Xu Xiaoge
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

INTRODUCTION

Asian perspectives in communication have been sought by policy-makers, media practitioners, and academics over the years. The results of the search have been recorded largely in the proceedings of the major regional conferences or seminars although some of them have been published in books. Few studies, however, have been conducted to examine the search for Asian perspectives in communication. This paper is designed to fill out this gap. Specifically, this paper addresses the following two research questions: How has the search evolved? What has driven the Asian search for its own perspectives in communication? To address these questions, this study reviewed and interprets the proceedings of these conferences or seminars. The assessment of the search for Asian perspectives in communication proceeds with a chronological account of these conferences or seminars followed by observations, discussion and interpretation. The search for Asian perspectives in communication under study refers to the one carried by the regional efforts only as recorded in the proceedings of the major regional conferences or seminars. Therefore, the national conferences or seminars searching for national perspectives in communication are excluded except those presented at the regional conferences or seminars.

A search of the literature has located eight major conferences held by Asian Media, Information and Communication Centre (AMIC) since 1985 (see Endnote 1). These conferences represent the major efforts in searching for Asian perspectives in communication Asia as they deal with Asian perspectives in communication in general, the press systems, press freedom and professional standards, Asian values in journalism, and the prospects of Asian communication.

The search for Asian perspectives in communication can be divided into two parts: the search for Asian perspectives in communication (from 1985 through 1993) and the debate about Asian values in journalism (since 1994). The first part deals with Asian perspectives in communication in general, the press systems in two major sub-regions: the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), and communication ethics in South Asian countries. The second part involves mainly the debate about Asian values in journalism, press freedom and professional standards and the trends and strategies of Asian communication in the future. The following is the historical account of these major efforts.

The regional efforts in searching for Asian perspectives in communication can be traced back to the symposium jointly held by AMIC and the Faculty of Journalism and Mass Communication, Thammasat University in Bangkok in October 1985. Known as "Communication Theory: The Asian Perspective," the symposium brought together 20 participants from Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and USA. At the three-day symposium, 10 papers were presented to explore Asian perspectives on communication theory, such as Chinese, Islamic, Japanese, Indian perspectives and ways to indigenize Western communication theories to suit Asian cultures. Specific suggestions were also made at the symposium concerning the use of the characteristics of particular Asian cultures in reconsidering the assumptions and hypotheses of the established communication theories. Moreover, the role of religion and power politics in communication processes and behavior in Asia were also examined and expounded. The symposium marked the beginning of the regional efforts to search for Asian identities in communication.

The results of the Bangkok Symposium were published in a book entitled "Communication Theory: The Asian Perspective." The Symposium and the publication of its proceedings have laid a solid foundation as well as paved the way for further search of Asian perspectives in communication. It has played a pioneering role in searching for Asian models or theories of communication. It also has set the framework for the subsequent conferences or seminars. The framework can be summarized as the following: Asia should test further the applicability of Western communication theories in the Asian contexts as well as the validity of emerging Asian communication models or theories. One of the ways to accomplish this task is to modify and adapt the parameters of Western communication theories to the various local conditions and situations in Asia.

Three years after the 1985 Bangkok Symposium, another major conference entitled "Consultation on Press System in ASEAN" was held in Jakarta during August 23-16, 1988. It was co-organized by AMIC and Directorate General for Press Development and Graphics, Department of Information, Republic of Indonesia. Among the 15 participants, three each came from Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Indonesia. Out of the three participants from each ASEAN state, one represents the media, another represents the academic community, and the third represents the government. Although no participants from Brunei, a paper outlining the press system of the country was available to the participants. In addition to the 15 participants from five ASEAN States, there were two AMIC representatives and other observers.

The conference examined the press systems of ASEAN states, covering the historical events that shaped the country’s press system; the legal and philosophical tenets of the press system; the role of the press in society; access to and ownership of the media; media regulatory mechanisms; restrictions on the media and their legal and philosophical foundations; and the distinctiveness of the press system compared to other press systems (Mehra, 1988).

