe other party. Voters cast their votes for a variety of reasons. Voters are said to cast their votes on aparticular party merely to express their opinion about specific issues (state of the economy, on crime, onimmigration) or voters vote to influence the outcome of the election. Behaviour of the first motivation issaid to be expressive while the second behaviour is said to be purposive (Alverez, Boehmke & Nagler,2006). Expressive voters see in the election a chance to register their feeling regardless of partyinvolvement. The election can be either as a time to help select the winner or an opportunity to express a preferencefor a party (Catt, 1996). Selective voters help choose a winner and will choose a candidate they believewill win or, as in the United States, as candidates who will run for office. Tactical voters are a primeexample of selective voters who will choose any party that they think will have the best chance of beatingtheir disliked party. Voters with positive motivation see in an election a chance to show their allegiance.Loyal voters would choose a candidate that is sure to win. Choosers are those that would like to choose awinner. A classic tactical voter is one who votes for a party that he does not like. The negative voterwould vote for a party because his or her favourite party would not win. In Malaysia where voting isbased on race, there are occasions when voters cross the party line to vote for a candidate from a similarracial background when his or her party does not nominate a candidate based on his racial preference. Butempirical evidence is lacking for an expressive statement to be made on this matter although Malaysianpolitics since independence has been said to be communal based (Ratnam & Milne, 1967). This study ispartly to add literature on the question of choosing party or candidate during the election. We always hold that citizens would vote for party rather than for candidate. In the United States, partyidentification was a variable used to predict voting behaviour and that would be seen to be stable. Thereis a slight twist in the concept of party identification in parliamentary democracies as a contrast from thepresidential elections ala the American model. This is based on the assumption that people are moregeared to think months ahead before the election and this meant that the issue of candidates does not arise.Names of candidates are heard only during the day of nomination before the start of the election campaign.Hence, months before the elections, voters would be thinking of voting based on party rather thancandidate. This of course would be different from the American presidential elections where the names of

candidates contesting for the presidency would make his or her announcement to stand for the race aspresident. You can see this clearly where the Democrat nominee is Barack Obama and the Republicannominee is Romney, two names that have been nominated months ahead before the election in November,2012. In our study, we asked respondents to state whether they would vote based on candidate or party. InFigure 1.3, we found that all age groups prefer to vote for party more than they would vote for candidate.For the young voters, we notice a trend where they were voting based on candidate more than party aftereach passing year. For example, in the survey in 2002, we found that, 78% of the young age group wouldvote based on party, but this percentage fell to 59% in 2008. This percentage rose slightly up again to63% in 2011 and 62% in 2012. We would imagine that the young, though still inclined to vote for a party,would not be high in percentage to go for party in the coming elections, but in terms of the overallpercentage, the majority would still prefer to vote for party than for candidate. In terms of race, 66% of young Malays, 59% of Chinese and 53% of Indians would vote for party in2012. By 2012, 40% of young Chinese and 47% of Indians were gearing towards choice based oncandidate than on party but only 33% of young Malays would still prefer candidate over party. Ananalysis by age, provides a picture that the middle age group (35-50) and the older age group (51+)would vote for party. A total of 67% of the middle age group and 66% of the older group would vote forparty in 2011, which was 7% and 4% more than that in 2008. A total of 41% of the Young (21-35) and40% of the Middle Age voted based on candidate in 2008 but the percentage who would vote forcandidate fell to 37% and 33% in 2011. The age groups are trailing the general population somewhat inbasing their voting preference. A general picture of the age groups in 2008, 2011 and 2012, is that theYoung are less in choosing party compared to the Middle Aged and the Older Group.

Figure 1.3: Choosing Party or Candidate. An analysis, based on age and race, found that 65% of the Young Indians, based their vote on partyand 35% on candidate in 2008, but this percentage fell to 59% on party and increased to 41% oncandidate in 2011, a 6% difference. For the other races and for the other age groups, the percentagepreferring party increased from 2008 to 2011 and showed a decrease in choosing candidate for the sameperiod. What can be made of this analysis is that the decline in the choice of party could be accounted forby the Young Indians, as for the other age groups, the choice was still based on party.Which Party Then?The choice of party is shaped by several factors. Parental influence as part of the early socializationprocess, or peer influence could be among the factors. The identification of issues, and the image of theparty could also contribute to the choice of party. Which party then would the young vote for when theyare in the voting booth? The young have their own idea of a party that they would vote for. In the twosurveys conducted in 2008 and 2012, we asked the young which party would be their voting preference if,‘elections were to be held tomorrow?’ Overall, the party the young prefer would still be BN in 2008 andalso in 2012 but the percentage is a short call. In March 2008, 51% of the young, from 21 to 35 years old,would vote for BN and it was 52% in March 2012. The other interesting point to note is that, the support

for DAP has increased from 10% in March 2008 to 13% in 2012, but the same cannot be said of thesupport given to PAS and PKR. The support for PKR has dropped from a 20% support in March 2008 toonly 10% in 2012 and as for the case of PAS; the drop has been 3%. Undecided voters come to 10%among the young that the parties may feel the need to address their efforts because in March 2008 therewere hardly any undecided voters among the young. To gain more votes, all parties need to go for the10% undecided young voters. Figure 1.4: Choice of Party.CONCLUSIONMuch work has to be done by parties to win the young over to their side. This study has providedpreliminary statements on national problems that the young voters have identified and the image of partythat they hold dear that could have been a contributory factor when they cast their votes in the 13thGeneral Election. The young voters in Malaysia have about 11 years of education and the majority havean income of RM2,000. It is also to be noted that, the acquisition of information remains an issue thatneeds attention among all segments of the population and political parties. Information has ceased to be a

monopoly of media organizations. With the audience fragmented, and multiple information sources, thepopulation, especially the young, can seek information on their own accord. Given the level of education,the young can question information coming from different sources. As this study indicated, the credibility of the media needs to be studied so that the audience would beable to receive information without much question and cynicism. Young Malaysian voters have a great sayin the outcome of the elections. According to Malaysian Election Commission records, about 50% of thetotal registered voters were below 40 years of age for the 13th General Election. Although many politicalparties have acknowledged their numerical strength, yet not many studies have been conducted on thepolitical behaviour of the young. Their access to information, their interest in receiving politicalinformation, their image of leaders, their image of the party, and even the problems facing them arepolitically relevant when they decide to vote. This study is a small contribution to understanding aboutyoung Malaysian voters.REFERENCESAimer, Peter & Vowels, Jack (2004). What Happened at the 2002 Election. In Vowles, Jack.Aimer, Peter; Banducci, Suan; Karp, Jeffrey & Miller, Raymond (eds). In Voters’ Veto. The 2002 Election in New Zealand and the Consolidation of Minority Government.; pg 16.32.Alvarez, R. Michael; Boehmke, Frederick J. and Nagler, Jonathan (2006). Strategic Voting in British Elections. Electoral Studies. 25(1):1-19.Cambell, A.; Converse, P. & Miller, W. & Stokes, W. (1960). The American Voter. New York: John Wiley.Catt, Helena (1996). Voting Behaviour. A Radical Critique. London: Leicester University Press.Dahlgreen, Peter (2009). Media and Political Engagement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Doppelt, Jack C & Shearer, Ellen (1999). NonVoters. America’s No-Shows. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Errington, Wayne & Miragliotta, Narelle (2011). Media and Politics. Victoria: Oxford University Press.Evans, Jocelyn A. J. (2004). Voters and Voting: An Introduction. London: Sage.Gunther, Richard; Montero, Jose Ramon and Puhle, Hans-Jurgen (eds). Democracy, Intermediation, and Voting on Four Continents. London: Oxford University Press.Heath, Oliver. (2011). The Great Divide: Voters, Parties, MPs and Expenses. In Nicholas Allen & John Bartle. Britain at the Polls 2010. London: Sage. pp. 120-146.Kim, Kyu Soo and Kim, Yong-Chan (2007). New and Old Media Uses and Political Engagement Among Korean Aolescents. Asian Journal of Communication, 17(4): 342-361.Lee, R.S.H. (1978). Credibility of Newspaper and TV News. Journalism Quarterly.McCombs, Max; Holbert, R Lance; Kiousis, Spiro & Wanta, Wayne. (2011). The News ad Public Opinion. Cambridge: The Polity Press.Nazni Noordin, Mohd Zool Hilmie Mhamed Sawal, Syazliyat Ibrahim; Zaliha Hj Hussin; Zaherawati Zakaria and Jennifah Nordin. (December, 2010). Malaysian Young Voters Voices: Make or Break Political Development. Paper presented at 2010 International Conference on Science and Social Research Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 5-7 December 2010.Nevitte, Neil; Blais, Andre; Gidengil, Elisabeth; and Nadeau, Richard. (2012). Socioeconomic Status, and Nonvoting: A Cross National Comparative Analysis. In Klingermann, Hans-Dieter. The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 85-108.

Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. (2011). Pew Research. New York.Ratnam, K. J. and Milne, R. S. (1967). The Malayan Parliamentary Election of 1964. Singapore: University of Malaya Press.Schmitt-Beck Rudiger and Voltmer, Katrin. (2007). “The Mass Media in Third Wave Democracies: Grave Diggers or Seedsmen of Democratic Consolidation” In Gunther,Richard; Montero, Jose Ramon and Puhle, Hans-Jurgen (eds). Democracy, Intermediation, and Voting on Four Continents. London: Oxford University Press; 75-134.Syed Arabi Idid & Saodah Wok. (June, 2012). Media Credibility and its Correlate with the Popularity of the Ruling Party. Paper presented at WAPOR 65th ANNUAL CONFERENCE, Hong Kong, 12-15 June 2012.Syed Arabi Idid & Chang, P.K. (2012). The Media and Public Agenda among the Malay and Chinese Communities during the 2008 Malaysian General Elections. Asian Social Science, 8 (5): 107-115.Syed Arabi Idid. (2011). Peranan Media Massa dalam Pilihan Raya Umum. Gombak: IIUM Press.Syed Arabi Idid (2011). Choosing Party or Candidate. Paper presented at the Wacana Meja Bulat Pilihanraya Raya Umum 13 (Penerokaan dan Telahan Sokongan Pengundi) organized by Majlis Profesor Negara and Institut Kajian Etnik, UKM, Hotel Equatorial, Bangi, Selangor, 23 December, 2011.Syed Arabi Idid. (1994). Penentuan Agenda: Peranan Media Massa dalam Pilihanraya Umum. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.Teo, Sue Ann & Rashidah Shuib. (2011). Young People’s Perception of Roles and Responsibilities as Political Party Members. Paper presented at The 2011 International Conference on Social Science and Humanity, Singapore. IPEDR Vol 5; 175-179.Voltmer, K. (Ed). (2006). Mass Media and Political Communication in New Democracies. London: Routledge.Wolak, Jennifer. (2009). Explaining Change in Party Identification in Adolescence. Electoral Studies; 28(4): 573-583.Zulkifli Jalil. (2012, June 7). Pengundi muda Penentu PRU-13? Utusan Malaysia, pp. 10.1This chapter is also published in Syed Arabi Idid. (2014). The Young Malaysian Voters. In FaridahIbrahim & Chang Peng Kee (eds.). Syed Arabi Idid: Scholarship in Transformation. (pp. 235-256).Bangi: Media and Democracy Research Group, UKM.

TA SEMIOTIC ANALYSIS OF ‘INDIVIDUALISM’ AND 2‘COLLECTIVISM’: THE GLOBALBERSIH 3.0 WEBSITE A SEMIOTIC ANALYSIS OF ‘INDIVIDUALISM’ AND ‘COLLECTIVISM’: THE GLOBAL BERSIH 3.0 WEBSITE Aida MokhtarIn 2012, one of the biggest rallies in the past decade took place in Malaysia calling for electoral reform(BBC NEWS Asia 2012). This rally took place amidst the ambience of the 13th General Electioncampaigning. The involvement of Bersih in the rally spurred my study of its webpage through a semioticanalysis with focus given to cultural values.BACKGROUND2Malaysia was bustling with activity as it was preparing for the upcoming 13th General Election. Malaysiain 2013 had a populace of around 30 million with Malays, Chinese and Indians making up the maincultural groups. The ruling party has always been the National Front Coalition or Barisan Nasional (BN)but it seemed to have had a stronger opposition at the time as in the 2008 elections. After the 2008elections, Barisan Nasional returned to power with a reduced majority and the forfeit of five states to theopposition (Moten 2009). In light of this, the outcome of the 13th General Election was waited for in greatsuspense. Some Malaysians have become more vocal in recent years. A colossal rally took place in Malaysia on28 April 2012 calling for electoral reform. The Joint Action Committee for Electoral Reform3 or Bersih(or Global Bersih 3.0) was reported to be behind the Bersih 3.0 rally (Samy 2013). This was not the firstrally organized by ‘Bersih’; it had organized rallies in 2007 and 2011. The goals of Bersih are supportedby the opposition party in Malaysia (Koswanage and Grudgings 2012). There was participation in theBersih 3.0 rally by the opposition party in Bersih and its leader, Anwar Ibrahim, was charged for hisinvolvement in the rally and if convicted, would be prohibited from running for office (BBC NEWS Asia2012). The Committee regards itself as an important part of Malaysia as it attempts to give the country anelectoral system that delivers ‘…a fundamental democratic right to its citizens; an electoral process thatdelivers fair and free General Election.’ (Bersih 2012). The Malaysian police claimed that 25,000 people attended the (Global Bersih 3.0) rally and that this

would impact the date of the elections by pushing it back (Jegathesan 2012). The Bersih 3.0 rally hadintrigued me and encouraged me to examine the Global Bersih 3.0 homepage in this research study.VOTING TRENDS IN GENERAL ELECTION 13For the Election Commission of Malaysia, the voting trend for the 13th General Election will becontrolled by young voters (Jalil 2012). There were 5.2 million voters of ages 21 to 39 for 20114. Youngvoters are further categorized into ‘emotionally influenced’ and ‘mature’ groups by the Commission. It isfurther reported that, the group that is emotionally influenced making up 2.3 million voters is more likelyto make them publicly heard as in the case of the Global Bersih 3.0 rally and the PTPTN demonstration5.The study focused on a semiotic analysis of the Global Bersih 3.0 website from the perspective of ayoung mature prospective voter. Of great interest to this study is the concept of ‘culture’ on the GlobalBersih 3.0 website.CULTURE, CULTURAL VALUES AND WEBSITESTraditional mass media educate us of our culture (Samovar and Porter 2001). It is curious to see as towhether cultural values are likewise found on websites in digital media. The Internet has allowedcommunicators to ‘speak’ to a global audience of which is obviously monumental in number. Thepredicted increased usage of the Internet and its role as a global marketing platform (Constantinides,Lorenzo-Romero et al. 2010) may develop standardised ways of Internet communication as it targetsvirtual communities that many marketers may soon regard as homogenous. ‘Culture’ comprises tangible items and intangible items that when combined describe a group ofpeople or a way of life (Moriarty et al. 2012). For better understanding of the concept of ‘culturalvalues’, we can divide it into ‘culture’; the collective programming of the mind that differentiatesmembers of one group or category from another group or category, and ‘values’, that are held bycollections (of people) and refer to a broad tendency to prefer specific states of affairs over others(Hofstede 2001). In sum, cultural values are the ideals in a given culture and appear to be present inInternet communication. Cultural manifestations on Internet websites have been examined in few researchstudies. The same issues of localization and standardization seem to apply to traditional advertising(Mooij 2010) and the Internet for marketing purposes in the discussion of culture and Internet websites.Overall, most studies on culture and websites have found them to contain some cultural biases except forone study which found similarities in the basic characteristics in the online consumer behavior of Internetusers in two European countries signaling the emergence of a global virtual village (Constantinides et al.2010). A study by Cho and Cheon (2005) dispelled the notion that the Internet is an advertising medium thatis less culturally bound and more global as it has some cultural bias as apparent in other studies.Distinctions have been found in the strategies used by High-Context cultures and Low-Context cultureswhen using the Internet (considered as a largely Low-Context medium) for communication and marketingpurposes (Wurtz 2005). Another study found the need to balance between both standardization and

