Broadcast Bill

The sources primarily concern the ongoing, contentious revision of Indonesia's Broadcasting Law (RUU Penyiaran), which aims to regulate digital platforms like TikTok, YouTube, and Meta to create a level playing field with conventional media. A major point of debate involves the proposal to grant the Ministry of Communication and Digital (Komdigi) and the Indonesian Broadcasting Commission (KPI) the authority to access and regulate the content recommendation algorithms of these platforms to combat harmful content, promote local culture, and ensure economic contribution. However, platforms like TikTok reject being governed by the RUU Penyiaran, arguing that their user-generated content (UGC) model fundamentally differs from traditional broadcasting and should be regulated separately under existing digital laws. The parliamentary discussions also stress the urgency of the revision to address declining revenues in national media, protect minors from unregulated live streaming content, and redefine the meaning of "broadcasting" in the digital age while also reassuring the public that the new law will not restrict press freedom or criminalize investigative journalism.

The Digital Frontier: Why Indonesia's New Broadcasting Bill Has TikTok and Tech Giants on Edge

The digital media landscape in Indonesia is undergoing a massive transformation, forcing a long-overdue legislative reckoning. The revision of the Broadcasting Law (RUU Penyiaran) has become a focal point of intense debate, pitting national legislators against global digital powerhouses like TikTok, Meta, and YouTube. This RUU, deemed crucial for navigating the digital age, aims to create a level playing field while safeguarding national interests and the public sphere.

Here is a 5W1H analysis of the crucial discussions currently unfolding in Senayan.

1. What: The Core Legislative Issues

The central focus is the Rancangan Undang-Undang (RUU) tentang Perubahan Ketiga atas Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2002 tentang Penyiaran. Legislators argue this revision is urgently needed to address the drastic shift in the national broadcasting landscape caused by the dominance of digital platforms.

Key proposed provisions sparking debate include:

• Algorithm Transparency: Explicitly proposing that the Ministry of Communication and Digital (Komdigi) and the Indonesian Broadcasting Commission (KPI) be granted the authority to access the digital content recommendation systems (algorithms) used by platforms like YouTube, Meta, and TikTok.

• Prohibition of "Second Accounts": A controversial proposal to ban the creation of multiple or fake accounts (second accounts) for individuals, companies, and institutions on social media.

• Protection of Local Content and Economy: Ensuring global digital platforms guarantee the sustainability of the local creator economy, preventing Indonesia from becoming merely an "etalase konten global" (global content showcase).

2. Who: The Actors in the Debate

The Proponents of Regulation (DPR/Government): Members of Komisi I DPR RI, including Amelia Anggraini, Oleh Soleh, and Dave Laksono, are driving the RUU. They assert the law must be both adaptif (adaptive) to technology and protektif (protective) of the national media ecosystem.

The Digital Platforms (TikTok, Meta, YouTube): Platform representatives, notably Hilmi Adrianto, Head of Public Policy and Government Relations TikTok Indonesia, strongly object to being regulated under the same law as conventional broadcasters. TikTok argues it is a User Generated Content (UGC) platform, fundamentally different from conventional media. They recommend that UGC platforms be regulated separately, preferably under the existing moderation framework overseen by the Ministry of Communication and Digital (Komdigi).

Industry and Press Organizations: Conventional media industries, represented by organizations like PWI, AJI, and ATVSI, support the revision to establish regulatory equality, noting that the current imbalance has led to declining revenues and mass layoffs (PHK). Conversely, experts and press groups stress that the RUU must not become a vehicle for restricting press freedom or criminalizing investigative journalism.

3. When & Where: Key Discussions

The discussion of the RUU Penyiaran is urgent, having been pending since 2012 and currently included in the Program Legislasi Nasional (Prolegnas) Prioritas 2025.

Critical meetings took place in the Kompleks Parlemen Senayan, Jakarta. On July 15, 2025, Komisi I held a Rapat Dengar Pendapat Umum (RDPU) with Google/YouTube, Meta, and TikTok to gather input and address the regulatory differences.

4. Why: Driving the Urgency

The main impetus for the RUU revision is the massive disruption caused by digital platforms, creating an imbalance in the media ecosystem.

• Protecting Youth and Public Integrity: Legislators highlight the urgent need to protect the younger generation from uncontrolled digital content, pointing to unmonitored live streaming that features vulgarity, harsh language, or inappropriate behavior, unlike heavily censored conventional TV.

• Combating Misuse of Accounts: The proposal to ban "second accounts" is motivated by concerns over the widespread misuse of fake accounts for spreading hoaxes, manipulating public opinion, and promoting "buzzers" who undermine qualified content creators.

• Ensuring Financial Accountability: DPR members have questioned the economic contribution and tax payments of global platforms operating in Indonesia, demanding transparency on their high revenues generated from local traffic.

• The "Equal Playing Field": Conventional media faces high operational costs, strict regulations (like P3SPS), and tight KPI supervision, while digital platforms operate with much looser oversight, giving them a significant market advantage.

5. How: Proposed Solutions and Conflicts

The biggest conflict remains how to regulate digital platforms:

• DPR's Unified Approach (Urgency First): Some members of the DPR, such as Amelia Anggraini, argue that due to the urgency of the regulatory needs, digital content should temporarily be included in the RUU Penyiaran. They claim that anything "published" or "broadcast" falls under the definition of penyiaran, regardless of the transmission method (internet vs. transmission tower).

• TikTok's Separation Argument (Species Difference): Hilmi Adrianto of TikTok and various academics argue that digital platforms (UGC/OTT) are fundamentally "two different species" compared to conventional broadcasting. Applying a "one-size-fits-all" approach would create legal uncertainty because the creation process, business model, and content moderation framework are distinct.

• International Models: DPR members propose adopting approaches from countries like Canada, France, Singapore, and Turkey, which have implemented strong digital oversight, including mandatory registration and the obligation to open algorithms for auditing.

Ultimately, the RUU Penyiaran is designed to be adaptive. Whether this adaptation means integrating digital platforms into the existing law or creating entirely separate digital regulations remains the key political challenge that the DPR aims to resolve quickly.