The Jakarta Consultation was followed by another regional consultation on the press systems in the states of the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) held in Kathmandu, Nepal in April 1991. Twenty three participants from seven SAARC member states attended the consultation. They include ministry secretaries of communication/information, editors, senior journalists, media researchers, and academics.

Following the Jakarta Consultation, the Kathmandu Consultation worked out a set of philosophical and legal tenets for the press systems of SAARC states. The Consultation re-examined the role and responsibility of the press in Asia, vis-à-vis Asian contexts and not against the usual Western models and standards of the press (Menon, 1991). Since the press is conditioned by the environment in which it operates, different levels of economic development and different cultural milieus of the SAARC states necessarily influenced the perceptions of press freedom and how the press should operate in a given country.

During the period 1985-1991, three major conferences were held to explore and examine the communication perspectives and the press systems. However, they did not deal with communication ethics. This missing link was remedied by the Seminar on Communication Ethics held during November 9-12, 1993 in Colombo, Sri Lanka, 1993. The seminar "Communication Ethics from a South Asian Perspective" was co-organized by AMIC and the World Association for Christian Communication (WACC) with the support of the Freidrich Ebert Stiftung. The seminar brought together 20 senior editors, journalists, scholars and communication professionals. The seminar program included panel discussions and case studies of experiences from India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Nepal.

Bearing in mind that values based on Western communication theories could not be automatically applied to Asia, the seminar re-examined Western theories and practices in the light of Asian cultures and traditions (Menon, 1993). The seminar also examined the unique conditions in South Asia that may inhibit some ethical practices and explored the particularities of the social, political and cultural context of communication ethics in South Asia.

The seminar discussed the following topics: communication ethics, media practitioners and institutions, environmental and cultural factors affecting media ethics, the influence of policies and government on ethical media practice, ethical standards, the role of the press councils and journalists’ unions, and the communication environment and the teaching of media ethics. Although no consensus was reached over these issues, the seminar sharpened awareness and understanding of issues related to media ethics and social responsibility in the South Asian region. It also widened awareness and understanding of the social, economic, political, cultural and other environmental factors that encourage or inhibit ethical and socially responsible media practice.

The search for Asian perspectives in communication switched to the discussion of the relationship between Asian values and the press since the 1994 Hong Kong Asian Press Forum. As both a cultural and political concept, Asian values can be historically traced back to the mid-1970s when academic efforts were made in exploring the relationship between the fast Asian economic development and the Asian cultural values. The concept has been debated largely in the areas of human rights, democracy, freedom of expression, and the relationship between cultural values and development. The concept of Asian values was not debated in journalism until the 1994 Hong Kong Asian Press Forum, The forum, held during December 1-3, 1994, brought 38 leading journalists, publishers, academics and researchers from across the Asia-Pacific area together in Hong Kong to discuss the topics of Asian values and the role of media in society. It was sponsored by the Freedom Forum Asian Center in Hong Kong in collaboration with the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Hong Kong. Attended by more than 100 people, the forum was dominated by Western media and the region’s English language press. The others, notably the Chinese language press, was under-represented, according to the observations of the Hong Kong correspondent of The Straits Times Mary Kwang (The Straits Times, 1994).

The Forum marked the beginning of the debate that specifically discussed Asian values in relation to the role of media in society. The conference was devoted to the discussion and examination of whether there exists an "Asian model" of journalism that could be said to reflect Asian values as espoused increasingly by leaders of some Asian nations, notably Singapore and Malaysia (Schidlovsky, 1996). Specifically, the conference addressed the following questions: What are Asian values? Does the Asian press cover Asia differently than does the Western press? Is good Asian news coverage different in character than good Western news coverage? Are there common characteristics of Asian society that should be, or can be, reflected by Asian media? What is the role of the media in society? (Schidlovsky, 1996). Answers to these questions differ among the participants. Despite the differences over the concept Asian values in relation to the role of the media in society, the participants seemed to agree on the need to display cultural sensitivity when reporting from other Asian countries. They also agreed on the need for journalists to immerse themselves in the language and culture of countries from which they were reporting (South China Morning Post, 1994).

