On Media Freedom and Digital Security

Header of SEA Dispatches with Damar Juniarto on Media Freedom and Digital Security

Bonnibel Rambatan talks to Damar Juniarto, Executive Director of SAFEnet, about digital rights and digital security, the increasing judicial harassment of expression in the digital space in Southeast Asia, how various countries try to emulate China’s Great Firewall to conduct surveillance and censorship of its people, and how can the people of Southeast Asia fight back the digital authoritarian practices.


Welcome to New Naratif’s Southeast Asia Dispatches. I’m your host, Bonnibel Rambatan, Editorial Manager for New Naratif. New Naratif is a movement to democratise democracy in Southeast Asia, and this podcast is one of the ways we attempt to do just that.

In the previous episode, we talked rather extensively about the idea of digital authoritarianism. Internet freedom is declining, and democracy itself is shrinking in its wake. This episode can be read as a continuation of that discussion, as we talk more about the origins of digital authoritarian models, as well as what we can do to push back.

Technological oppression aimed at key groups opposed to government policies has often resulted in doxxing, hacking, and harassment campaigns by paid online mercenaries. Governments shut down the internet on a regular basis while doing nothing to stop massive data breaches of its citizens. Disinformation campaigns continue to spread. All the while, across Southeast Asia, various countries try to emulate China’s Great Firewall to conduct surveillance and censorship of its people.

All of these, if left unchecked, will inevitably lead to the collapse of democracy across the region. Fortunately, many CSOs are putting checking measures as well as trainings and tools to fight back. One of these organisations is the Southeast Asia Freedom of Expression Network, or SAFEnet. Established in 2013, in line with the increasing judicial harassment of expression in the digital space in Southeast Asia, SAFENet has now expanded its work to fight for all digital rights, including the rights to access the Internet, the rights to exercise freedom of expression, and the rights to be safe in online spaces.


Hi, Hello, my name is Damar Juniarto. I’m the Executive Director of Southeast Asia Freeedom of Expression Network, SAFEnet. We are a regional digital rights organisation based in Bali, Indonesia. We are focusing on the protection of digital rights for Southeast Asia citizen.

That’s Damar Juniarto, Executive Director of SAFEnet. He’s been the person in charge of various reports and other initiatives conducted by the organisation that we’ll be discussing throughout this podcast.


Digital Authoritarianism in the Region

We did talk about digital authoritarianism in the previous podcast, but we’d like to know your thoughts and your opinion, because in your 2019 report, if I’m not mistaken, it was titled The Rise of the Digital Authoritarianism. Maybe you can tell us a bit more about that, but what you see here as a problem as the rise of authoritarianism in the digital space.

We talk about the Internet in the certificate, it means that we have to mention numbers first. How many persons now using the Internet in the Southeast? To be precise, like we use the data from insider intelligence. Like in 2023, there is more 380,000,000 Internet users in the Southeast Asia. And probably like the majority who use the Internet is mostly Indonesian because of the numbers of our country. That’s a big number.

For instance, like for Southeast Asia, with the digital transformation agenda that we had, within three more years, in 2026 there will be like double or triple the number of users, which approximately will be reached to 400 million. So with this landscape, I will say that landscape, instead of just numbers, it means that the digital technology actually becoming our everyday life. And it doesn’t mean that when we talk about digital transformation, it’s only about the economic side of the people that we need to be discussed with the others, but also like what is the impact of this digital technology to our political and also sociological life?

Because according to the Positivism, those who believe in the digital transformation, this impact of digital transformation is also impacting to the growth of the democracy. But we’ve seen that the trend is no longer there, the trend is no longer toward the democracy. Instead, like in our report in 2019, we’ve seen a U-turn where the digital did not provide a space for democracy. Instead we usually found a lot of repression that mostly coming from the state. And this repression, digital repression coming from the state usually follow with a lot of attacks to the people, especially those who criticise or those who try to open a public discussion about what happened within the country.

For instance, what happened with the corruption, what happened with good governance. And we’ve seen that the trend is slowly becoming worsening. And there were three or four indicators that we can use to project whether this country is becoming more try to implement repressive way to repress the people. One is, is there any online surveillance to the people? And then the second one, is there any online censorship for the people? The third one is about whether there were like an attempt from the state to do an information worker. And the last one is about whether the state implement internet shutdowns. So based on those indicators, then we can checking the factors of the digital democracy of the country. And we found out that most of the country in our region tried to adopt this digital authoritarian model from the China.