localization in key aspects of a website (Gong 2005) making notions of culture central to the balance.Baack (2006) looked into the preference of informants of a website and found them to prefer a locallyadapted website. For Hermeking (2005), ‘In spite of their ostensible universality and important role asengines of globalisation, the Internet and its Web neither eliminate cultural differences nor are theyculture-free products.’ Aspects of culture have been examined on websites albeit in few research studies. There appears tobe a dearth on studies focusing on the amalgamation of concepts of cultural values on websites through asemiotic analysis of which this study attempts to address. Central to this study is the consideration ofHofstede’s (2001) cultural dimensions which were also mentioned in some studies of the Internet andculture (Hermeking 2005; Constantinides, Lorenzo-Romero et al. 2010). Hofstede’s model of culturaldimensions has been applied most to global marketing and advertising (Mooij and Hofstede 2010). Thepopular use of Hofstede’s (2001) cultural dimensions for the study of cultural values is apparent (Okazakiand Mueller 2008), as it is one of the 100 most-cited publications in the Social Science Citation Index(Cooper-Chen and Tanaka 2008). The evident clarity and pragmatism resonating through Hofstede’scultural dimensions makes them favoured in the choice of a cultural dimension for this study. There havebeen suggestions that Schwartz’s cultural dimensions (Schwartz 1994) are better than Hofstede’s culturaldimensions but their seemingly incompatibility in terms of their pragmatism for this research study hasgiven Hofstede’s cultural dimensions preference. Global Bersih 3.0 appeared to be personified by Ambiga Sreenevasan whom can be described as aperson with predominantly individualistic qualities as outlined by Hofstede (2001). This is clear whenshe seems to demonstrate the ‘I’ consciousness and her works display individual initiative andachievement. The association of Ambiga with individualism seems to be reinforced with the 2009International Women of Courage award given to her by the United States State Department for herapparent organization of the ‘March for Justice’ and for her controversial work in the areas of religiousfreedom among them (Bennett 2009). The United States is the most individualistic country as it is rankedfirst whilst Malaysia is less individualistic and more collectivistic as it is ranked number 36 in a study of50 countries and three regions (Hofstede 2001). It appears that, Ambiga as reflected by the award seemedto be favoured by the United States and it could be said that she reflects American individualisticqualities. These qualities are seemingly distinct to the predominately collective culture of Malaysiamaking the question further the works for which Ambiga has been recognised and awarded for. The intrigue surrounding Ambiga’s apparent individualism made the cultural dimension‘individualism and collectivism’ the obvious choice for this study. ‘Individualism and collectivism’ isone of the dimensions in addition to: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity and femininity,and long-versus short-term orientation conjured by Hofstede (2001). The concepts ‘individualism’ and‘collectivism’ have been defined by Hofstede (2001, p. 225) as: “Individualism stands for a society in which the ties between individuals are loose. Everyone is expected to look after him/herself and her/his immediate family only. Collectivism stands for a society in which people from birth onwards are integrated into strong, cohesive in-groups, which throughout people’s lifetime continue to protect them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty.” Young and Chan (2005) mentioned of recent studies replicated in European countries that havedemonstrated the validity of Hoftsede’s typology and the need for further applications of this typology in

Asia.CURRENT STUDYSemiotics is the study of signs6 (Leeds-Hurwitz 1993; Bignell 1997). The definition of semiotics bySaussure looks at a sign as having two components – the visible part7 (or signified) and the part that isabsent (signifier) (Leeds-Hurwitz 1993) or mental concept (Bignell 1997). This definition is preferredwhen examining the Global Bersih 3.0 website over the one by Peirce (Eco 1976; Leeds-Hurwitz 1993)and Eco (1976) due to its evident clarity. This definition is then extended with the notion of ‘denotation’and ‘connotation’ by Roland Barthes that are central to his work, ‘Le mythe, aujord’ hui’ where there isthe literal denotative meaning and the many meanings or connotations (Moriarty 1991). For Bignell(1997), Barthes calls the social phenomenon of the gathering together of signs and their connotations toshape a particular message as the formation of ‘myth’ which suggests ways of thinking of people, places,products, places or ideas which are structured to send specific messages to the viewer of the text. This isillustrated in the image whereby when a pair of shoes is found on a lady walking out of a Rolls Roycewhich connotes luxury and these meaning transfers onto the shoes, a mythic meaning is created when theshoes are associated with a privileged way of life. For this study, it is not only the denotations and connotations of signs but also their relationship andthe mythic meaning that is created which are also deemed important. Leeds-Hurwitz (1993) suggests thatthe denotation of signs is somewhat universal but its connotations are culturally bound. It is furthermentioned that, ‘Denotation often crosses cultural boundaries; connotation almost never does.’ (Leeds-Hurwitz 1993, p. 27) It is apparent that, the connotations of signs are different in different cultures withdenotations of signs having more standardized meanings. Signs can be both linguistic (language) and non-linguistic (Leeds-Hurwitz 1993; Bignell 1997) making websites and their content apt for a semioticsstudy. There appears to be smaller signs found in a bigger sign from my understanding of signs. A website is defined as a communication tool that blurs the differences between marketingcommunication forms: advertising, direct marketing, and public relations (Wells, Moriarty et al. 2006).Semiotics is useful in our understanding of reality from text by providing us with a system of interpretingsigns which altogether creates mythic meanings. The use of cultural values taken from Hofstede’sdimension of individualism and collectivism (that are used as separate concepts) is important in this studyas it frames the interpretations of signs on the website better focus. This is a research study that focuseson interpreting the Global Bersih 3.0 website through a semiotic analysis guided by cultural values. Theresearch questions for this study are: a) What key signs on the Global Bersih 3.0 website depict individualism? How are the signs interpreted? b) What key signs on the Global Bersih 3.0 website depict collectivism? How are the signs interpreted? c) What is the mythic meaning of the Global Bersih 3.0 website?

They befit the study of signs in terms of the signified and signifier, the questions of denotation andconnotation and the overall mythic meaning conveyed. An interpretative framework was designed guidedby the research questions. The questions ask the analyst to identify the key signs most related to‘individualism’ and ‘collectivism’ as defined by Hofstede (2001). Hofstede’s definition of‘individualism’ and ‘collectivism’ was mentioned on the same page as the questions which were used asa guide. The questions were designed in such a way as to guide the analyst and give her room forinterpreting the signs. The mythic meaning in terms of the overall message derived from the websiteanalysed was also included in the framework. The interpretative framework was accompanied byHofstede’s (2001) book as reference for the better understanding of the characteristics of individualismand collectivism. The Global Bersih 3.0 website was analysed in the key areas. It was written based on analysis of thehomepage of the website. It was then typed and compared with the original written piece fordiscrepancies. The website was referred to for better understanding of the written notes. Theinterpretation was then categorized into themes of ‘individualism’ and ‘collectivism’. Time and budgetconstraints were the limitations to this study. It was also apparent that, this study was an attempt to look atone website and specific sections.KEY SIGNS AND INTERPRETATIONSThe key signs and their interpretations according to individualism and collectivism categories are asfollows: a) Key Signs and Interpretations – IndividualismAmbiga seemed to have a leadership role in Global Bersih 3.0 although this was not obvious from thewebsite. There is an apparent sole depiction of her in one image on the Global Bersih 3.0 website makingme associate her further with individualism. She appeared to be the face of Global Bersih 3.0. Sheseemed to personify Global Bersih 3.0. The image projected her as somewhat happy and saintly like. Hersolitary depiction on the website is as though she is projected as a hero worthy of respect by the peoplewho support Global Bersih 3.0. She seemed to be the figure of clean and fair elections propelled byGlobal Bersih 3.0 and her individualism had been left intact with her solitary depiction. Her popularity could be gauged by the indication that over 9,000 people seemed to be in support ofAmbiga as indicated on the website at the time. There were also tweets in support of her. A key tweetmentioned her as a role model to Malaysian youths as she showed patriotism and calm conviction of truthin the face of injustice and idiocy. Another individual face depicted on the website is the sign in the formof the visual of Malaysia’s current Prime Minister, Dato’ Sri Najib Tun Razak; the image projected is thatof a formal one perhaps taken in his capacity as Prime Minister. The dignified pose he gave wassomewhat marred by the words next to the image that mentioned he was heckled (or jeered) in London.The heckling towards the Prime Minister can be interpreted in a way that Global Bersih 3.0 washighlighting his unpopularity to their supporters. He was seemingly depicted as the enemy to Ambiga onthe website. Support for Ambiga was encouraged but not for the Prime Minister it seemed; there seemedto be a juxtapositioning attempt here.

