Mediaboss Marketing

New Atlanticist

February 4, 2024

By Parker Novak

In 2024, elections are everywhere all at once. Dozens of countries, stretching from Mexico to the Solomon Islands, are holding crucial contests, including the worlds three largest democracies, India, Indonesia, and the United States. Between rising authoritarianism, growing institutional mistrust, and rapid spread of artificial intelligence, these elections are set to present a cumulative stress test on democracy worldwide.

Already the fourth-largest country by population, Indonesia is projected to become the worlds sixth-largest economy by 2027 and an increasingly important geopolitical player to match its size and wealth. Thus, the outcomes of its February 14 presidential and legislative contests carry far-reaching implications for the future not only of the country host to theworlds largest Muslim population, but also of Southeast Asia and the world.

With more than two hundred million eligible voters, Indonesias massive electorate appropriately reflects its sprawling geography, stretching 3,200 miles from its easternmost to westernmost points. This makes electoral administration a logistically complex affair, with ballots cast at more than eight hundred thousand polling stations across the countrys six thousand inhabited islands.

The most recent nation-wide elections were held in 2019, when 80 percent of eligible voters turned out to re-elect incumbent President Joko Widodo, popularly known as Jokowi. In the five years since, millions of young people have reached voting age, joining an already young electorate, in which 50 percent of eligible voters are classified as millennials or Gen Z.

With more than 1.7 million people entering the workforce annually, economic development and job creation are unsurprisingly atop the list of voters policy priorities, both of which Jokowi has been laserfocused on during his two terms in office. Foreign affairs issues are also on voters radars, as reflected by the January 7 presidential debate dedicated to them. Among other subjects, the candidates debated Indonesias place in the world, geopolitics, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

That said, voter behavior is ultimately driven by personalities, not policies. In a December survey from Lembaga Survei Indonesia, respondents were asked to state their reasons for choosing to support a presidential candidate. Their responses overwhelmingly reflected interpersonal dynamics, such as experience, leadership ability, and trustworthiness, whereas policy issues barely registered.

Naturally, the presidential race is receiving the lions share of attention from voters and the media. Under the Indonesian constitution, the president is limited to two terms in office. Thus, Jokowi cannot run for re-election, and three high-profile figures are vying to succeed him: Prabowo Subianto, Ganjar Pranowo, and Anies Baswedan. Each are paired with a vice presidential running mate: Prabowo with Gibran Rakabuming Raka, Ganjar with Mahfud MD, and Anies with Muhaimin Iskandar.

Alongside this, voters will cast ballots for all 580 members of the House of Representatives (DPR), the lower house of the national legislature; 2,372 members of provincial legislatures (DPRDs); 17,510 members of regency and city DPRDs; and all 152 members of the Regional Representative Council, the upper house of the national legislature. All legislative candidates run under the banner of one of the twenty-four political parties contesting the election, eighteen of which are national in scope.

Ballots, especially those from far-flung islands, can take days to count. Official results are scheduled to be released more than a month after the election, on March 20. On election day, quick counts and exit polls will provide helpful, but not necessarily perfect, barometers. The 2019 election was the first in which presidential and legislative ballots were cast on the same day, and the administrative burden it put on election workers contributed to hundreds dying from exhaustiona tragic outcome that administrators are seeking to avoid repeating.

Indonesian elections are broadly seen as free and fair. Historically, candidates and parties have ultimately accepted the results, albeit sometimes after tense hand-wringing that can turn violent. After losing the 2014 and 2019 elections, Prabowo contested the results in court, and the aftermath of the 2019 elections saw riots in Jakarta during which several people were killed.

Prabowo, the frontrunner, currently serves as the minister of defense. He is backed by a coalition of eight national parties, led by Gerindra, for which he serves as general chairman. Having run against Jokowi in 2014 and 2019, this is his third campaign for the top job. This time around, Prabowo is seen as tacitly backed by Jokowi and is framing his candidacy as a de-facto continuation of the incumbents presidency.

