By Dr Azian Muhamad Adzmi

Malaysia’s rise in the World Press Freedom Index is a positive signal, but digital misinformation and fragile public trust may still undermine its democratic media aspirations.

In a noteworthy leap forward, Malaysia has jumped 19 places in the 2025 World Press Freedom Index, landing at 88th globally. For a country often caught in the paradox of political reform and media repression, this progress is significant, if not historic.

The driving forces behind this ascent are twofold: the establishment of the Malaysian Media Council (MMC) and the recent amendments to the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998.

While these structural changes are praiseworthy, the real test lies ahead – in a digital ecosystem where misinformation festers, trust in journalism is fragile, and media freedom can be both weaponised and undermined by the very platforms meant to democratise discourse.

From the perspective of media and communication scholarship, Malaysia’s institutional reform is a case study in media democratisation under hybrid regimes - those navigating between state control and liberalisation.

It reflects both normative aspirations and regulatory experimentation, but the question lingers: can structural reform alone inoculate the Malaysian public sphere against the contagion of digital disinformation?

Institutional Legitimacy: A Good Start

The creation of the Malaysian Media Council, a long-awaited independent body for media self-regulation, is a key development. The council is expected to uphold journalistic integrity, mediate public complaints, and act as a safeguard against undue political interference.

In theory, this moves Malaysia closer to what Jurgen Habermas termed the “ideal speech situation”, where discourse is free from domination, and communicative rationality prevails.

Moreover, the legal redefinition of false information to exclude satire, parody and clear fiction represents a crucial safeguard for creative and critical expression. This change directly addresses the long-standing criticisms from both domestic and international observers regarding Malaysia’s vague and overly punitive legal framework for online speech.

By drawing clearer lines, the state sends a signal that not all dissent is disinformation, and not all critique is criminal.

Yet, institutional legitimacy does not automatically translate into public trust. For Malaysians, decades of state-centric media regulation have embedded a culture of cautious communication.

Therefore, while these reforms are a step in the right direction, their impact depends heavily on how they are operationalised – and perceived.

Trust in Journalism: Still Fragile

Globally, trust in journalism is at a low ebb, and Malaysia is no exception. Years of politicised reporting, media conglomeration and ownership opacity have compromised journalistic credibility.

A 2024 survey by the Center for Media Integrity Southeast Asia found that only 43 per cent of Malaysians trusted mainstream news outlets “most of the time”, with higher trust reserved for international media platforms – often at the expense of contextual understanding.

This erosion of trust has created a vacuum eagerly filled by influencers, pseudo-journalists, and algorithmically amplified conspiracy theorists.

Media reform, if it is to be meaningful, must not only liberalise structures but also actively rebuild the credibility of professional journalism. The MMC can play a vital role here, but only if it is sufficiently resourced, politically insulated, and transparently governed.

The Digital Challenge: Misinformation’s Long Shadow

Despite progress in governance, Malaysia’s media environment continues to be inundated by misinformation, particularly on social media platforms where virality trumps veracity.

The RSF report acknowledges that Malaysia, like many other democracies in transition, is grappling with "infodemic" – the explosion of false or misleading content that undermines public discourse and institutional legitimacy.

The recent amendments to the Communications and Multimedia Act, though promising, still face implementation challenges. The act’s selective enforcement in the past – often targeting opposition voices, journalists or civil society critics – has left a residue of suspicion.

If the government is serious about reform, it must ensure consistent, impartial enforcement that does not weaponise misinformation laws to suppress dissent.

Moreover, regulatory focus must expand beyond legacy media to include the algorithmic biases of social media platforms. While the MMC addresses professional media ethics, who will regulate TikTok influencers spreading political propaganda or WhatsApp chains promoting medical falsehoods?

Without a digital literacy campaign of scale – starting in schools and extending to older demographics – Malaysia risks strengthening the "freedom" of media without the "responsibility" of consumption.

A Regional Context: Learning from Neighbours

Malaysia's new ranking places it second in Southeast Asia, behind Thailand. But the region remains fragmented in its commitment to press freedom. Cambodia and Myanmar continue to suppress independent media, while Singapore maintains tight regulatory control.

This mixed regional performance suggests that Malaysia’s progress, though commendable, must be contextualised.

For instance, Indonesia’s early experiments with media councils and cyber laws offer both inspiration and caution. While decentralisation allowed for media plurality, it also produced regulatory inconsistency and politicised enforcement.

Malaysia must learn from such examples to avoid reform fatigue – a condition where initial gains are lost due to institutional inertia or political pushback.

Moving Forward: Recommendations for Sustainable Reform

1. Embed Media Literacy in National Curriculum

Media reform must be complemented by audience empowerment. Without equipping the public to critically engage with information, even the most independent media institutions will be drowned out by misinformation and apathy.

2. Strengthen the Malaysian Media Council’s Mandate

The MMC must be more than symbolic. It needs budgetary independence, a diverse leadership board, and enforcement powers that can act against breaches in ethical journalism – including politically motivated media spin.

3. Establish a Digital Ethics Commission

To regulate online platforms and influencer content, a multi-stakeholder commission including tech companies, media scholars and civil society can ensure transparent algorithmic accountability and data governance.

4. Protect Whistleblowers and Investigative Journalism

Legislation to protect whistleblowers and ensure access to information will encourage investigative journalism and restore public faith in the media as a watchdog, not a mouthpiece.

5. Conduct Periodic Media Impact Assessments

Beyond rankings, Malaysia should conduct internal assessments of media freedom and public trust, incorporating qualitative indicators that reflect the lived realities of journalists and audiences alike.

Hope, with Caution

Malaysia's climb in the World Press Freedom Index deserves applause – but not complacency. Structural reforms, while foundational, are only part of the equation. In an era of deepfakes, data breaches, and digitally curated realities, media freedom must be resilient, adaptive, and grounded in public trust.

The Malaysian Media Council and legal reforms are encouraging signs of progress, but the road ahead demands vigilance, political will and an informed citizenry.

Freedom of the press is not merely the freedom to publish – it is the freedom to question, to critique, and to hold power to account. Whether Malaysia can protect and deepen this freedom in the digital age remains the ultimate test of its democratic maturity.

-- BERNAMA