b) Key Signs and Interpretations – CollectivismThe key sign ‘Global’ in Global Bersih 3.0 connotes something of a worldwide acceptance of Bersih.Bersih denotes clean in the Malay language and represented the clean and fair elections as underlined onthe website. The clean and fair elections message communicated seemed collectively accepted on theglobal stage and this was depicted on the website through the signs of Global Bersih 3.0 supportersabroad. The sign 3.0 in Global Bersih 3.0 reminds of the numbers associated with Web 1.0 Web 2.0. Inview of this association, the 3.0 communicated the somewhat contemporary and trendy identity of GlobalBersih in the digital era. This seemingly trendy association was perhaps to attract youths in the missionfor their collective acceptance of Global Bersih 3.0. Generation Y (born from 1980 to 1996) and theMillennial generation (born from the 1990s to the beginning of the decade of the new century) aretechnologically savvy (Moriarty, Mitchell et al. 2012). Perhaps, these are the people targeted to by theGlobal Bersih 3.0 website. Emphasis of collectivism is found in the moving pictures of what appeared to be many peoplegathering, holding signs showing their support of Global Bersih 3.0. The idea that there were many peoplein support of Global Bersih 3.0 in many countries was depicted on the homepage. Upon close inspection,the visuals suggested what seemed like Malaysians (or Asians) in different countries that came together insupport of Bersih 3.0. Global acceptance appeared to indicate the coming together of Malaysians (orAsians) and not a more diverse international community from several continents. Perhaps, by using theMalay word ‘Bersih’ in Global Bersih 3.0, it somewhat isolates itself from the international communitywho would not be able to understand this (foreign) word. The notion of collectivism is apparent in thepublic invitation found on the website. The collective effort is based on a common need; the need forclean and fair elections. Global Bersih 3.0 believes in the strength in numbers and this underlines itsbelief in the importance of collectivism in ensuring that its voices are heard. The messages which arecommunicated to the public are most probably those which are sanctioned by Ambiga. On the website, there is a message which indicates Ambiga as being harassed by what seemed like toGlobal Bersih 3.0 as Pro-BN groups. The group (or collective assembling) of people was depicted as agroup of villains (or antiheroes) as they were perceived to be harassing (or annoying) the key figure ofGlobal Bersih 3.0. Barisan Nasional was seen to be Ambiga’s enemy (and perhaps the enemy to GlobalBersih 3.0). A call for (collective) support for her against this enemy was posted on the website. She waspredominantly individualized in character but the ‘I’ consciousness turned into a ‘We’ consciousness inthe face of her enemy. It could be interpreted that Global Bersih 3.0 gave her a platform to express herindividualistic ideas and gain a collective form of support. Yellow was the colour of Bersih, it was thecolour that seemed to unite the supporters of Global Bersih 3.0 and strengthen the collective support forclean and fair elections. c) Mythic MeaningThe key mythic meaning of the Global Bersih 3.0 website was Ambiga Sreenevasan, is a person who washighly individualized as evident in the recognition of her works as acts of courage by the United StatesState Department (Bennett 2009). Her sense of individualism seemed to be unacceptable to some peoplein Malaysia as evident in the harassment case mentioned on the Global Bersih 3.0 website but acceptableto the supporters of Global Bersih 3.0. The Global Bersih 3.0 movement supporting a clean and fairelection attracted supporters to it and of course, to her. She was respected for her individualistic views

and collective support was given to her when needed at the time of the research study.CULTURAL VALUES OF SIGNS AND SIGNIFICANCEThere were more collective signs found on the Global Bersih 3.0 website underlining the support that wasgiven to Global Bersih 3.0 at the time. There were two individuals whose images made up the individualsigns on the website. They were depicted as though on opposite poles of the continuum of good and bad.The website called for more support on a global level. This study encourages young voters who aredeemed ‘emotionally influenced’ by the Election Commission in Malaysia and who are likely to maketheir voices publicly heard (Jalil 2012) to read the Global Bersih 3.0 website very carefully beforesupporting Global Bersih 3.0. This research study advises young ‘emotionally influenced’ voters to findout who Ambiga Sreenevasan is as she is depicted as the key figure in Global Bersih 3.0. As youngvoters, there is the need to be discerning when reading anything especially before supporting the cause.There is the need to look at the bigger picture of Ambiga and Global Bersih 3.0 and the connotations theybring. Ambiga is an individualistic character but there is the question as to whether her type of individualismis acceptable to Malaysians and this should be raised by young voters. There is much sensitivity in thiscountry especially in relation to religious beliefs. Hence, any form of individualism inculcated in oneselfshould be that which is acceptable to Malaysians in a Muslim majority country. It is importance ofteaching students to critically appreciate what they encounter in the media whether it is in traditional ordigital media forms. This makes them have a balanced view of matters in the world which is a fair way oflooking at things. The existence of Global Bersih 3.0 and the many supporters it seems is a sign of many more things tocome. Many other causes and issues will be raised in future as Malaysia transforms itself from being adeveloping country to a developed country akin to countries that are recognized as having big economieson the world stage. It is our response to these situations which will reflect the level of thinking agreeablein some ways to the populace found in developed nations. Malaysia should not adopt the ideas of peoplefrom developed countries in totality because Malaysia is a multireligious Muslim majority country. Thereis much religious sensitivity to consider. This is in keeping with Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad’s (1991)idea of a developed nation in our own mold in his Vision 2020 Policy.CONCLUSIONA semiotic study allows for a systematic way of interpreting signs. There were more signs which depictedthe cultural value ‘collectivism’ than ‘individualism’ found in the study. This reflected the predominantlycollectivistic orientation of the Global Bersih 3.0 website. The semiotic study has allowed for an in-depth analysis of the website by looking at the meanings of words and images that go beyond the literalmeanings. This study encourages audience members to exercise great discern when reading content foundin the mass media and digital media in general and the Global Bersih 3.0 website in particular beforeshowing their support for this cause and other causes in future.

REFERENCESBaack, N. W. (2006). Culture and Web Communications. Journal of Business Research 60(3): pp. 181- 188.BBC NEWS Asia (2012). In Pictures: Malaysia Protest. Retrieved 14 July, 2012, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-17878604.BBC NEWS Asia (2012). Malaysia’s Anwar Ibrahim Denies Protest Offences. Retrieved 14 July, 2012, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/worldasia-18146064.Bennett, R. (2009). Ambiga Sreenevasan: Gender Equality is a Responsibility of All Malaysians. DIPNOTE: U.S. Department of State Official Blog. Washington D.C., U.S. Department of State.Bersih (2012). Global Bersih 3.0: About Us. Retrieved 29 June 2012, 2012, from http://www.globalbersih.org/about-us/.Bignell, J. (1997). Media Semiotics: An Introduction. Manchester University Press.Cho, C.-H. and H. J. Cheon (2005). Interactivity on Japanese versus American Corporate Websites. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 17(4).Constantinides, E., C. Lorenzo-Romero. (2010). Effects of Web Experience On Consumer Choice: A Multicultural Approach. Internet Research 20(2): pp. 188-209.Cooper-Chen, A. and M. Tanaka (2008). Public Relations in Japan: The Cultural Roots of Kouhou. Journal of Public Relations Research 20 (January): pp. 94-114. Eco, U. (1976). A Theory of Semiotics. Bloomington, Indiana University Press.Gong, P. (2005). Cultural Impact on the design of E-Commerce Websites. Issues in Information Systems VI (2): pp. 182-189.Hermeking, M. (2005). Culture and Internet Consumption: Contributions From Cross- Cultural Marketing And Advertising Research. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11(1).Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations. Thousand Oaks, California, Sage Publications.Jalil, Z. (2012). Young voters, the Determining Force in the 13th GE? Utusan Online. Kuala Lumpur, Utusan Melayu (M) Berhad.Jegathesan, M. (2012). Malaysia Rally Fallout Could Delay Polls: Analysts. AFP News.Koswanage, N. and S. Grudgings. (2012). Malaysian Police, Protesters Clash, Raising Poll Doubts. Reuters Edition. Kuala Lumpur, Reuters.Leeds-Hurwitz, W. (1993). Semiotics and Communication: Signs, Codes, Cultures. Hillsdale, New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.Mahathir Bin Mohamad (1991). Malaysia: The Way Forward. Office of the Prime Minister. Kuala Lumpur.Mooij, M. d., Ed. (2010). Global Marketing and Advertising: Understanding Cultural Paradoxes. Thousand Oaks, California, Sage Publications.Mooij, M. d. and G. Hofstede (2010). The Hofstede model: Applications To Global Branding And Advertising Strategy And Research. International Journal of Advertising 29 (1)(1): pp. 85-110.Moriarty, M. (1991). Roland Barthes. Cambridge, Polity Press.Moriarty, S., N. Mitchell. (2012). Advertising & IMC: Principles and Practices. Boston, Pearson.Moten, B. R. (2009). 2004 and 2008 General Elections in Malaysia: Towards a Multicultural, Bi-party Political System? Asian Journal of Political Science 17(2): pp. 173-194.Okazaki, S. and B. Mueller (2008). Evolution in the Usage of Localised Appeals in Japanese and