So they borrow the idea of controlling the internet from the China and try to implement these indicators within the country. Which is that for instance, we are now familiar with the term Internet shutdown. It started in Myanmar back then in 2017, 2018 in specific area like in Rakhine state or Chin state, but then follow with other countries as well, like Indonesia for instance, what happened in Papua at the moment. So that’s the reason why in our report in 2019 we call it this is the rise of digital authoritarianism not only in Indonesia, but also in the region, in the Southeast Asia region.

So that’s the beginning. If we try to look at what happened back then in 2019. So now the 1 billion big question, what is our status now in the region? And also probably like we will talk about in the middle later, what is our status now? Our status now is not getting better, even though we already notifying people that will be aware of this digital authoritarian and beware that whenever it comes to your country means that your freedom, your internet freedom, your freedom of expression, freedom will be curved.

There is no space for you. There is no safe space for you to speak. Because there will be another way from the state to repress you. Or even if they don’t repress you, because digital authoritarianism is also about manipulating your opinion so they can implement propaganda like fabricated messages to you so then you believe there’s nothing wrong with in your country everything is okay, but actually on the fact it’s not okay with you.

So it’s not easy for you to live in the country where the country when the state tried to tell you that everything is okay. Although in the fact it could be like totally different from the reality. So that’s my thoughts here regarding what happened in the region regarding digital authoritarianism.

Digital Domination

Yeah, thank you for the very comprehensive answer.

And we realised also that you mentioned that we are not getting better and your 2023 report, in fact, it’s getting worse, right? The trend is getting worse and there’s like over 200 more cases of criminalisation in regards to the to this. Why do you think that’s the case?

I mean, you did mention about even though you’ve been trying to reach out to people, tell people about these problems and these issues. But also, on the other hand, the government has been spreading propaganda through online means and stuff like that. What do you think makes the government’s steps very effective?

The propaganda, for example. And also of course, we’re all familiar with the buzzer RP and paid trolls to trolling people, cyber bullying people and activists like that. Could you maybe have something to say about that.

Yeah, I would like to answer that with a different approach on the problems because when we talk about digital authoritarian, it’s always about the state who repressed the society. But there is also a similar term being used by other scholars. The term that they use is digital domination.

So I will explain a bit about this because when we talk about geopolitical political now, who has the power? Who in the world has the power? Because what happened in the last decade or the two decades, the power is sitting from the first one in the economic side. Who has the power? Who has more power now between the oil and gas company and also the tech company? Then you will see because of the report from their company and also you see that the numbers is so there’s a big difference now because the tech companies suddenly become more powerful, right? And also getting more money than the oil and gas company.

There is a shifting of the who has the domination. So I would like to say that this tech company now has to be the economics of global. Although they are operating online and providing the online services. But the impact is not only about the economy that they get they get from the activity, but also they are providing a new way to communicate to others.

Like for instance like any works from Elon Musk will be affecting a million users of Twitter at the same time. So it means that who holds the power on speaking or getting attention on the platform will get more followers or more people who will looking at the person. So the aspect of the economical power and also the political power of digital world. Giving an idea from the perspective of digital domination that there is unbalanced domination before

Now, many countries, especially countries in Southeast Asia really like taking steps. Instead of just becoming the users of only talking about we just become the market for the digital company or the big tech company they try to exercise their power. So they are trying to get ways to tame this digital big tech company by using a lot of ways, like for instance changing the regulation if they need try to tame the Google. Now in some countries they try to protect company or in other countries they try to limit the power of big tech companies. You must comply with the registration for instance to get the permit for doing your business. So that kind of exercise that being placed by the government.

And whenever you talk about government or state, we must understand that many countries in the Southeast Asia used to be authoritarian before authoritarian regime. So they are thinking that the way to win the domination, they will use the exercise of their powers and now they are in the top position of their social media or tech company platform.

So in the some of the country and they get this idea from China of course. When they are seeing that China is very successful with the great firewall of China means that there is a limitation for Google to enter the China border and the idea of the state can implement a digital jurisdiction. And then the idea is now the state can access the power to say that these countries need to be protected from the big tech company. Because this big tech company giving a free space for people to talk about the government on the internet.

Like for instance in what happened in Singapore for instance. Now they have an idea to implement how to limit them. Like for instance back to Singapore. Those who has a lot of followers has to pay some of money to the government as a guarantee. If there is a violation or there is an attempt to doing a defamation to the Prime Minister, they have to pay the penalty to the government. So they are cutting the money from the initial payment from the famous blogger for instance.