A retired lieutenant general, Prabowo symbolizes the resurgence of Suharto-era and military-aligned figures. He displays a fierce nationalisma potent factor in Indonesian politicsand faced credible accusations of human rights violations during his military career. To inoculate against this, he has worked to change his image, especially among young voters. As two correspondents in Southeast Asia recently put it, hes rebranding himself as a cute grandpa with awkward dance moves and a softer side.

Ganjar, who served as the governor of Central Java until last September, is backed by a coalition of four national parties that is led by Indonesias largest, the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDIP). Elected as governor in 2013, he built a national profile and came to be seen as a politician in the mold of Jokowi. Some expected the president to endorse Ganjar, but this did not happen, partially due to an apparent breakdown in Jokowis relationship with Megawati Sukarnoputri, PDIPs chair.

A former two-term DPR member, Ganjar has sought to project an everyman image and play up his humble beginnings. He is charismatic and knows how to play to the cameras; qualities that some of his critics argue mask a lack of policy depth. His focus on grassroots events and spontaneous public appearances emulate Jokowis well-known blusukans, or unscheduled visits, albeit in a manner that PDIPs secretary general insists are blusukan plus.

Anies, who served as the governor of Jakarta until 2022, is backed by a coalition of four smaller national parties. Elected as governor in 2017, he leveraged his countrys most prominent governorship to build a national profile that he hopes to use as a launching pad to the presidency, much as Jokowi did in 2014. Anies has sought to position himself as the candidate of choice for voters who desire change.

A former university rector who served as minister of education and culture in Jokowis first cabinet, Anies projects a studious, policy-minded image. While he controversially drew support from hardline Islamists during his first campaign for governormuch as Prabowo did in 2014 and 2019Anies has sought to moderate his image, appeal to young voters, and play to his image as an intellectual and an Islamic scholar.

With just days to go until the election, a lot can and will happen. On policy, there isnt a lot of daylight between the candidates, who have sought to differentiate themselves more on the basis of image and personality. But there certainly are some differences. According to recent polls, Prabowo holds a commanding lead, but is falling just short of winning the outright majority required to avoid a runoff, while Anies and Ganjar are locked in a tight contest for second place.

In the event of a runoff, Prabowo will start as the favorite to win and may benefit from institutional support. It will be competitive, though, if Anies and Ganjar unite behind whichever of the two advances to face Prabowo. As the old adage goes, a week is a long time in politics, and the time between now and a runoff election would be an eternity. The intrigue, twists, and turns that characterize Indonesian politics will surely make for a fascinating election.

Parker Novak is a nonresident fellow with the Atlantic Councils Global China Hub and Indo-Pacific Security Initiative, where he specializes in Southeast Asia, the Pacific Islands, Indo-Pacific geopolitics, and US foreign policy. He previously served as the Indonesia and Timor-Leste country director for an international non-governmental organization.

Image: Three presidential candidates, Anies Baswedan (R), Prabowo Subianto (C), and Ganjar Pranowo (L), are posing for photos after the first presidential candidate debate at the General Election Commission (KPU) office in Jakarta, Indonesia, on December 12, 2023. Indonesia is preparing to hold general elections for president and vice president for the 2024-2029 period in February 2024. (Photo by Aditya Irawan/NurPhoto)

Read more:
Who will lead Indonesia after Jokowi? The world's third-largest democracy is about to decide. - Atlantic Council

Listen, observe and be patient those were the words Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward said to me when I asked them what their advice would be to a young eager reporter who wants to follow in their footsteps in investigative journalism.

What seems to be three everyday, simple things that not only journalists but every good professional is supposed to be doing have become a real challenge. In an era of immediate information, internet and the rise of social media, we have forgotten the importance of connecting with others, reading their body language, looking them in the eye and treating them as humans.