American Print Advertising. International Journal of Advertising 27 (5)(5): pp. 771-798.Samovar, L. A. and R. E. Porter (2001). Communication between Cultures. Australia, Wadsworth: Thomson Learning.Samy, F. A. (2013). Suhakam Panel: Incidents Of Misconduct, Disproportionate Force Used By Police During Bersih 3.0 Rally. The Star Online. Kuala Lumpur, Star Publications (M) Bhd.Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are There Universal Aspects in the Structure and Contents of Human Values? Journal of Social Issues 50(4): 19-45.Wells, W., S. Moriarty. (2006). Advertising: Principles & Practice Upper Saddle River, NJ. Prentice Hall.Wurtz, E. (2005). A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Websites from High-Context Cultures and Low-Context Cultures. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11(1).Young, S. M. and K. Chan. (2005). Advertising Appeals and Cultural Values in Television Commercials: A Comparison of Hong Kong and Korea. International Marketing Review 22(1): 48-66.2I would like thank Ms. Syarifah Hasanah for her contribution of some materials to my research study.3The Joint Action Committee for Electoral Reform was established in Malaysia by concerned citizensin 20054This statistic encompasses from the first to the fourth quarter in 2011.5Demonstration on PTPTN or Perbadanan Tabung Pendidikan Tinggi Nasional in English is NationalHigher Education Fund. This demonstration was held on 14 April 2012.6Semiotics originates in the work of two men, Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles Peirce (Bignell,1997).7The signified could be the writing of the word cat or picture of a car and the signifier is the mentalconcept of ‘cat’.

NARCISSISM AND THE NEWCULTURE OF CITIZENSHIP: THE 3 EXPERIENCES OF THREEMALAYSIAN BLOGGERSNARCISSISM AND THE NEW CULTURE OF CITIZENSHIP: THE EXPERIENCES OF THREE MALAYSIAN BLOGGERS Shafizan MohamedAs citizens, the bloggers have refocused their political attention outside the parliamentarian system; theyare in the process of redefining just what constitutes the political, often within the contexts of civil societywhere according to Beck (1999) the boundaries between politics, cultural values, identity processes andlocal self reliance measures become fluid. Politics is not only an instrumental activity for achievingspecific goals, but is also an expressive activity, a way of asserting values, ideals and belonging. InMalaysia specifically, a country where politics is racially and culturally divided, partisan politics areoften seen as a way of supporting and resisting the status quo. In an environment where freedom of speechand expression is often contested, citizens are restricted to having their voices heard only at the electionpolls. For many ordinary citizens, political participation is mostly restricted to being law abiding citizenswho discuss issues only with close acquaintances. Blogging brings in new cultures of citizenship that will have a significant effect on how citizenshipand politics are experienced by these bloggers specifically; and by Malaysians in general. FollowingDahlgren (2003, 2005 and 2006) and Couldry (2006) who argued that democratic engagement should beframed less by the political lens and be understood more through a cultural approach by identifying newcultures of citizenship that can link politics to the everyday citizen, blogging to be a practice that linksprivate action to national politics. Couldry (2006: 323) asked, ‘What would a culture of citizenship looklike? Is it perhaps the absence of such a ‘culture’ that underlies the often-feared decline of politics? Or,more positively, what new cultures of citizenship might be emerging, and where or how can we best lookfor them empirically?’ Responding to his queries, that emerging new cultures of citizenship can be foundin how blogging is experienced by Malaysian bloggers.NARCISSISTIC POLITICSAccording to Papacharissi (2010) personalization is an operative feature of online media like blogs. Shedefines personalization as the ability to organize information based on a subjective order of importanceranked by the self. Inspired by the work of Lasch (1979), Papacharissi (2010) related the personalization

of blogging to Lasch’s (1979) concept of narcissism. Lasch’s (1979) definition of narcissism relates tobehaviors structured around the self in post-war, late-capitalist America, where he locates the productionof a personality consistent with clinical definitions of ‘pathological narcissism’. Lasch’s (1979) take onnarcissism is not akin to the everyday understanding of narcissism as hedonistic, rather he viewsnarcissism as a very weak sense of self that is in constant need for external validation. On the other hand,Papacharissi (2010) situates her use of narcissism within a postmodern culture that emphasizes self-expression values that is civically motivated. In relation to blogging, Papacharissi (2010: 145) takes a step further by contextualizing narcissism asa pre-occupation with the self that is self directed, but not selfishly motivated. She employs narcissism ‘tounderstand the introspection and self-absorption that takes place in blogs and similar spaces, and to placethese tendencies in historical context’. Narcissistically motivated political views shared on blogs arepersonally inclined but at the same time meant to contribute to the greater public. While a quantitativeanalysis of blogs finds them to be largely self-referential (Papacharissi, 2010) and motivated by personalfulfilment (Kaye, 2005), contextual research studies and case studies have found blogs to be liberating(Elsadda, 2010; Somolu, 2007) and democratizing (Tan and Zawawi, 2008; Smeltzer, 2008). The analysis of the blogging experience agrees with Papacharissi’s (2007, 2010) narcissistic take onbloggers. The bloggers often write about issues that interest and benefit them personally. Blogging allowsthem to dictate and moderate issues that they care for. They do this with a conscious effort to gathersupport. For many, blogging about politics is hardly deliberate. They usually write about issues that affecttheir life and become political only after realizing they have audiences who are interested in what theyhave to share. In both instances where writing about politics is deliberate or by chance, politics is writtenand designed according to the bloggers’ personal compass. However, as proposed by Papacharissi (2010), such narcissistic behaviors must be in tune with aparticular historical context and as such, while the bloggers are focused on their personal interpretation ofpolitics, their behaviors are very much connected to their existing political and socio-culturalexperiences. Blogging allows them to further extend their activism. Blogging affords them the power todictate and design how issues are presented hence allowing these bloggers to fully exploit their alreadypolitical selves. The personalization of politics can be analyzed by the way these bloggers presentthemselves as: 1) the authoritative voice, 2) the centre of politics, and, 3) a public/political figure.The Authoritative VoiceOne of the ways in which the bloggers personalize politics through blogging is by employing theauthoritative voice. While being an authoritarian is often seen as an attribute of a narcissist (Vaknin,2001), by the authoritative voice the way they present themselves as the authority, indicating self-proclaimed expertise on issues and deliberate attempts to influence and infuse the public’s politicalviews. In his study of bloggers’ motivation, Kim (2006) found that political bloggers are more likely tosay that blogging makes them feel confident and authoritative. He also found that, bloggers who are morepolitical tend to find the need to influence readers. Kim’s findings resonate with this study. Politically-active bloggers are more likely to assert an authoritative voice when blogging. Laila, a 40 year old female blogger found through her personal experience the ability to become a