So those kind of exercise is being copied from one country to each other and then now becoming a trend that they have this idea that we can dominate this digital world by creating a lot of regulation and also creating a lot of cyber mercenaries. Because you already said about the buzzers here, but actually buzzers is not only in Indonesia, we’ve seen a lot of buzzers also related to the state.

And then this cyber mercenaries is not usually not people like you and me, but it can be like a PR firm or even like an army that’s being trained by the state by going abroad. For instance, they study in China and then go back as cyber army, and then that’s the situation at the moment.

So using this digital domination, when we talk about what happened now, it’s truly giving you a banal picture of our digital platform now is very limited because the state already dominates the digital, although they have a big fight, like content moderation, for instance, with the big tech platform.

But actually they are now in power, obviously over the people and also over the social media platform in the region.

The Model of Digital Authoritarianism

Okay, I want to go back to the idea that lots of Southeast Asian countries are emulating China, which has been very successful in their digital authoritarianism, but obviously they’ve been implementing the Great Firewall for a few decades now. They’ve already set the stage for authoritarian and for their brand of authoritarianism to actually take place.

But on the other hand, let’s say, for example, in the United States with Donald Trump and all the election and all of that, we had the whole Cambridge Analytic debacle with all of these. Again, the usage of social media to spread like propaganda, fake news, hoaxes and so on, right? So I think again, correct me if I’m wrong, but in Southeast Asia it seems there’s kind of a blend between those two.

So we have the Chinese model, but also the propaganda model, but also, as you mentioned, the cyber mercenaries has been trained and so on. You did mention Singapore and stuff, but there are lots of conditions and differences in the Southeast Asian countries regarding people’s responses to these things, to these applications, because again, we set out those, like, very different kinds of ground rules before digital authoritarianism, digital authoritarian laws are taking place, right?

So what I wanted to get your opinion about is that how have the people been reacting over Southeast Asia? And like, do you see, for example, in Singapore, certain measures have been successful, and even before that, it’s been difficult for people to speak up. But in Indonesia, for example, we have people speaking up a lot louder, which it can’t happen, for example, in Myanmar, it’s a lot more dangerous to speak up about that.

Do you see these differences in these differences between China and Southeast Asia and between Southeast Asian countries? Do you see this as a kind of opportunity for us to fight back? What’s your outlook on these and the future, the potential futures of where this might go?

Yeah, okay. Let me clarify something first because probably I’m not explaining very well in the beginning regarding the model of digital authoritarianism. If we follow Alina Polyakova on her basis on exporting digital authoritarianism, there are two models at the moment. One is the Chinese model which is heavy on the panel of the inside like you say, like implementing the it’s like investing a lot of money and developing the Great Firewall of China. But there is also another model coming from the Russia. The model of Russia is more under disinformation. The Russian model focusing on delivering the manipulation over the people with disinformation.

What happened in the Southeast Asia, authoritarian regime in South Asia adapt these two models and then they enhance their censorship and online repression. So they are taking some of the model from the China but they are also combining the use of disinformation to request or to manipulate the people. So they are combining between disinformation campaign and also combining with the repressing the people through the technology.

I would like to say that’s the typical character of what happened in Southeast Asia, for instance in Cambodia, Cambodia tried to implement single internet gateway which is very similar with the idea of Great Firewall. And those idea is also being looked around by Indonesian government. Now they try to implement their DNS Nusantara which is very similar. The idea is very similar although the name is quite different because one is single gateway, the other one is the Great Firewall. But DNS Nusantara is actually like building this block for the people and then people only can access content that has been approved by the government. So it’s just quite similar, right?

But then when we talk about this information, we also seen those model like the Royal Thai Army using this group of cyber mercenaries as well, and also the Tatmadaw in Myanmar is also develop their own cyber army and using them to attack the people, the civil society.

So in the situation like what happened now, there is two way of seeing or inspecting the challenges and also the opportunity. Professor from Citizen Lab, Ron Deibert, he’s saying that during this asymmetric war there is no opportunity that people society can beat or in the same capacity to win the war. Because there is an asymmetric war between what the state already had and also what civil society probably civil society just realised there is this situation.

But there is another way of thinking that not to be fatalist on seeing the situation, but try to find a solution, which is the solution is hard to find and I definitely not going to formulate one because we are still finding the formulation. But the necessity for the civil society to collaborate and also having a new strategy to tackle this problem of digital authoritarianism is needed.