Obviously, the digitalization of the world has also put the basic practices of journalism in jeopardy. Its easier to text than call and send an email instead of interviewing, we have forgotten that the key in journalism is to show up.

Good reporting takes commitment and time, and accuracy will always be more important than speed.

Investigative journalism did not begin with Watergate. Yet, its firm establishment in American journalism and its gradual proliferation globally can be largely attributed to the scandal. In fact, Watergate has been an inspiration for young journalists around the globe, myself included, to stick to the idea that no matter how unpopular the news media may sometimes be, rigorous and ethical journalism will hold accountable those with power and influence over the rest of us. In other words, good journalism will be the backbone of a healthy democracy.

Woodward and Bernstein remind us that theres no such secret key in investigative journalism. In fact, all journalism should be about knocking on peoples doors and showing up. Becoming an expert on your subject.

The duo became journalism icons when they broke the story of the Watergate break-in in the early 1970s at the Washington Post and exposed the criminal activity and cover-up that led to the impeachment and resignation of then-President Richard Nixon. Their reporting on the story won them each a Pulitzer Prize for Public Service in 1973.

These legendary reporters not only came to reminisce about Watergate, they reminded us why we should, more than ever, raise the standards in journalism to ensure democracy is protected. 50 years later, with a completely different political landscape, a cultural shift, and a digital world, Bernstein and Woodward still believe that the ultimate solution to keep American democracy safe is to reform journalism.

The Osher Lifelong Learning Institute at FAU hosted Woodward and Bernstein on Feb. 8 for a lecture on journalism in todays democracy. As an aspiring journalist, having them on campus, hearing their advice and having the opportunity to learn from their methodologies was an enlightening experience.

We need to deal with the problem of pomposity in journalism, said Bernstein during the lecture. Anything can be infected, there isnt certainty. People are now only looking for information to reinforce what they believe and it is discouraged because theres no consensus on what good reporting is.

Woodward complemented by explaining that it is crucial to raise the standards of getting information and creating a curatorial consensus about what is good journalism.

We need to go back to the sources: a witness, a participant, the documents owner. We cant continue with going by a rumor. These should be our standard, we wont publish anything that doesnt meet them, said Woodward.

The world has changed and forever will, but the heart of good reporting is still the same. The methodology of getting good stories is the same: knocking on doors, being respectful to the people we talk with, observing and listening, being a critical thinker, staying consistent and always following our instinct.

A lot of doors slammed in our faces but the result was worth it. People are going to say no but its the yeses that count, said Bernstein. People like to tell the truth, there are a lot of deep throats in the world, we just need to give them the opportunity. Listen to them carefully.

Having the opportunity to talk to Woodward and Bernstein reminded me why I decided to pursue journalism in the first place. Their legacy continues to show the real evidence that truth, in fact, matters.

In the face of adversity and critique, its crucial to remember the foundational principles of journalism. As journalists, we are tasked with the formidable job of holding those in power accountablea role that may not win popularity contests but is essential for the health of our society.

Nixons words in the Oval Office on Dec. 14, 1972, serve as a reminder of the mindset were up against: The press is the enemyThe establishment is the enemy. The professors are the enemy. Repeated like a mantra, these words were meant to discredit the very institutions tasked with questioning, analyzing and informing.

It is precisely this adversarial role that underscores the vital importance of journalism. Let us not be deterred by the challenges but instead, be inspired by the courage of those who have stood firm in their quest for truth. Journalisms mission to illuminate the truth and contribute to informed citizenship is more important now than ever.

Sofia De La Espriella is the News Editor for the University Press. Email [emailprotected] or message her on Instagram @sofidelaespriella for information regarding this or other stories.