The Asian Press Forum concluded without a statement on Asian values, but it marked the beginning of the debate on Asian values in journalism. It kindled a debate about whether Asian values exist in journalism or whether there is an Asian model of journalism, which reflects Asian values.

The concept of Asian values was not fully examined and debated until the 1995 Kuala Lumpur Seminar. In response to the 1994 Hong Kong Asian Press Forum, AMIC organized a seminar in August 1995 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. This seminar was devoted specifically to discussion on "Asian Values in Journalism." It was held, in the words of Vijay Menon, AMIC Secretary-General, to "provide a corrective" to an imbalance addressed by Malaysia’s former Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim at the 1994 Hong Kong conference. In his statement, Anwar said: "We have entered a more meaningful state of engagement between Asia and the West through the current debate on Asian values. Ironically, the debate seems to be more actively pursued in the Western international press than in the Asian national media" (Menon, 1996, p. vii).

At the seminar, over 50 journalism practitioners, policy makers and educators from 14 countries debated about the subject of Asian values in journalism, "which is of interest to all thinking journalists, far beyond Asia" and the conference "give[s] ample evidence that there is no consensus within Asia, nor perhaps in any region within the world’s largest continent, about what Asian values are, in journalism or in anything else" (Masterton, 1996, p. 1). The seminar was designed to discuss the concept Asian values in journalism, to increase awareness and understanding of issues related to value formation in Asian journalism, to identify emerging media trends and developments and their impact on media values in Asia, to compare Asian and Western journalism values, and to develop actionable recommendations on key issues identified during the seminar.

The seminar held six sessions, dealing with "Asian Values in Journalism: Is There Such a Thing?" "Social and Cultural Influences on Journalism Values in Asia," "Influences of Politics and Policies on Journalism Values in Asia," "Changing Asian Media Environment and Its Impact on Journalism Values," "Value Formulation in Journalism Education in Asia," "Asian Values in Journalism: Idle Concept or Realistic Goal?" At these six sessions, 21 papers were presented to explore and examine Asian values in journalism. The participants were widely divided over the concept of Asian values and the existence of Asian values in journalism. Despite the wide disparity of views on Asian values, the media professionals "reached a broad agreement on the need to identify certain universal values which are rooted in the Asian context and to promote them in the professional sphere" (Masterton, 1996, p. 171).

After the 1995 Seminar on Asian values in journalism, the search switched to the specific areas of journalism: press freedom and professional standards at the 1996 Kuala Lumpur Conference. The conference brought together over 60 participants from 16 countries in the region and beyond to offer national perspectives on press freedom and professional standards. They also examined the role of media monitoring mechanisms and explored the impact of new multimedia on the press as well as the social and cultural factors affecting press freedom.

The seminar was designed to discuss the concept of press freedom in the Asian context, to examine the relationship between press freedom and professional standards, to identify emerging media trends and developments in Asia, and to develop actionable recommendations on key issues identified during the seminar. It was held in the context of "many Western proponents of pluralism seek to promote western-style press freedom in Asia," according to AMIC secretary-general Vijay Menon (quoted in AMIC Report, 1996).

The seminar held six sessions. The first session was on "Press Freedom: Asian Perspectives," the second on "The Role of Media Monitoring Mechanisms," the third on "Press Freedom and Professional Standards: The Role of Press Councils and Journalists’ Unions," the fourth on "Social and Cultural Factors Affecting Press Freedom," the fifth on "Press Freedom: Commonwealth Perspectives," and the sixth on "The New Multimedia Environment and Its Impact on the Press." (AMIC Report, 1996). The papers and discussions looked into the various national perspectives on press freedom and professional standards in Asia. The national perspectives on press freedom and professional standards expressed at the Seminar supported what veteran journalist T.J.S George said told the seminar in his keynote address. He said that the concepts of press freedom and professional standards are not universal and objective realities, but are relative to the social, political, economic and cultural backgrounds in each country (AMIC Report, 1996). Although these perspectives were nothing new, they did reinforce the contingency of press freedom and professional standards.