What I mean about that is because the civil society organisation in Southeast Asia needs to embrace this technology as well and also working with this new technology to adapt with this new condition means that not only using the social media to help their campaign, but also learn about what is digital security, how to protect themselves from the attack, doing regular audits on their digital assets and then holding trainings, digital security trainings, or even better, like Holistic security trainings. So combining between the physical safety, secret, socio safety and also digital safety all together into one training and that’s not enough because in other countries as well I saw the opportunity that the civic society can work together with the technologies to find a solution of creating a safe space for them.

For instance, like a place to work together on collaborative documents for instance like what is the alternative of working together on the online platform instead of using the services from Google or services from Meta, is there any way of using new and safe technology? Or even like is there any safe channel for us to sending instant messaging instead of just using the factory and popular WhatsApp for instance? Or even like Google Maps? Is there any other way? And I’ve seen this as an opportunity and other than that I also need an initiative to solve problems.

2019, after our report on digital authoritarianism, we started to initiate helpline in the Southeast Asia. So digital helpline, this is not a unique or a new term in digital security because this is just an incident handler. But then when we talk about we don’t have those incident handler within the Southeast Asia countries so we need to initiate that. And we already started to have our own digital helpline but also together with the other organisation we develop Tim Reaksi Cepat or Trace. This is like probably the translation is like fast response team that consists of more than 20 cybersecurity experts into one collaborative organisation.

And this kind of hub is really needed because what we have now only limited resources for the helpline is very limited. So by providing this in Indonesia and then we probably can provide in other countries because I met also with other organisations because that SAFEnet is not the only one, obviously. We met with security makers in Malaysia, they are doing the same and then we met with other Filipinos and then they have this idea as well. So we are trying to develop this in national level but then all these helpline is connect to each other and then could be like fortifying the civil society from the digital repression coming from the digital authoritarianism. So those initiatives is needed as a pushback over the situation that happened.

Other than that, let me mention as well other initiatives or other progress coming from the civil society across the Southeast Asia is trying to challenge all the digital curb the freedom of expression and also digital rights. Like for instance like taking those regulations that not follow the international human standard to the court. Try to win the litigation process and proclaim the winning as a way that we are the citizen of Southeast Asia is not just silence whenever the oppressive coming when they repress us, we are going to fight back we are going to push back everything so we’ll let everyone should respect our rights. Although this is not yet 100% winning.

Tim Reaksi Cepat

Of course it’s a start and it’s a great start to have all of these measures in place. I want to know more actually about the Tim Reaksi Cepat, the Trace, what does it do and how is it similar with the other institutions that you mentioned across Southeast Asia that’s doing the same thing?

And also how is it going so far with the whole fighting back against the legislation and stuff like that? Do you see this as a battle that can eventually turn around this whole digital authoritarianism and what do you think is actually required from the civil society organisations or even people themselves to actually overturn this authoritarian tendencies?

I will answer one by one starting from Trace. So the beginning or the initiative of Trace begin into October 2020, that’s during like after the release of our report and then we realised that we need to do something about this. How to make sure that there is a team or a group that respond very fast whenever someone say that I’m becoming a victim of digital attacks.

So we are connecting to the other organisation as individuals who have expertise or specialisation on tackling digital incident. And at the moment there are more than 20 people joining this Trace and then we are still opening. So this Trace is based on volunteers and the services is targeted to help civil society and human rights defenders and then the second one to media and journalists and the last one for the vulnerable groups, for instance of the LGBTQ.

So there is a reason why we are giving these services because we try to prioritise them, because they keep on being targeted with the digital attacks. What we can do with Trace is like whenever you receive a hacking of your social media account or hacking of your website or you get a doxxing from others or like you had DDoS, Distributed Denial of Service, to your website or impersonation mobile spyware, then we will deliver these services to you for free, for the victim, for free.

And then what we already provide is an online portal where people can submit their report to us and then immediately there is a response from this team. The reason why we developed this and not just like relying on the existing helpline because the system is more easier because it’s based in the region, so people know each other, right? So it’s easier when you see you’re telling that we have become the victim of this digital attack and oh, yeah, we know the group and then can easily drop the hub to this group or to this individual.

So that’s the process is more simple and then even the way how to communicate is much easier as well because we are speaking the same language. That’s a problem. Most of the Southeast Asian people cannot speak English very well, especially from Indonesia. Probably not many of us can able to speak English very well.