More here:
COLUMN: No democracy without journalism a lesson from Woodward and Bernstein - University Press

This month Democracy Now! turns 28. Since our very first broadcast in 1996, Democracy Now! has been committed to bringing you the stories, voices and perspectives you won't hear anywhere else. In these times of war, climate chaos and elections, our reporting has never been more important. Can you donate $10 to keep us going strong? Right now a generous donor will DOUBLE your donation, making it twice as valuable. Democracy Now! doesn't accept advertising income, corporate underwriting or government funding. That means we rely on you to make our work possibleand every dollar counts. Please donate today. Thank you so much. -Amy Goodman

This month Democracy Now! turns 28. Since our very first broadcast in 1996, Democracy Now! has been committed to bringing you the stories, voices and perspectives you won't hear anywhere else. In these times of war, climate chaos and elections, our reporting has never been more important. Can you donate $10 to keep us going strong? Right now, a generous donor will DOUBLE your donation, making it twice as valuable. Democracy Now! doesn't accept advertising income, corporate underwriting or government funding. That means we rely on you to make our work possibleand every dollar counts. Please donate today. Thank you so much. -Amy Goodman

We rely on contributions from you, our viewers and listeners to do our work. If you visit us daily or weekly or even just once a month, now is a great time to make your monthly contribution.

Please do your part today.

Continued here:
None of These Candidates Wins Nevada Primary, Beating Nikki Haley - Democracy Now!

The mail piece from United Democracy Project echoes Weiss campaign in slamming Min for his drunk driving arrest last spring. The groups television ad has not been released.

This is the groups first spending foray into a 2024 race. It started the year with more than $40 million cash on hand.

Weiss has benefited from outside help, including a $1 million advertising campaign by EMILYs List, a stalwart Democratic group that boosts women candidates who support abortion rights.

While EMILYs Lists support for Weiss had been telegraphed for months, the intervention by the pro-Israel group was more unexpected.

The Israel-Hamas war, which has become a flashpoint dividing some Democrats, has not been a major point of contention in the contest between Min and Weiss. Neither has called for a cease-fire, which pro-Israel groups strongly oppose. Min and Weiss have made little mention of the issue on social media, save for condemning Hamas in the immediate aftermath of its Oct.7 attack in Israel.

Mins campaign attributed AIPACs opposition to private conversations he had with the groups members and leadership.

Despite State Senator Mins support of Israel, and a broad coalition of endorsements from the Jewish community, a number of Republican donors at AIPAC are upset that he has called for Bibi Netanyahu to be held accountable for the security failures on October 7th and Netanyahus failure of leadership during this crisis. Senator Min does not believe in the annexation of West Bank settlements, he had hoped that a constructive dialogue could be had. It appears they disagreed, said Dan Driscoll, Mins campaign manager, in a statement.

United Democracy Project did not respond to an email seeking comment about its involvement in the race.

Last week, Weiss scored the backing of Pro-Israel America PAC. The groups executive director Samantha Garelick said in a statement that Weiss is committed to defending Americas strategic alliance with Israel and has proven her resolve to fight and address antisemitism in all its forms.

Min has endorsements from much of the California Legislative Jewish Caucus, including its co-chairs: state Sen. Scott Wiener and Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel.

Original post:
A pro-Israel super PAC is wading into the fierce fight for Katie Porter's seat - POLITICO

This year, with a minimum of four elections, some city and town clerks are turning their attention to vote-by-mail applications leaving them little time to do anything elseall year long. "It's insane," one clerk said.

We often hear impassioned pleas to protect the health and spirit of our democracy. Count us among those voices. Its a uniquely trying time for the nations fundamental democratic institutions, including those vital arteries that pump the lifeblood of local democracy through our communities: clerks offices.

Anyone who is truly appreciative of or concerned for American democracy should think of the local town or city clerk. These are the folks who put in the always crucial and too often thankless work to maintain the machinery of our electoral system, from voter and candidate registration to staging and overseeing elections. And over the last several election cycles that machine has seen much more sand thrown in its gears. There was the herculean task of shepherding elections amid a devastating viral pandemic. Then there was a targeted campaign to overwhelm election officials across the country, including Massachusetts clerks, with excessive and frivolous records requests based on a former presidents baseless election-denial conspiracy-mongering that he continues to amplify as the presumptive Republican nominee.