The 1996 Kuala Lumpur Seminar not only scrutinized press freedom and professional standards in major Asian countries but also came up two sets of recommendations to deal with the existing issues in these two areas.

After the 1996 Kuala Lumpur Seminar, the concept of Asian values in journalism was discussed in relation to the trends and strategies of Asian communication by some participants at the Singapore AMIC’s 25^th anniversary conference on Asian communications in the next 25 years. The 1996 Singapore Conference, entitled "Asian Communications: The Next Twenty-Five Years," was held in Singapore during June 1-3, 1996. Nearly 300 participants and speakers from 30 countries participated in the conference to explore the current trends and developments in Asian communications and what the future holds for Asian communication in the next 25 years (AMIC, 1996).

At the conference, the exploration of trends and strategies of Asian communication in the next 25 years also touched on the relationship between Asian values and communication as well as Asian ways to deal with the challenges of new technology on communication. Judging by the papers presented and the general tone of the conference, the AMIC 25^th anniversary conference can be regarded as a sign of confidence for Asian communication in the next 25 years. This confidence, however, was shattered to some extent by the Asian Economic Crisis occurred by the mid-1997.

The Asian Economic Crisis occurred first in Thailand in the mid-1997 and then spread to Indonesia, Malaysia, Japan, South Korea, and Hong Kong. The crisis not only has brought about an immense setback to the regional economy but also has driven the search of the causes for the Crisis. Among others, the lack of watchdog functions of the press and of transparency of Asian communication has been located as a major cause for the Crisis.

In response to the Asian Economic Crisis, governments in Asia countries have taken different approaches and measures as far as communication is concerned. While the press in Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines are striving for more freedom from the government control, the press in Myanmar, Vietnam, Malaysia, Laos, Singapore and Cambodia continue to operate under government constraint. These developments reflect different government policies and media philosophies as well as the conflicts between government and the press in terms of what the press should be and do in society.

A closer look at the search process and its historical moments has found that behind the search lies a major driving force, which can be a combination of economic success, cultural reassurance, political independence, and incompatibilities of Western communication theories with the Asian contexts. The explosive economic growth in Asia since the 1970s has grabbed the world attention and aroused its interest in Asia. The remarkable economic growth first in Japan, then in South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore; followed by Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines, and the coastal regions of China has enabled Asia to rise as a growing economic power and a confident and promising region in the world. The rapid economic development has been accompanied by democratization in South Korea, Japan, Thailand, and the Philippines. Parallel to the rapid economic development is also the rapid political reforms in China, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Malaysia. The political landscape in Asia has changed considerably over the years.

In response to the economic and political changes in the region is the reassertion of Asian cultures and values. The increasing prominent international presence of Asian cultures is among the crystal indications of the reassertion of Asian cultures and values. The other indications include Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir’s "Look East" policy the advocacy of Asian values by some Asian governments in debate about democracy, human rights and freedom of expression.

The concept of Asian values has extensively been used by Asian and Western politicians and academicians in the analysis of contemporary events and issues. According to the advocates of Asian values, the concept has been used as an icon of the efforts to reconcile their desire to maintain their distinctive local cultures with the overwhelming forces of globalization. The claimed Asian values include group orientation, filial piety, hard work, community or nation above individuals, more emphasis on duties than on rights, more emphasis on responsibility than on freedom, social stability and harmony, and more emphasis on education, and respect for authority. Although these claimed values are also universal, they tend to be more emphasized and more widely shared in much of Asia as indicated by some studies.