social activist. Though her husband was arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA) in 2002, Laila onlystarted blogging in 2008. Prior to having a blog, she mostly relied on alternative newspapers. Today,blogging is very much significant in Laila’s life. She proclaims that it is her media. Despite already beingpolitically active, blogging allowed Laila to be more effective in her fight. She may have close links withthe politicians and even had her own column in the newspaper, but with blogging, she was able to directlyreach a large audience and share her stories and activism within her own control. She shared; “Initially, Ididn’t really use the Internet in my fight. I didn’t really realize the potential, but when I startedblogging, it opened a whole new world for me. The blog gave me a huge momentum. It allowed me toreach people from all over the world.” Blogging gave her the ability to create her own media. A media for her to establish her fight andgather public support all by herself, in her own way. Through her blog, Laila not only expresses butattempts to influence her readers. She carefully designed her blog as a medium for her to put her causeforward. She dictates what she wants her readers to get from her blog by focusing on the ISA and sharingher experience as the spouse of a detainee. To her, blogging is; “First is self-expression. Second is to educate and create awareness and lastly, of course to influence. I need the public’s support. I want my readers to be my media.” Through blogging, Laila was able to personalize her own politics. In her terms, politics is aboutgetting justice for her husband and other ISA detainees. She does this by writing about her experiencesand targeting specific audiences. For instance, she shared that her blog is specifically catered to theMalays and the younger generation; two demographic groups she feels needed to be educated about theISA. Laila shared, “I used to write in English but my friends advised me to write in Malay because theyclaim that the non-Malays are very well aware of the ISA, it is the Malays who are still oblivious. Ineed to focus on the Malay readers…” She also claims that her blog was able to educate the youngergeneration, “… the young ones, they are genuine because they ask so many things. They want to knowso they get their answers from the Internet. I see the Internet as a market place that is satisfying thegrowing demands for information. My blog came at a right time…” Similarly, Dr. Rafick, a 53 year old ex-army officer, has always been one to share his political viewswith the public. He often writes to newspapers. But getting his letters published in newspapers is noteasy. Frustrated that his letters are often left unpublished, Dr. Rafick found his own political space inblogging; “I cannot recall exactly when I started blogging; I believe it was around 2005. I was not that active then; I used to jump from one blog provider to another. I became more active in the past three years. I was among the early bloggers. I’ve always written about social issues, politics is just part of it. It was out of frustration really, I was frustrated that whatever I wrote to the newspapers was not being published so I decided to write in my own space.”Dr. Rafick exerts strong ownership towards his blog, he is careful because he feels that his blog is hisprerogative; “I don’t allow other people to write in my blog, I write my own articles. I am responsible of whatever I write, people are allowed to comment. I never stop people from commenting. Actually

Malaysia Today8 publishes a lot of my articles. Another important point is that my blog name is ‘therightstowrite’; I coined that name to capture the freedom of speech. It is my right to write, so you can’t stop me from writing. It’s freedom. But at the same time, if you don’t like what I write, don’t read it. Why read something you don’t like? I’m not forcing you to read it. I’m just writing in a space that belongs to me.”Dr. Rafick is clear of his blogging intentions. He wants to be acknowledged for his views. He claims; “If I wanted to be anonymous, I wouldn’t have put my name out there. When I started my blog, I wanted people to know that it’s me writing, I didn’t want to hide behind some anonymous name. I’ve commented on Malaysia Today saying that ‘90% of those who commented here are cowards. You are cowards because you don’t even dare to put your name forward. Why are these people afraid? They are afraid because they are not able to put forth a wise opinion…if you are brave and truthful, you shouldn’t be afraid…” While Laila is authoritative in issues related to ISA, Dr. Rafick presents himself as an authoritativepolitical analyst. He wants people to read about his views and most importantly he wants people to knowit is his views. Aside from comparing and contrasting, showing how they both represent in their ownways, ‘narcissistic politics’ as a new way of doing citizenship. To further argue about how narcissisticpolitics is fast becoming a new culture of citizenship, the case of Mahendran. Unlike Laila and Dr. Rafickwho were already activists prior to having blogs, Mahendran was not attached to a formal political orpublic movement. Unlike Laila, he did not experience any significant life event that led him to politics.Though he has always been interested in issues, he was never politically active. He started blogging in2007 while in his final year of college. What started out as an outlet to express and practice writing soonturned into a very serious activity; “Initially I talked about myself, my pillow, my stuff (laughs). I was 21 and playing around. Once in awhile I write about things that I think is wrong, I’ll read the papers and think ‘hey! This is not right and I’ll write about it…’ People or friends who are reading it, they started to comment…this is right or this is wrong…and then slowly I see my readership increase. I didn’t want to write a political blog, being a student and realizing the risks, but it was unavoidable.” From someone who was only able to discuss on issues with friends, Mahendran is now able to notonly discuss but create his own political space; a public space where he brings up the issues andmoderates the discussions. Now he claims to blog with a clear intent, he claims; “I see blogging merely as a tool for me to reach some of my life objectives; my personal agendas. Every activist has their own agenda and mine is political awakening. I want more people to use the Internet; Internet penetration in Malaysia is still low. I also want to see a betterment of the socially and economically underclass. It’s not about race - Malay, Chinese, Indians, anyone…. I feel that the two agendas can be reached through blogging.”More specifically, he now sees himself as an authority in the issues concerning Malaysian Indians, “I also want to support political awakening in Malaysia especially among the Malaysian Indians. I want them to question first, look at all aspects before giving their support. If you vote

without thinking, it undermines your political power. We need this political awakening before we can reach other milestones in social, economy and many more and in a very short frame of time, I have helped achieve all these.” By exerting the authoritative voice, these bloggers personalize politics by making and presentingthemselves as experts on some issues. Through their ownership of blogs, they consider their personalmedia, these bloggers are motivated to pursue their own political ideals. Although they may benarcissistic in terms that they are driven mainly by personal goals, the effort they put into achieving thosegoals; such as conducting research, proposing myriad of political views and sharing information onissues, rightly benefit the public.The Centre of PoliticsFor these bloggers whose main intent is to influence and pursue their ideals, blogging enables them todirectly participate in the country’s politics. Through the connection they build with the authorities and thelarger public, the bloggers often find themselves advising, initiating and participating in political actions.The transition from blogging about politics to participating in political action is common among A-listbloggers (Drezner and Ferell, 2004) (Davis, 2009), it can well be seen in the way several Malaysianbloggers like Jeff Ooi, Tony Pua and Elizabeth Wong turned into instant politicians (Tang, 2006; Tan andZawawi, 2008). Similarly, for these bloggers who have significant followers but are not really part of the A-list,participating in political actions that go beyond blogging brings them to see themselves as significantpolitical players, placing themselves at the centre of the particular politics that they adhere to. Laila forinstance, personalizes politics by putting herself at the centre of political action. She claims to havechanged her readers’ opinions about the ISA, “…when they started reading my blog, their opinionschanged 10%. My blog is also a meeting place between the young bloggers who blog for fun andserious bloggers who may be from the media itself like rockybru and shanghai fish…” Laila sees herblog as an important source of information and feels that she is an integral contributor to the country’spolitics. She even claims that her activism breaks through racial barriers and her brand of politicsprecedes that of the government: “Truthfully, I think I am more than 1Malaysia. RPK (Raja Petra Kamaruddin)9 once invited me to a gathering of bloggers; there were many types of non-malay there. When they heard about my experience, they were really supportive. I’ve been invited to talk in many gatherings organized by non-Malay communities; I’ve even talked in churches. I prayed in their churches. Even before Hindraf10 went public with their cause, we, GMI11 had an understanding with them with regards to human rights.” For Laila, her blog was meant to be a tool in her fight to free her husband. Her blog was created to bepolitical. She blogged about issues, social critiques, laws and politics; and when she shares her personalstories, it is also meant to be political. Laila presented politics through activism and her everyday lifestruggles. The blog became an extension of Laila. She wanted to get as many people as possible to shareher cause. It is narcissistic, but as proposed by Papacharissi (2010), it is not selfish. Laila’s focus on hertroubles and activism is her way of politicizing a serious issue. In a way, by presenting ISA through her