Now, the metaphorical sand in the gears is the product of some very real postcards inundating clerks in city halls and town offices throughout the Berkshires and across the commonwealth. You probably saw the tri-fold white postcards, sent by the Massachusetts secretary of state, in your mailbox a while back. After allowing a vote-by-mail option during the COVID-stricken 2020 election year, Massachusetts made that option permanent in 2022. Now any Bay State voters who want to utilize that option can request mail-in ballots with those postcard applications, which must be sent to every registered voter no less than 60 days before every primary or general election, in accordance with that 2022 law. You can still vote the old-fashioned way, so you dont have to fill out that postcard and forward it to your local clerks office. A lot of people did prefer that option, though, and handling those applications for mailed ballots has become a considerable time-sink for local clerks offices.

Having a vote-by-mail option, like any reasonable and secure way to expand the access and ease of voting, is a good thing. Like early in-person voting, if theres a way to accommodate folks with schedule conflicts, mobility issues or any other reasons that might prevent or dissuade them from standing in line at the polls on Election Day, we ought to pursue it. Given growing apathy and anemic voter participation of late, every reasonable step to encourage democratic participation is worth taking.

Some have concerns about the security of mail-in voting, fears no doubt fanned by Donald Trumps meritless attacks on mail-in votings legitimacy during the 2020 election. Those concerns can be addressed. Anyone concerned with Massachusetts system should educate themselves on how the process works when a clerk receives a mail-in ballot application. In fact, its the rigor of that system that is hamstringing many clerks offices. These applications have to be verified by the workers in those offices, including what Pittsfields assistant clerk of voter registration and elections referred to as problem children, a term for postcards with incomplete or inconsistent information. Thats a process that deserves and requires time, attention and, like all quality public services, money to run and staff operations.

Whether a clerks office gets a few dozen or a few thousand (or more) of these little postcards forwarded to them, thats a big amount of work added to the plates of the folks at the front lines of local democracy. Realistically, for most offices it means having to staff up which can be difficult for city or town halls quickly looking for more workers or room in their limited budgets. Pittsfield City Clerk Michele Benjamin told The Eagle that handling this years rush would not be possible without the help of volunteers. Meanwhile, in Sandisfield, the town clerk is a part-time position because the municipality cant afford to offer the benefits that would come with a full-time position. So Clerk Douglas Miner puts in hours on the weekend days he isnt paid to work in an effort to process all the vote-by-mail applications in time. The town did approve hiring an assistant for him another part-time position but Mr. Miner will continue putting in extra hours.

Im not in this job for the money, he told The Eagle. Neither are the volunteers in the Pittsfield clerks office. Yet if were going to be consistent with the lofty paeans to democracy its so fashionable to pronounce nowadays, we ought to put our money where our democratic values are. Clerks offices clearly need help to keep up with the states admirable efforts to expand voting access. Some municipalities, like Sandisfield, might not have that budgetary flexibility, but the state can and should step in to provide the budgetary backstop to make sure Massachusetts mail-in-voting system does not collapse on the backs of over-worked clerks, which could in turn give a foothold to those opposing sensible efforts to expand voter access and participation. Its not exactly a spend-happy mood on Beacon Hill at the moment, but the sort of help that could make the difference to clerks offices perhaps grants to pay for part-time positions allocated based on applications received would barely register as a rounding error on the states annual budget. Protecting democracy demands more than penny-pinching.

In the meantime, thank your local clerks office workers. Many are working overtime to uphold their end of the bargain. Massachusetts can and should do more to help them meet the challenges.

See the original post here:
Our Opinion: If we want to support democracy, it should include helping overworked clerks - Berkshire Eagle