Modernization in Asia, to some extent, has been equated with Westernization as far as technology and management transfers are concerned. With the inflow of Western technology and management, Western ideas and values are flooding into Asia, influencing the ways of thinking and acting among Asians and thus diluting the local cultures. To combat against the strong influences of the Western ideas and values in their modernization process, many Asian countries have been trying to retain their own cultural and political identities. The search for cultural and political identities has become more urgent with the increasing domination of Western media giants in the transnational communication and the unbalanced global information flow. Coupled with the imbalance of global information flow are an invasion of Western cultures and the imposition of Western values. This has caused grave concerns among some Asian leaders. Therefore, they resort to "Asian values" to justify their calls to safeguard cultural identities in the battle against Western cultures and values.

In their nation-building process, some Asian governments have advocated that Asia should be different in running its various countries instead of copying everything from the West since Asia is so diversified in terms of languages, religions, races, cultures and economic growth. Human rights, democracy and freedom of expression should be contingent on the various national social and political structures, historical experiences, cultural values and economic conditions. They are not only relative but also dynamic in terms of time and space.

The search for cultural and political identities can be best understood in the context of a two parallel process of globalization and localization. Modernization has opened up Asia to the rest of the world and it is part of the globalization process. The technology and management inflow has enabled Asian countries to grow fast and thus more interconnected with the outside world in terms of markets and resources. At the same time, however, Asian governments have realized the importance of maintaining their cultural and political identities in the globalization process. They have been localizing the imported management and ideas from the West and making full use of them to suit the domestic economic developments. To go global but stay local has been one of the common strategies of most Asian governments in running and developing their own countries.

Adapting Western models of modernization, concepts of human rights, and patterns of democracy, Asian countries are searching for the right direction and development to suit their own various contexts. That search has also been extended into communication, as indicated in the exploration of Asian perspectives in communication since the mid-1980s and the debate about Asian values in journalism since the mid-1990s.

The search for the right direction and development in communication has also been driven by the realization among media policy-makers, practitioners and academics of the influence of Western communication theories and their incompatibilities with the Asian contexts. Asian communication including journalism has been greatly influenced by the Western journalism in its early formative stages. The establishment of modern newspapers and journalism schools, the training of journalists, and the operation of the press as a whole are among the clear indicators of Western influences on Asian journalism. Although Western journalism has played an important role in the development of Asian journalism, it also has exerted negative influences on Asian journalism, such as sensational approach, adversary practice and entertainment orientation, which remain incompatible with the Asian contexts.

Furthermore, Western communication theories have failed to fully describe, explain or predict the communication phenomenon in Asia. For instance, certain communication behavioral patterns in Asia may not be easily explained by Western theories, such as face, seniority of age and status, different philosophical and religious backgrounds (Gottberg, 1985). In addition, Western communication theories had their own limitations, such as overemphasis on quantitative methods, lack of focus and repetitiveness, weakness in studies of structure and function of communication in societal context, and the absence of culture as a critical factor in communication (Chu, 1985).

There has been "a widespread feeling among communication scholars in Asia that there is a pressing need to re-examine Western communication theories in the light of Asian cultures and traditions" (Menon, 1988, p.ix). The need is generated by the fact that Western models and theories have been accepted uncritically at the expense of tradition concepts of communication in Asian cultures (Menon, 1988). The realization of the incompatibilities of Western communication theories with the Asian contexts has led to the need to modify or adapt the parameters of Western communication theory to the various local conditions and situations in Asia. Moreover, Western-oriented theories can be enriched by using Asian communication processes, behavior patterns, and experiences. In their search for Asian perspectives in communication, Asian scholars turn to their own rich and long traditions in the fields of religion, philosophy and arts, the core of great cultures. The magnificent cultures in Asia would not be possible without their distinctive approaches to communication. Derived from their rich cultural foundations and philosophical concepts, Asian press philosophies can prove to be very productive in widening the discourse of communication metatheory (Dissanayake, 1988).

