Exclusive, Chairman of the Digital Commission of the Press Council Dahlan Dahi Emphasizes that Journalistic Works Must Have Economic Rights

In the era of rapid information technology, journalistic works have no economic rights. Everyone can use it as they like for free. Now, said the Chairman of the Digital and Sustainability Commission of the Press Council, Dahlan Dahi, a revision of the Copyright Law which regulates the economic rights of journalistic works has been carried out. This is important, because journalistic works must have economic rights.

***

"The results of your work (the press) are taken by technology companies for free. This is not a healthy model, not only for press and public companies, but also for platforms. Imagine technology platforms such as artificial intelligence, search engines, social media getting a free supply of news but then can make money," he said.

Meanwhile, the press company can only scratch their heads watching everything. Data in 2024, said Dahlan, 80% of advertising is controlled by technology platforms that do not have content because he is not a content company, which does not produce news because he is not the press. "There are three big players who control 80% of the advertising market in Indonesia. Meanwhile, the press company has more than 50 thousand competing for a cake that is only 20%," he said sadly.

That is why, continued Dahlan Dahi, this situation must be changed. Changes have been made when the government formed the Digital Platform Corporate Responsibility Committee to Support Quality Journalism (KTP2JB) or Publisher Rights. However, the strength of this institution does not exist because of its nature, it is only an appeal to global technology platforms.

Through the revision of the Copyright Law, global technology platforms are required to pay royalties for every content they use. "This revision of the law changes the game from an appeal to an obligation. More assertive. Because this is an economic right. Anyone who uses journalistic works must have a license. And anyone who gets a license must pay royalties," he said to Edy Suherli, Bambang Eros, and Irfan Meidianto from VOI who met him at the Tribunnews office, South Palmerah, Jakarta, June 17, 2026.

Here are the corrections to your interview transcript. Some non-standard words and typos have been corrected, foreign terms are italicized, and sentence structure is simplified to flow as a professional interview text without changing the speaker's speech style.

Results of Manuscript Improvement

Bang Dahlan, can you describe how far AI has actually penetrated and influenced the world of the press or journalism today?

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a powerful technology. Powerful in the sense that it not only retrieves, retrieves information that is already available on the internet, but has the ability to process that information, present it to its users, and also synthesize - mix information produced by humans with that produced by machines. Synthesized, so new things, new information are born.

Its adoption is around 700 million out of 8.3 billion population and this includes the fastest adopted technology. Of course the impact on humanity, organizations, and information will be huge. Not only for journalists and the press, but in a wider field than that.

For the press itself, how big is the influence?

Okay, let's see journalistic work as a job of finding, processing, and distributing information. In these three levels, artificial intelligence can help. Helping find information, process it, and he also helps distribute information. We are talking in the area of productivity. How a journalist who used to do an hour-long interview takes three hours to translate (translate). Now with artificial intelligence we only need five minutes, not three hours. How do we process images, how do we process videos, so I think this is a very powerful technology. And we are also waiting for what kind of journalistic products can be helped by artificial intelligence that already exists now, such as recommendation engines, personalization, and others.

So it's very helpful. It's just on the press company side, this is very challenging. Because what happens is the distribution of information produced by the press company is not only now in search engines or on social media, but also in the AI generative interface. When the information or news produced by the press company is presented in the search engine, we still see there is traffic sent by the search engine to the original page (the original page), so it's like a landing page, so the press company still has business there. Then if it is presented on social media in the form of a feed, the press company still has a distribution channel, helped to reach its audience through social media. This is still okay, in the sense that these technology platforms take news from journalists, present it to their users, but still send traffic back.

"So far, it looks like a win-win solution, right?

This model has been going on since 1998 and the result is at the end. In 2024, 80% of advertising is controlled by technology platforms that do not have content because he is not a content company, which does not produce news because he is not the press. There are three big players (players) controlling 80% of the advertising market in Indonesia. Meanwhile, the press company has more than 50 thousand competing for a cake that is only 20%.

Is that the issue here?

Yes, here is actually the point of the problem. Technology platforms in the form of search engines (search results) and technology platforms in the form of social media still send traffic to publishers. But this only leaves a 20% cake to be divided into more than 50 thousand press companies. Meanwhile, on the other side, three technology platform companies control 80%.

What is the impact?

Many press companies have laid off employees, while press companies that have not laid off employees are also financially stressed. So they don't have the ability to reinvest (reinvest) into journalism. If you can't reinvest in journalists, the quality of journalists becomes not good and what we give to the public is also information that is not qualified, not verified (verified), not independent, and so on.

Well, generative artificial intelligence or AI is more ruthless than this. Because he processes and presents news produced by the press, produced by journalists, but now he doesn't send traffic. And this is called the zero click phenomenon.