sufferings, making her plight the center of the ISA struggle, Laila was able to put a serious political issuein a term that is easier and accessible for the everyday public who may not able to fathom the institutionalworkings of ISA. Like Laila, Dr. Rafick too often finds himself to be at the centre of political action. Heeven claims to help coin the 1Malaysia12 concept; “As a citizen, I feel I am able to express more, whether it is being read or not, I don’t know. But I can see some impact of my writing. For example, immediately after the election, I met up with one Ketua Puteri UMNO13, I suggested to her to set up an NGO and call it 1BukitAntarabangsa. If you go to my blog, there is actually a tab called 1BukitAntarabangsa, I said it is mine (idea) but you can take it. It is suppose to be about the people in Bukit Antarabangsa14. 1BukitAntarabangsa is 1Malaysia.”He also claims that because of his blog, authorities and politicians are asking for his advice; “When I wrote to the Chief Minister of Selangor; I said manage your front line referring to Selangor government workers. I wrote a few points and I’ve noticed that they have been done. Recently, I was invited to a forum on hill slope safety, so I was given a few minutes to speak. The government wanted to allow developers to build on class three slopes so I gave them my views. I wrote about it on my blog, soon after, I got calls from the geological department, the works ministry. They wanted to clarify on the points I put up on my blog, so I explained. In that sense, I see that whatever I do, there is some impact.” Through blogging, Dr. Rafick is able to connect directly to politicians and authorities, something hewas not able to do by writing to editors. Furthermore, he now sees himself as an important contributor. Heputs himself at the center of political action. The experience of Laila and Dr. Rafick confirms the findingsby McKenna and Pole (2004) and Drezner and Ferell (2008) who in their studies on blogging andpolitical participation concluded that, the majority of bloggers feel that they become more knowledgeableand have much more of an influence on politics and political discourse. Similarly, from someone who was only able to discuss on issues with friends, Mahendran is now ableto not only discuss but create his own political space; a public space where he brings up the issues andmoderates the discussions. Through the interest that he gathered from his blog, Mahendran is now linkedto formal political institutions like the social movements, politicians and the authorities. He is also able toreach the non-Indian readers, widening his scope of audience thus allowing his views to be largelycirculated; “Especially after the Hindraf incident…most of them (non-Indian readers) commented on how they liked to hear the voice of a Malaysian Indian. At the time, there were not many Indian bloggers but they are mushrooming now. The non-Indian readers, they read my archived posts and they understand my experiences and these allow for the creation of dialogues. As such they tend to relate more, like the issue with the slaughter of the cow at parliament, I was disgusted by it and I wrote about it. I got many responses that said things like, ‘I would feel the same if I was in your shoes’. They (non-Indians) wouldn’t know if we don’t talk about it and they can be informed if they get the perception of the minorities.” Mahendran is now politically active, he not only initiates and participates in political discourses he is

also very much involved in political and community actions. He even co-founded an Indian bloggingassociation; “When I first started blogging in 2007, I identified that there were around 10 of us Indian bloggers so we got together and set up the Malaysian Indians Bloggers Club (MINDS). Just the 10 of us, it was initially for fun but after 2007, we saw the increase in Indian bloggers and we created minsblog.com. Our main goal was to popularize blogging among Malaysian Indian youths. We did not press on politics. It’s more about creating awareness.” Through blogging, Mahendran transitioned into a politically-active citizen. The popularity of his bloghas opened doors for him to be formally involved in the country’s politics. For a young Malaysian at theage of 24, he now has credible political experience. Blogging allowed him to be at the centre of politicalaction. He has been on the media, approached by politicians, watched by the authorities, formed ablogging movement and has a popular political blog that caters especially on the plight of the MalaysianIndians. The way these bloggers bring themselves to the centre of political action indicates that thisparticular breed of narcissism has a democratizing effect. While narcissistically motivated, their blogsare democratizing in a unique manner, it entrusted everyday Malaysians into the centre of political actionshence contributing to the plurality of voices in the country’s politics.The Political FigureThe essence of narcissism can also be seen in the way these bloggers start to gather their own followingand build a public image for them. The persona they present in their blogs are brought into everyday lifewhen they are acknowledged by members of the public. Just like a politician, the bloggers are recognizedfor their activism. Laila feels like a political figure among her blog readers, she shared; “When her husband was finally freed, she felt a strong connection with her readers. ‘When my husband was released I felt that all of Malaysia was jubilant, celebrating together with me. These are the people who were supporting me through my blog; they too feel as if they are part of my fight and that the fight was successful. Ultimately, I was able to share my happiness with my blog readers.” Her blog also became something that she shares with her husband. In a way, the blog not onlyconnected her with the public but also connected the public with her husband. “He will share insightsfrom Kamunting and I will spread the information. He couldn’t record his experience so he will share itwith me and I will go home and write it down”. Laila’s blog also helped turn her husband into a publicfigure while behind bars. Dr. Rafick also experienced acknowledgement from both the public and theauthorities; “When I first started, I had five readers a day. Today I get about 8,000 a day. Some of my readers know me personally. I know that the authorities are also reading. I know certain politicians who read my blog because they have communicated with me. Sometimes they tell me that what I wrote is not accurate but I tell them that I write based on my perception, it may not be right but it’s mine.”

Like Laila and Dr. Rafick, Mahendran also found fame through his blog. Named after him, his blogbecame an important source of information for the Malaysian Indians especially; “It (his blog) became a brand name. Initially I wanted the URL mahendran.com. I was young, 21 at the time, I wanted to play around but unfortunately it was taken. I tried to put my full name but it was too long, so I settled with bmahendran.com. My blog became well-known during and after 2007.” He admits to having politicians reading his blog to get information about the Malaysian Indian; “It was especially during the Hindraf controversy when bmahendran. com was really popular. The politicians will come over to see at whatever I write…even the smallest of issues…they will then highlight the issue as if they are the champions of the minorities, but its good I guess…at least the message gets across.” One of the main characteristics of narcissism is the need for external validation (Lasch, 1979;Papacharissi 2010). According to Vaknin (2001), a narcissist finds satisfaction with his or her own selfworth by acquiring validation from others. Although I am not suggesting that these bloggers are pathologicnarcissists who live only for external recognition, I find that external acknowledgement does indicate tothe bloggers that they are indeed significant politically. For these bloggers who are politically active,being acknowledged by the public and the authorities fits their experience of a civic-based narcissism.Narcissistically, they are recognized for their personal interpretation and presentation of politics but suchrecognition also serves as evidence of their position within the wider political environment.The Narcissist Citizen-BloggerBy personalizing politics according to their ideals and in the process of finding themselves in mainstreampolitics, these bloggers experience what Papacharissi (2010) terms as civically motivated narcissism. Byportraying themselves as the authoritative voice, the centre of politics and the public figure, thesebloggers are satisfied by their ability to personalize their mode of activism, dictating politics according totheir understanding and life experience. Although their participation is very much self-motivated, it is notentirely selfish. Through their blogs they contribute by sharing political views and participating inpolitical action that will ultimately affect the larger public. Blogging allows Malaysians in general to resist these restrictions. They are able to express and sharewith very minimal restrictions. They are able to comment and criticize. They can now share their opinionsand give suggestions. They can recommend and even moderate discussions. In another sense, even if thesebloggers are resisting institutionalized political culture by narcissistically promoting their own brand ofpolitics, they are inadvertently finding a way to be part of the particular system that previously sets themapart from the political elites. If they previously feel disconnected from the country’s formal politics, theyare now linked to it. Narcissistic politics through blogging thus functions more than just as a space forresistance but also an avenue for belonging.REFERENCES