The search of Asian perspective of communication theory should be relevant, addressing issues in their socio-cultural context, concrete, not obscure, observable and be backed by research using adequate, and appropriate methods (Chu, 1985). The search for Asian perspectives in communication does not necessarily mean the total rejection of Western communication theories. It has involved the adaptation, accommodation and preserving national sovereignties. Adaptation is an approach designed to adapt the advantages of the new technologies to the priority needs of the most underprivileged ones so that it can stop their values from being endangered (Modoux, 1996). Accommodation is to accommodate and respect different cultures in a peaceful co-existence environment (Naito, 1996; Gautier, 1996). Besides the adaptation and accommodation strategies, another strategy is to preserve national sovereignty in a global village (Nair, 1996).

Nation states are structured to define what is good for its people and represent its people on issues beyond the efforts of individuals or smaller social units to handle. They "have also systems to keep its cultural differences, educate its younger generation on core values, and guide its people to discriminate what is good and bad in the global information and knowledge flow. Moreover, global institutions lack administrative resources, while nation states use national resources as a direct means to influence domestic and international events" (Nair, 1996, p. 9). Therefore, "we will communicate not as global citizens but as citizens of a nation" (Nair, 1996, p. 9).

In addressing the issue of national sovereignty and cultural identities in a global context, the media should "examine the challenges to the sovereignty of the state, explore some of the inherent tensions between the nation and the state and the contradictions of a ‘national cultural environment’ within a globalized context" (Sreberny-Mohammadi, 1996, p. 1). The above mentioned strategies, adaptation, accommodation and preserving national sovereignty in a global village, among others, represent a driving force in the continued search for Asian theories of communication. It is against these historical, cultural and political backgrounds that the search for Asian perspectives in communication has been constructed and evolved. The 1985 Bangkok Seminar provided the general framework for the search for Asian perspectives in communication. The framework set out by 1985 Bangkok Symposium include modifying or adapting the parameters of Western communication theory to the various local conditions and situations in Asian countries, testing the validity of emerging Asian communication models and constructs and constructing Asian communication theories in the social and cultural contexts.

Within that framework, the three subsequent conferences dealt specifically with the role, responsibility, and ethics of the press in ASEAN, SAARC and South Asian states. Despite their variations, these conferences share the following elements in terms of what the press should be and do in society: to assist nation-building, to strengthen social harmony amid diversity, to cooperate among member states in either ASEAN or SAARC and to sharpen awareness and understanding of issues related to media ethics and social responsibility in the South Asian region. These major conferences have mapped out the directions and dimensions of searching for Asian models or theories of communication.

From 1994 through 1996, the search for Asian perspectives focused on the debate about Asian values in journalism, a continuation of the search for Asian ways of journalism under the banner of Asian values in journalism. Throughout the whole debate about Asian values in journalism, the supporters or advocates of Asian values in journalism advocated that journalism in Asia should not copy the Western model. Asian countries should have their own perspectives on the government-press relationship, the role of the press as well the concepts and practices of press freedom. The government-press relationship should be cooperative instead of adversary for the sake of national development or nation building. The press should play greater roles of educator and catalyst of social and political change in society instead of merely entertaining and informing the public. As far as press freedom is concerned, it is not exclusive to the West but also one of the values held dear in Asia as well. The press should be free and at the same time should be socially responsible. The press in Asia is also expected to exercise greater caution in covering issues sensitive to the social and political structures, cultural values and economic conditions.

Throughout the decade long search, some Asian perspectives in communication have been identified. They include the development values, such as the desire for harmony or to avoid differences and conflicts, mild ways of criticism of government, and the need of the press to be more mindful of the cause and consequences of their news coverage. Other values include the emphasis on the role of educator and catalyst of social and political change in society, the dismissal of the adversary journalism as being incompatible with the Asian societies, and the cooperation with the government in nation-building. These perspectives or values have influenced the media policies in much of Asia in terms of what the media should be and do in society.

