Rehman Rashid's perspective of press freedom is close to reality not only in Malaysia but anywhere in the world. The extent of which a particular medium is free more often than not depends on its owner or owners.

On the other hand, YiJin Woo's perspective that journalists in a particular medium (newspaper, TV, radio etc.) must be free to say anything they want even if it works against the owner's or owners' interests is the journalistic ideal but is rarely the case in reality.

In a recent online debate with someone in Britain, I argued that ownership is the main factor restricting what can and cannot be published even in a country with relatively little government control of the media, such as Britain.

He countered that while what I said was indeed true, almost anyone in Britain can start a publication to express whatever view they want, even though each particular medium would most likely not express views that adversely effected the owners.

Indeed he's correct since I saw exactly the same thing regarding media freedom in Britain when I was a student there in the 70s.

One doesn't really have to look all the way to Britain to see proof of my point. For instance, The Star , Nanyang Siang Pau and China Press and other press have been subject to the same government controls both before and after the MCA-linked company Huaren Holdings acquired two Chinese language papers.

In fact, the main objection to their acquisition was based on the fear that through their ownership by an MCA-linked company, the two Chinese dailies would lose the editorial 'independence' they hitherto enjoyed.

Also during the last general elections, The Sun gave space to Barisan Nasional as well as opposition parties and the government did not come down on it. However, I wouldn't expect The Sun to publish anything critical of its owner, Vincent Tan, nor of any of his businesses interests.

Likewise, I'd hardly expect Harakah to say anything complimentary about the Barisan Nasional, as I wouldn't expect a Barisan Nasional publication to say anything good about PAS.

As for journalists speaking up in defense of the public; well that's entirely up to the respective medium. If its mission was to speak up and defend the public, it most likely would.

Being a journalist myself, I'd say that Rehman is right in saying that journalists are technical reporters. This is especially so in the case of news reporting, though perhaps not so at all in their commentaries and editorials.

Quite often a company claims something favourable about itself and in the absence of credible information to the contrary, there's very little I have to go on to counter the claim, so I'd write 'Company X claimed ... ' and let the readers decide.

As for whether there are more publications now than 15 to 20 years ago; well, one can buy a copy of Harakah or any of the other political parties' organs on the street. Twenty years ago, we could not legally buy publications like Aliran , Nadi Insan as we can today.

As for online publications, they are folding up due to lack of funds or public support and not due to government legislation.

On the contrary, the government has allowed - through the Multimedia Super Corridor's 10 Point Bill of Guarantees - the continued, open existence of online publications.

So while the media could be freer in Malaysia, it's incorrect to say that we don't have press freedom at all.