So that’s the situation. And so far we have a lot of victims who got the attack from unknown actor and at least I heard from the testimony from the victims, they are saying that Trace is real. So for instance, like Narasi Media is being attacked, 37 of the journalists and former journalists being attacked at the same time.

And then these Trace helping immediately helping every one of them and then they can get back their account very quickly and even to those who have targeted more than one digital attack, it only also can be recovered and then also they can protect themselves more better than before. So I saw that as an opportunity and also acknowledgement from the victims and we are thinking of not stopping doing this surface the helpline.

And I think it’s also like very important to talk to the other helpline or inviting others cyber security experts to join this kind of initiative, whether in Indonesia, whether in Philippines or whether in Malaysia and try to make the regional hub for this helpline.

Okay, the second one I kind of forget. Bonnie, what is the second question?


Yeah, I wanted to ask about the you did actually mention it about the outlook on these fights abroad. But before we go there, I actually have another question that I would like to ask because you mentioned about digital security trainings and also all of these there’s Trace and all of these things that are in place to mitigate the things that the criminalisations, but also the attacks that the government might do against journalists and against everyone speaking up.

But also on the other hand, all of these have also created lots of self-censorship in people who would like to speak up. So I’ve seen like people now hesitate to speak up even like being so careful and censoring themselves. And also we did talk a lot about disinformation campaigns. So there’s a lot of need there for media literacy has been spotting hoaxes, spotting fake news, that’s been a strong concern as well, right?

So what are your thoughts on both self-censorship as well as media literacy? Because these two things are obviously connected, right? If people keep censoring themselves and then you end up getting with lots of news sources and people in general don’t know which one is true, which one is fake news and stuff like that, then we get to a very confusing media landscape.

What are your thoughts on that?

Years ago I used to keep on saying about beware of the chilling effect of this situation of criminalisation because in the end people will limit themselves to express their opinions and thoughts on the social media. But I found that it’s not enough. Probably last year I’m seeing this new trend that people choose to deplatforming themselves.

They delete their social media account, they delete their Facebook account, Instagram, Twitter, because they are fed up with this situation. The social media is no longer a place for exercising democracy and exercising freedom of expression, instead of become a place where people being attacked just because expressing themselves.

So this is the new worriedness from my side, seeing good people with clear thinking and also brilliant ideas choose not to use the social media anymore because they thought that there’s no way internet can be fixed, so they choose to depart.

So I keep on reflecting on the situation and then I because I also have this dilemma as well as me as a digital activist, I have this dilemma as well because whenever I try to like providing advocacy for the digital rights violation, I also being attacked, right? Then I’m thinking should I also deplatform myself, like delete my social media account?

But then I realised during the reflection if we don’t stay in the social media and then keep on expressing ourselves so this space will be used only for those who spread the disinformation, those who spread the troll against the activities and then we really don’t have opportunity to reach more people because all the narrative is coming only from one side instead, there is no good conversation and healthy conversation.

So I decided not to leave the platform and even I myself like now criticising the platform because the platform is doing nothing over what is coming to the social media conversation and choose to challenge them as well, how to work together with the civil society to provide a better place or fix the condition.

And that’s the new pace that we are going now. How to make sure that everyone in the same agenda like the rest of the world tried to fix the internet and also giving back the space to the people. Now, I think whenever we talk about the winning case of litigation, I would like to say that there’s a lot of good positive energy coming from the litigation process since we are delivering the litigation advocacy and also non-litigation advocacy altogether to support the victims.

Now people know that at least when someone or tried to express themselves and then they’re being attacked and then criminalised with the digital laws that there will be an organisation or there is someone will help them to provide the advocacy compared to the situation before, there is no condition like this.

So I’m seeing this as an opportunity, although this is not an easy job because when we talk about winning it’s actually sometimes we can get someone free, totally free from the sentences. For instance, like giving them what they call that amnesty coming from the president two times so we can give them a total free condition for the victims. But sometimes lowering the sentences into a penalty that they don’t need to pay or the punishment that they don’t need to enter the jail is something that also can be considered as a winning as well, because then there’s this idea that in the end, the good win, the good people won. So that’s the situation.

Media Information Literacy

Yeah, so clearly there are lots of it’s a very interesting dynamic where I think as long as we keep on fighting back and letting people know that there are these measures in place to help them, and there are these organisations, as you mentioned, that they’re not alone, so they don’t need to deplatform themselves. I deplatform myself because of the whole situation, but that’s like my personal choice as well.