The impact is that if we assume that the source of press traffic on their websites is 80% from social media and search (search), that means if all that traffic runs to generative AI, then the size of the audience of the press company today is actually only 20%.

Imagine with the emergence of generative AI, website traffic has already dropped by 50-60% today, some are even worse, it could be up to 70%. But this is not over, it will still go down again and it should be around 20% of its current size. That is, the press company is finished according to me. This is a very dangerous situation because they produce news, finance journalists - I see that there are almost 100 journalists. How to finance more than 100 journalists and their non-journalist staff to produce and distribute news, but they get nothing from it.

Very sad for the press company?

Yes, so you can't finance journalistic work. Well, the results of your work (press) are taken by technology companies for free. I think this is not a healthy model, not only for press and public companies, but also for platforms. Imagine technology platforms such as artificial intelligence, search engines, and social media getting a free supply of news but then being able to make money.

Not only that, the news supplied by the press company can become unqualified because it does not have the ability to finance its journalists, it does not have the ability to produce high quality journalism. So, the news that is not qualified will become the raw material for generative AI, and generative AI will process the news that is not qualified for the public.

Who is harmed? The public too. So we need to think about how to build a healthy ecosystem, which is useful for the public, and useful for its players, namely the press company and technology platforms.

Among the many AI platforms that exist today, which ones have been targeted by the Press Council to be invited to cooperate?

"We certainly don't target that, yes. But if we look at the global market, there are 4-5 players that are now an issue. Because the issue of artificial intelligence, generative AI, and its impact on the press, its impact on the public. This is not just an Indonesian issue, it is also a worldwide issue. So I think it is worth it for us to continue to update (update) developments from outside and also we build alliances with friends in South Africa, Latin America, Australia, Europe, and Asia itself. Because in time we face the same problem and we share resources (resources), share manpower for how we overcome this problem together for quality information for the public. That's the most important thing.

So this is what underlies the Press Council to move. How far has this movement gone?

"The problem we are seeing now is actually not just a problem of journalists, not just a problem of quality information, not just a problem of the platform, not just a problem of the press company. This is actually an ecosystem problem. In the ecosystem there are rules of the game that regulate the dynamics in this ecosystem. One of the most crucial rules of the game is that journalistic works do not have economic rights.

Well, that's what makes all companies, all institutions, all people able to mine (mining), can take this news that he did not produce, but is not protected by a license. So anyone can take it. It's like Europeans came to Africa in the 15th century and they found gold. And there were no rules that this could or could not be taken. Well, today the news is like that. Everyone can take it. If the gold is God's gift there it is. But the news is not. It must be created, it must be corrected (correct) one by one. It must be hammered before it is published (published). It's a business, it's a process. And it's not free. But by the platform, it's free. Well, I think that's why we have to think about how this journalistic work can be placed as something that has economic rights.

Is this something new? No. America has had copyrights for decades. Europe has them too. Everyone protects their copyrights. Like how they protect music (music) and movies (movies). But Indonesia doesn't have any rules.

"So the state must be present, right, Bang?

Yes, to create regulations so that this ecosystem is healthier. And we see the momentum when the government through the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and the DPR is formulating a revision of the copyright law. So the entrance is through the revision of the copyright law.

Previously, the government had regulated this through publisher rights. How do you think it will be implemented?

The idea of publisher rights is actually the same. How the platform is responsible to the publisher so that a healthier ecosystem can occur. But this does not have a legal imperative, it is not legally mandatory. This revision of the law changes the game from an appeal to an obligation. More assertive. Because this is an economic right. Whoever uses journalistic works must have a license. And whoever gets the license must pay royalties.

If it's publisher rights, KTP2DJB only manages appeals. So it's a little difficult. And what we've seen, friends at KTP2DJB work very hard but it's not effective enough to force platforms. I think this revision of the copyright law makes the level of regulation different. It's more specific: copyright.

Previously there was an ART (ASEAN Trade Agreement/Rules related) between Indonesia and America. One of the clauses is that they can take our content without paying. How do you see it?

In ART in article 3.3 actually asks the Indonesian government to refrain from forcing platforms to fulfill their obligations in accordance with publisher rights. Kayak data aggregation, revenue share, it is prohibited according to ART. But it's a paradox. Because the publisher rights alone do not apply effectively, now the Indonesian government has made an agreement with the American government to say, "Yes, this should not be enforced." And I am happy that the Indonesian government emphasized that as far as ART is contrary to applicable laws, yes it does not apply. Hopefully it can be consistently done.

But this copyright is a different topic. Because the copyright is not based on this cooperation, but the basis is the copyright to journalistic works. As well as other works: music, film, photography, all have copyrights. So actually the revision of the copyright law confirms the copyright on works that have previously been protected. Well, journalistic works in the form of text, this is what previously did not seem to have copyright. This revision tells that including text has its rights.