Despite their different responses to the Asian Economic Crisis, Asian governments have learned, among other things, a big lesson in communication management. Some governments exercise stricter control over the flow of information while others loosen it to allow greater transparency. Common to their strategies is the importance attached to the management of communication and the continuation of searching for Asian perspectives and ways of communication in light of their various historical experiences, social structures, cultural values, political systems, and economic conditions. Despite the continued domination of the Western media in Asia and their strong influences over Asian communication, the search for Asian perspectives in communication continues and will gain greater momentum after Asia recovers from the Asian Economic Crisis.

AMIC. (1985). AMIC-Thammasat University symposium on mass communication theory: The Asian perspective. Singapore: Asian Media Information and Communication.

AMIC. (1996). AMIC Seminar on Press Freedom and Professional Standards in Asia. Singapore: Asian Media Information and Communication Center.

Chu, L.L. (1985, October). Mass communication theory: The Chinese perspective.Paper presented at the AMIC-Thammasat University Symposium on Communication Theory: The Asian Perspective, Bangkok.

Chu, G. (1985, October). In search of an Asian perspective of communication theory.Paper presented at the AMIC-Thammasat University Symposium on Mass Communication Theory: The Asian Perspective, Bangkok.

Dissanayake, W. (Ed.). (1988). Communication theory: The Asian perspective. Singapore: Asia Mass Communication Research and Information Centre.

Dorgan, M. (1997, Nov. 26). Asian crisis made worse by a muzzled press. San Jose Mercury News. [Online] Available: http://wwwb.session.rservice.com/cgib…**X%3a%7crefsstart=1%7csearch_id=A2%7c

Gautier, D. (1996, June). Thinking globally and acting locally: The art of accommodation. Paper presented at the AMIC 1996 Conference on Asian Communications in the Next Twenty-Five Years, Singapore.

Gottberg, H.V. (1985, October). Keynote Speech. Speech delivered at the AMIC-Thammasat University Symposium on Mass Communication Theory: The Asian Perspective, Bangkok.

IPI (1998). World press freedom review: Asia.[Online] Available:http://www.freemedia.at/home3.htm.

Masterton, M. (1996). (Ed.), Asian Values in Journalism. Singapore: Asian Media Information and Communication Centre.

Mehra, A. (1988). Report. AMIC Consultation on Press System in ASEAN. Singapore: Asian Media Information and Communication Centre.

Mehra, A. (1989). Press System in ASEAN States. Singapore: Asian Media Information and Communication Centre.

Menon, V. (1991). Introduction. Press Systems in SAARC . Singapore: Asian Media Information and Communication Centre.

Menon, V. (1993). Welcome address. In the proceedings of the 1993 Colombo Seminar on "Communication Ethics from a South Asian Perspective." Singapore: Asian Media Information and Communication Centre.

Menon, V. (1996) Preface. In M. Masterton (Ed.). Asian Values in Journalism. Singapore: Asian Media Information and Communication Centre.

Modoux, A. (1996). Development and communication. Paper presented at the AMIC 25^th AnniversaryConference on Asian Communications: The Next Twenty-Five Years, Singapore.

Nair. B. (1996). Preserving national sovereignty in a global village. Paper presented At the AMIC 1996 Conference on Asian Communications in the Next Twenty-Five Years, Singapore.

Naito, T. (1996). Thinking globally and acting locally: The art of accommodation.Paper presented at the AMIC 1996 Conference on Asian Communications in the Next Twenty-Five Years. Singapore.

Schidlovsky, J. (1996). Is there an Asian model of journalism? In Under Pressure: Asia and Pacific Media, The International Federation of Journalists. South China Morning Post (1994, Dec.5). Press unravels the news about Asia, Feature Section, p. 23.

Sussman, L.R. (1998). Global warning: Press controls fuel the Asian debacle. In Freedom House (1998, May 3). Press Freedom 1998. A Freedom House Report.

The Freedom Forum. (1994). Asian values and the role of the media in society.Hong Kong.

The Straits Times (1994, Dec.3). Be prepared to champion universal ideals, says Anwar, East Asia Section, p. 15