But, yeah, just as long as people have these things that you mentioned, there’s a lot of opportunities to fight back and keep the struggle going, so to speak.

So I guess my next or maybe one of my last questions would be like, what do you think is needed from organisation, from CSOs, and from people, from activists and people in general, actually, to actually overturn this digital authoritarian space?

Because of course, there’s a lot of, the government will push back even harder, but there’s also opportunities for us to actually fight back against these measures. But what do you think is still missing? What do you think is needed? What would be your ideal situation in these times? Like, what the people are able to do, what organisations are able to push back and fight back stronger?

What do you think needs to be done?

I think what is missing and also just realised for a couple of years is the MIL program, the Media Information Literacy especially, that focusing on providing information about the digital rights. Not many people knowing that they have their rights on the Internet. They have the right to access the Internet. They have the right to express themselves, and also they have the right to be safe.

So without knowing this information is one of the challenges as well. Because, for instance, like many cases of the GBV, Gender-Based Violence, that we gather from 2019 and we now receive more than almost 2000 cases, we met with the victims and then they said that thank you to the materials that you delivered during the seminar, because I know that I’m becoming the victim of sextortion or I’m becoming the victim of non consensual, intimate images.

So those kind of information that people have their right on the Internet, then they have to protect their rights. And if they feel that there is a violation of their rights, of digital rights, they have to go to specific organisation who can give or can provide advocacy for them. And that’s something that needs to be done.

And then this is so embarrassing because we just realised this for a couple of years. We already started to produce what we call an online platform for people to learn about what is your rights, what is your digital rights. But I think I need media to do this or news, or speak person, spoke person, or like influences to explain about this to the people. To start it just for the first line of the general comment number 34 from the UN Human Rights Council saying that every rights that are already protected in the real world should be protected on the online work only that basis can be delivered to the people is enough. By delivering this, everybody now has the idea.

So when people try to mock me or try to repress me on the online so I have my right to protect myself using a specific protection on the Internet. So I spotted the big agenda that needs a collaboration between activists, media and also civil society groups or even like communities. Let’s start to have those conversations speaking about what is our rights, how to protect our rights, and also what can be done together to exercise these rights.

So slowly then after knowing our right, then we know that the big enemies are the same enemies within the Southeast Asia countries of the digital authoritarian practices.

What Can We Do?

Yeah, okay. Certainly it’s been a concern for New Naratif for quite a while and it’s an ongoing project that we are doing and we are trying to do to get people talking and discussing and fighting back about these digital rights.

I guess my last question, do you have any tips for the listeners if they’d like to get more involved, where they can start? I mean, obviously listeners will be able to join further discussions with SAFEnet. You should follow SAFEnet and everything and also New Naratif as well.

But do you have any particular starting points for the listeners that you’d like to mention?

Yeah, we try to share a lot of reading materials for the people for a couple of years. For instance, to educate yourself independently of digital rights, you can open padepokan.safenet.or.id, this is still in Bahasa. This is actually adaptation from the methods that we develop for the adaptations. And then for educating yourself on online Gender-Based Violence, you can open awasKBGO.id in Bahasa, but also we provide the English version as well. To educate yourself on digital security, how to secure yourself from a lot of potential harms, you can open digsec.safenet.or.id. And the last one, we also creating a tools which is self assessing yourself whether you’re vulnerable or not on the Internet, you can open pakemdiri.safenet.or.id.

Most of these materials are in Indonesia, but I think it’s easy, we can do it localisation and then we adapt it to other languages as well. But at least the idea that try to provide this information is a start about delivering the Media Information Literacy as a part of information society. Sorry if I’m promoting too much during this session, but I hope that all of these materials and also my opinions regarding situation that happened in Southeast Asia will give you perspective on what is going on.

Yes, definitely. Thank you so much. We would actually like you to promote all of these things because you’re doing very important work and we believe that our listeners will find all of these links valuable. I think we’ll also put them in the show notes later in the release of this podcast. But thank you so much, Mas Damar, for this very interesting conversation.


That wraps up our discussion with Damar Juniarto. Damar has mentioned lots of things that us listeners can access for our own protection, as well as to share to everyone in our networks who might benefit from it. I’ll repeat them here.

You can also find all of these links in our show notes at newnaratif.com.

My name is Bonnibel Rambatan, and this has been Southeast Asia Dispatches. Brought to you by New Naratif, and produced by Dania Joedo. I’ll see you around.

Back to top arrow
Bookmark (0)
ClosePlease login

Related Articles


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 100 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here