"Now where is this development of this revision?

The Press Council is not a major player in this context. In the sense that the Press Council is not the party that formulates, not the party that brings this to the DPR, debates in the DPR, and decides. The position of the Press Council is to escort the articles related to journalistic work. And we thank the Ministry of Law that they put the Press Council as a gateway to get the opinion of the press, and the Press Council has also submitted its proposals to the Ministry of Law.

How far is the progress now?

As far as I know, the Ministry of Law is finalizing this, listening to input from various parties, as well as input from friends of the platform, because this law is also important for them. In the DPR it has also been discussed and hopefully this June there will be a finalization.

"Because the DPR must be escorted, what if they forget later?"

Oh yes, I think everyone should monitor this, because the ultimate goal of this law is for the public. Then the press community and platforms, I think they are also interested in this rule so that how this regulation can be useful. Basically strengthen everything so that the press ecosystem becomes stronger.

Learning from the experiences that have occurred in other countries in resolving disputes between the press and AI platforms, what can we apply to Indonesia?

The United States, where the technology companies are based, they focus on B2B (Business-to-Business). The concept is the same, that the work of the journalist is not free, you have to compensate. But the settlement scheme is B2B. If there is no deal (deal), they go to court. And both cases (cases) are there; there are those who have dealt with B2B with AI platforms, there are also those who have cases in court like The New York Times. In Europe, yes as far as I read, they also adopt the B2B method. But also adopt the method of some companies gathering to negotiate with the platform. But the most important thing in Europe is that the law says that this journalistic work is not free and you have to pay a license. That's the foundation. In Australia it's similar to Europe.

The proposal from the Ministry of Law now is an association: LMK (Collective Management Institution) one door. That's why the Press Council proposes that it shouldn't be one door, it's better to use the hybrid method. Open space for B2B. But for small companies that may not have a legal division, leave the work to LMK. LMK who defends it and charges whoever and wherever uses his journalistic work. LMK ideally has a monitoring system, so it can tell the press company, "Oh, this is your work used here, you can get royalties."

Now how can press organizations such as PWI, AJI, IJTI, and so on be involved in this?

"I see the position of the Press Council as a facilitator in situations like this. When, for example, the rules say that this must have an LMK, the problem is how to form an LMK. And the Ministry of Law also asked the Press Council to help bridge this. We have asked for opinions from friends. The Press Council will gather its members to form an LMK. Like when the Press Council made KTP2DJB, the method was the same.

"This AI is a robot, how can humans find a gap to compete?"

There are two approaches to answering this question. The first is about the impact of AI on the workforce. The second is the ethical issue. In terms of ethics, AI does not have the ability to be 100% correct. He can create deepfakes, distribute information that is like the truth but it is completely (completely) wrong.

There is a court in Germany that has sentenced one of the platform companies. The German court's ruling considers that the information presented by generative AI is synthetic. So it is not drawn directly from the source, but from the source it is processed, then new synthetic information is generated. Now the question is, who is responsible for this synthetic information? Publisher or platform? The German court decided: the platform. Coincidentally, this synthetic information falsely accused two companies of committing a crime. These two companies sued this platform, and the court upheld the lawsuit. Although the truth of AI can be 90%, there is still a 10% chance of being wrong. Not to mention the issue of bias, accuracy of numbers, ratios, all sorts of things. That's the ethical dilemma.

Now we're getting to work. I think what's interesting is how journalists adapt to the machine (Artificial Intelligence). AI is very powerful in collecting information from various sources, from media, social media, research results, and so on. He has that ability. Not only is he able to attract, retrieve all the information, he can process it to answer questions from his users (users). And he produces new information. AI can be asked, "What new news is happening right now?" He can answer that.

Well, what about journalists?

AI doesn't have eyes and ears without new data from the field. He can learn about student demonstrations from previous data. But once there are no reporters, he has no information about where the latest demo is. He can theorize, but basically (grounding-nya) it doesn't exist. Well, journalists will give AI eyes and ears so that it makes sense (make sense) to the actual reality. Journalists can produce something that AI can't do. Journalists who make information new.

So with this pattern, journalists don't have to worry about competing with AI?

No. Imagine in an ecosystem, for example in this room the players are tables, chairs, glasses, suddenly a new instrument comes that happens to be powerful. That's AI. Of course we can't say that I don't care, can't. What we need to do is understand this tool, then we adapt. Well, this is important to help our work become more productive. We can't eliminate it because it has its uses. So the control remains with us.

With this explanation, what does the future of the press mean?

"I live in three generations. First, the newspaper/print media era. Second, the internet era: 1998 Google, 2004 Facebook, 2006 or 2007 Instagram, then there is YouTube 2006. And the third phase: November 2023 starting ChatGPT launched by OpenAI. Understand this technology and adapt. That's the formula. We can't fight it.