Beck, U. (1999). World Risk Society. London: Blackwell.Cook, D. T. (2006). Problemitizing Consumption, Community, and Leisure: Some Thoughts On Moving Beyond Essentialist Thinking. Leisure/Loisir, 30(2), 455-466.Couldry N. (2006). Culture and Citizenship: the Missing Link? in European Journal of Cultural Studies, Vol. 9(3), 321-339.Dahlgren, P. (2003). Reconfiguring Civic Culture in the New Media Milieu in J. Corner & D. Pels (eds). Media and Restyling of Politics. London: Sage.Dahlgren, P. (2005). The Internet, Public Spheres, and Political Communication: Dispersion and Deliberation. Political Communication, 22:147-162.Dahlgren, P. (2006). Doing Citizenship: The Cultural Origins of Civic Agency in the Public Sphere. In European Journal of Cultural Studies, 9(3), 267-286.Davis, A. (2009). New Media and Fat Democracy: The Paradox of Online Participation. Newmedia & society, 12(5), 745–761.Drezner, D. & Ferell, H. (2008). Introduction: Blogs, Politics and Power. A Special Issue of Public Choice Volume, 134 (1-2), 1-13.Drezner, D. & Ferell, H. (2004). The Power and Politics of Blogs. Paper presented at the 2004 American Political Science Association.Elsadda, H. (2010). Arab Women Bloggers: The Emergence of Literary Counterpublics. Middle East Journal of Culture and Communication, Volume 3(3), 312-332 (21).Jun-E Tan and Zawawi Ibrahim. (2008). Blogging and Democratization in Malaysia: A New Civil Society in the Making: SIRD.Kaye, B. (2005). It’s a Blog, Blog, Blog World: Users and Uses of Weblogs. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 13(2), 73-95.Kim, E. (2006). Political and non-political bloggers in the 2004 United States Presidential Election: Motivations and Activities. Indiana University.Lasch, C. (1979). The Culture of Narcissism. New York: Norton & Co.Lenzi, M. (2006). Personalizing Politics’ in Kultgen, J. and Lenzi M. (2006) Problems for Democracy. Rodopi: Netherlands.Loh, Francis (2003). A New Politics in Malaysia: Ferment And Fragmentation in Barlow, C. and Loh, F. (eds). Malaysian Economics and Politics in the New Century. Cheltenham, Gloucester, United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing.McKenna, L. and Pole, A. (2004). Do Blogs Matter? Weblogs in American Politics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science AssociationPapacharissi, Z. (2010). A Private Sphere: Democracy in a Digital Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.Smeltzer, S.C. 2008, Blogging in Malaysia: Hope for a New Democratic Technology? Journal of International Communication, Vol. 14, No. 1, 28-45.Somolu, Oreoluwa. (2007). Telling Our Own Stories: African Women Blogging for Social Change. Gender & Development, 15:3, 477-489.Tang, Hang Wu. (2006). Let a Hundred Flowers Bloom: Digital Speech in Malaysia. Asian Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 1 (1), 1-22.Vaknin, S. (2001). Malignant Self Love: Narcissism Revisited. Macedonia: Narcissus Publishing.Wallsten, K. (2005). Political Blogs and the Bloggers Who Blog Them: Is the Political Blogosphere and Echo Chamber? Paper presented at the American Political Science Association’s annual meeting, Washington, DC.

8Malaysia Today is a Malaysian news blog founded by controversial political blogger and politicaldetainee Raja Petra Kamaruddin (RPK) in 2004.9Petra Kamaruddin (RPK) is a controversial Malaysian political activist and political blogger whohas been detained twice under the Internal Security Act for defaming the Prime Minister and his wife.10HINDRAF or Hindu Rights Action began as a coalition of 30 Hindu organizations committed to thepreservation of Hindu community rights and heritage in a multiracial Malaysia. HINDRAF has made amajor impact to the political landscape of Malaysia in staging the 2007 HINDRAF rally.11Gerakan Mansuh ISA (GMI) is a coalition of several non-governmental movements that are workingagainst the use of the Internal Security Act (ISA) which allows the authority to detain anyone withoutcharge.121Malaysia is a national campaign designed by Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Tun Razakemphasizing on ethnic harmony, national unity, and efficient governance.13Puteri UMNO is a young women’s wing of UMNO, akin to the youth division which consist only ofmale UMNO members.14Bukit Antarabangsa (translated from Malay to English as International Hill) is a hillside townshipsituated in the urban area of Ulu Kelang, Selangor. It is considered as one of the earliest eliteresidential areas in Malaysia.

FRAMING ‘BERSIH 3.0’ BY MALAY PRINT AND ONLINE 4 MEDIA FRAMING ‘BERSIH 3.0’ BY MALAY PRINT AND ONLINE MEDIA Chang Peng Kee Nor Syazwani IsmailThe mainstream media are alleged for constantly reporting positively about the ruling political party, andadversely about the opposition. Journalists always play a vital role in delivering information toaudiences. This is because they are responsible for delivering the latest information known to the public.News in the mass media makes important information to readers and this in turn becomes a source forthem to think about when making decisions during elections (Syed Arabi, 2011). With the recent emergence of the new media or the Internet, this channel of communication is said tohave become a major player in politics. The development of the Internet is transforming the politicalsituation worldwide, including Malaysia. The General Election in March 2008 saw the failure of certainparties in utilizing this technology which is subsequently regarded as important and influential. A numberof experienced veteran leaders fell to the opposition candidates who have been capitalizing on thesophistication of the Internet during and also off election campaign periods. According to Tremayne(2007), bloggers are not just regarded as journalists, but also opinion leaders cum shapers nowadays.Political participation through new media appears to have posed challenges to the Malaysian rulingpolitical party. However, audiences now are expected to give feedback, responses and also their viewswithout any restrictions. The development of Internet media such as online news portals is seen tocomplement this interactive effort. In this respect, ‘Malaysiakini’ that was founded on 20 November 1999has been widely accepted by the netizens as the source of most popular news and information onMalaysia, especially in relation to politics. The ‘Bersih 3.0’ rally that was held on 28 April 2012 at Dataran Merdeka Kuala Lumpur hadreceived wide coverage from both mainstream and online media. It was a continuation of ‘Bersih’ thatwas held on 10 November 2007, a few months prior to the 12th General Election; and subsequently,‘Bersih 2.0’ that was held on 9 July 2011. Both ‘Bersih 2.0’ and ‘Bersih 3.0’ are lauded by certainquarters for the attempt put forward by non-governmental organizations for a clean, transparent and fair13th General Election. As a country that practices democracy, the ruling political party in Malaysia isalways finding itself surrounded by watchdogs in the society, such as the opposition, the public and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) whenever policies are implemented or changed.

The participation of citizens is important as ‘citizens will help define community goals, developagendas, develop strategic initiatives, participate in and review the implementation of procedures,actively participate in the measurement of progress, and in assessing impacts of programs’ (Gibson, Lacy& Dougherty, 2005: 2). The power of these watchdogs is not to be neglected as it can make or break theprocess of policy-making. This paper aims at scrutinizing the Malay print and online media on reportingthis significant issue prior to the 13th General Election. With the focus being the news coverage before,during, and after the ‘Bersih 3.0’ rally, the study examines how the mainstream daily Utusan Malaysia andthe Malaysiakini news portal frame the story. The media framing process with five generic framedimensions developed by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) covers responsibility, human interest, morality,conflict, and economic consequences, is applied to this research study. Consequently, this study identifiedthe frame dimensions most highlighted in both print and online media during the pre-rally and post-rallyperiods.PREVIOUS FRAMING STUDIESIn political communication research, especially in relation to the formation of public opinion, framing isoften used to describe a phenomenon in which the messages are conveyed by the media to shape the wayan individual evaluates and thinks about an issue. The mainstream media, such as newspapers, or Internetmedia, such as online news portals, both play an important role in framing political issues such as thecoverage of ‘Bersih 3.0’ which is the focal issue in this study. To frame a story is to choose some aspectsof perceived reality and make them more salient in the form of text communication with a view toprojecting a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral judgment, and proposed solutions(Entman, 1993). The study of media framing of political issues in Malaysia is not new. The study conducted by Chang,Fauziah, and Wan Amizah (2010) look at the message framed by the former Prime Minister Tun Dr.Mahathir Mohamad through his weblog chedet.com. This weblog is chosen because the former premierhas been actively voicing his opinions through blogging since May 2008. With the usage of framing theoryas the basis for their study, these researchers conducted an empirical research study on this weblogcontent by using the measurements of five generic frames developed by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) toexplain the framing phenomenon in the blogging. The results show that, both the target and language havean impact on the frame-building process. While in another study conducted by Zhou and Moy (2007), the online public opinion and mass mediacoverage are found to have affected each other. To determine the correlation of this relationship, theirstudy uses framing theory to analyze the online discussion and media coverage of an incident in China.There are beyond two framing processes seen in this study of which how online discussion leads tobuilding frames in the mass media; as well as how the framing in the mass media eventually leads to theformation of public opinion in online discussions. Further to these processes, the findings enable theresearchers to make a conceptual and empirical relationship of the formation of the frame-interactingprocess. The present study emulates the framing researches with the adoption of five generic framesconducted by the main author and his associates. This can be found in Chang, Faridah, and Normah(2010); Chang, Faridah, Fuziah Kartini, and Kho (2011); Chang, Faridah, Fauziah, and Chew (2012);Chang, Musa, and Fauziah (2012); Chew, Fauziah, Faridah, and Chang (2012); and, Kho, Chew, Tan, and