What is the message from the Press Council for perpetrators, both the press and AI managers, so that this industry continues?

What we are discussing is information. Information helps what is in our brain, in our consciousness. Information then influences us to choose who the presidential candidate is, who the regent candidate is, but information also influences us to buy what products or services. So powerful is information. Information shapes our collective consciousness.

"The information that we manage, which is produced by journalists including non-journalists, is information that also affects the intersubjective reality. That is why this information must be guarded. If this information is filled with hatred, this is dangerous for the community. It has been proven for centuries that rebellion is driven by information, riots are driven by information. So, this information is very crucial. When we talk about the integrity of information, this is no longer talking about the press, journalists, influencers, or platforms. This is about the public.

So how do we create a system that ensures that this information has integrity for the public, the nation, and the country, as well as for the next generation. All players - platforms, press companies, journalists, the public, regulators, the DPR, the government - must think about this together. Not for the press, but how the public can get information that has integrity. Because this information is what shapes all that is in the minds of all of us. We love this Republic, we respect the Red and White flag, we respect the heroes, we respect the rule of the game, ethics (ethics), it's all because of the information that is in our heads. And the press is one of the parts in this ecosystem that maintains and takes care of the information that is in the public. So it's very, very crucial.

Dahlan Dahi discovered the world of journalism after observing various professions around him. And after discovering the world of journalism, he has consistently played it until now for 32 years. For him, doing work in the world of journalism feels like channeling a hobby.

He found the world of journalism as a means to work since he was a student at Hasanuddin University (Unhas) Makassar. "When I entered Unhas, my first job was to find my identity. Who the hell am I? Because by finding that identity, we understand where it is going," he said.

At that time, continued Dahlan, it was the era of reform. "I found some interesting things. Many reform figures and fighters, they are inspiring and critical of the government. Just name Gus Dur, Cak Nur (Nurcholish Madjid), Amien Rais, and others," he said.

He also saw that there were musicians and artists who were critical of the government at that time. There was Rendra, Iwan Fals, and the Kantata Takwa group whose songs in Dahlan's view were very cool. "I thought, if I were a good artist, too," he recalled.

Then he tried to be active in the Unhas campus newspaper, Identitas. There he found the right profession. "I feel this is my world. And I consistently choose it. Even when there is a chance to be the chairman of the student association, I choose not to," he said.

After struggling in the campus press, there was an opportunity to become a correspondent for the Koran Surya (Kompas Gramedia Group) in Makassar. "I became more convinced when my friend encouraged me, 'If you want to be big, you have to move to a bigger pool. The reason is that in the old pool, you are a big fish in a small pool. When you enter Surya, you are a small fish, but in a big pool', "he said.

And being in a big media made Dahlan grow even more. "I was lucky to be able to enjoy all the pleasures that other journalists could enjoy. I could cover abroad, so I could go anywhere. I covered the Iraq war for three months. And I was one of the first to come to the Middle East. I moved around in Jordan, Baghdad, Egypt, around the Middle East," he recalled.

After the Iraq war and returning to Indonesia, he attended many trainings held by the Kompas Gramedia Group. "Among them are Supervisory Management, Marketing for Non-Marketing Managers, Finance for Non-Financial Managers, and others. There are many experiences and training given to me," said Dahlan who has been working as a journalist for 32 years.

For Dahlan Dahi, this work he plays is also a hobby, so he really enjoys it. "So, I feel like I'm not working, but I feel like I'm doing something I like. I really enjoy the work. If there are other activities, I'll meet friends while drinking coffee," he said.

For the sport he does is jogging once a week. "I jog once a week," he continued.

Another activity he likes is gardening in the yard. "I like plants. In front of the house there is a small garden, I take care of it and clean it up and then plant plants," said Dahlan.

He also likes to go to the mountains if he has time. "I'm not a serious mountain climber, just for fun. Mount Salak and Mount Gede are the ones I've climbed. By climbing mountains we find balance. Between seeing mountains, forests, hearing the sound of water, the sound of birds in nature, it's so fresh. That's balance. After that I get refreshed," he said.

Because he is aware that he is no longer young, Dahlan maintains his food intake. "Food can make us healthier, or vice versa. It can get cholesterol, sugar, so the intake must be maintained. So you have to be smart to choose the right one," said this chicken noodle lover.

The key, said Dahlan Dahi, is not to overdo it and eat properly. And until now he can still enjoy his favorite foods.

"In 2024, 80% of advertising is controlled by technology platforms that do not have content because he is not a content company, which does not produce news because he is not the press. While there are more than 50 thousand press companies competing for a cake that is only 20%,"

Dahlan Dahi