The Sidelines: Creating critical content for the Malay-speaking community
With Haniff Baharudin, radio producer
The Sidelines is the supplementary issue to every main edition of The Starting Block. Here you will find the interview transcript and more information about the conversation of the week. The interview is transcribed by Otter.ai and edited for length and clarity. All links provided come from me, and not the guest, unless stated.
Listen to the audio version here.
TRANSCRIPT
TINA CARMILLIA: Hello, my name is Tina Carmillia and this is The Starting Block, a weekly conversation on science and society with an emphasis on disinformation, data, and democracy.
Before we start, I’d like to let you know that the transcript, links and credits for this conversation are available on The Sidelines, the supplement to every main edition of The Starting Block.
Now, in the next lane: radio producer Haniff Baharudin on creating and producing programmes that cater to the Malay community.
Ready? Let’s go.
HANIFF BAHARUDIN: Yeah.
TINA CARMILLIA: Alright, so as usual, I always start with an introduction and I will leave it to you to introduce yourself.
HANIFF BAHARUDIN: Yeah, so I’m Haniff Baharudin. I am a producer with BFM 89.9 a talk radio station based in Malaysia that focuses on business, current affairs, politics and also lifestyle, I suppose. Yeah, we have a bit of everything under the sun but mostly a talk radio station based in Klang Valley, Malaysia.
TINA CARMILLIA: Right, and for a while, until maybe 201 you were also the producer for Bila Larut Malam, which is a late-night talk show in Malay about modern and traditional trends, maybe? Tell me more about the legacy of this show because I love it.
HANIFF BAHARUDIN: Legacy of the show… Yeah, it’s been a while, to be honest. So I’ve sort of like, I don’t want to move on, but it’s just that I’m in a different phase right now. But the show will definitely be part of my portfolio and something that I’m quite proud of.
I think what we were trying to do with Bila Larut Malam was to start exploring conversations in the Malay language, but at the same time also looking at modern phenomenon and traditional culture as well. And at the time, it was an interesting period because we started seeing a lot of like trends emerging like vaping was the in thing at the time. So we were like, okay, these are the things that we should be exploring, be covering, be talking about, and not just traditional culture. But at the same time, obviously, by nature of the show that we need to talk about the traditional stuf, but that’s to be expected. But we were more interested in the more modern phenomenon, modern cultural stuff at a time.
And because I producers are just me and my colleague Aziff [Azuddin] so it eventually led to us deciding on where we want to go where and where we want to bring the show. It’s the only Malay language s how on BFM, because BFM by itself is a station that has a lot of things under its umbrella. I don’t know if it’s a good thing or a bad thing but it sort of naturally became a platform for us, by the nature of the language, to start by perhaps—oh, we have a philosophy show, why don’t we do philosophy in Malay? Oh, we have a finance show? Why don’t we do finance in Malay?
So yeah, I don’t know whether this is a good thing or a bad thing. But it became a platform to, not necessarily translate literally, because we both know that the idea of a show like this has to be approached in its own way rather than just via translation. Because the initial approach of the Malay language department at the time was to translate or bring about all the other BFM shows—the ideological aspect as well—in Malay, which we felt was to be reductive at a time. Or rather we felt that’s not how you approach it, you can’t just—oh, you already have all the content in English, just translate them to Malay. We don’t think that’s how we should go about it. We should look at it in different lens but at the same time, we can use all these shows that we have as a form of inspiration to explore, but look at it in a more critical lens and slightly different lens.
I think the thing about us is that maybe ideologically, we fit into a BFM’s mould, by the same time, we are both aware of the nuances that come with the language and also the community and also the whole world there. So the idea is to not just literally translate things. So BLM is supposed to be a show that looks at the community, the language, the society, the nation, the country in a way that’s more nuanced.
TINA CARMILLIA: And even after BLM after your show’s run, I still don’t see a lot of original content in Malay, whether in traditional media or in social media, that focuses on, for instance, literary criticism or intellectual discourse. Or maybe there was a small moment of publications like that, that mushroomed, maybe in the mid-2010s, late 2010s. And I was a part of some of those groups, I follow some of these channels or Twitter accounts and Facebook groups, but most of them seem to slowly turn into like this fascist, racist support group. Why do you think that’s the case? Why… I don’t know how I’m going to phrase this question in a less uncomfortable manner, but I’m sure you know where I’m coming from.
HANIFF BAHARUDIN: Yeah. Okay, here’s the thing. I don’t want to sound like I’m being a bit more condescending. But I think, based on what you said initially, you said that there weren’t a lot of content of BLM’s nature at the time. I don’t think we were the first, to be honest, I don’t think we were the last, and I don’t think we were a trend-setter in any way shape or form, because I think the thing about BLM is that BLM also tried to talk to all these initiatives that were at the time mushrooming, like you said. And yeah, we found out that they were a lot of initiatives that were doing a lot of interesting things as well.
So coming into it, and learning about how the society was, I initially had this slight scepticism towards how perhaps, the Malay community or the Malay speaking community—not they don’t necessarily talk about all the intellectual stuff, which I found out wasn’t necessarily the case law. Perhaps they were movements at a time they were already doing these things it’s just is that they weren’t as well-publicised.
But during BLM’s run, we started seeing a lot more of these initiatives mushrooming, coming out. And the fact that these conversations are happening by itself is good without—I don’t want to sound condescending, like, just because it happened, therefore, it’s good. But I think it needs to be credited, it needs to be recognised. Because sometimes I think outsiders or people who are not that familiar with the language, I think myself included, tend to have this perception that the community is only more invested in perhaps, you know, purely entertainment, gossips, and things that are just fun, which is not necessarily the case. So so I would credit the fact that there are movements that are already discussing these things, intellectually, it shows that that, you know, actually there is a demand and supply when it comes to intellectual conversations happening in Malay.
But at the same time, you’re right, here are some of them that have that kind of tones eventually. So while I applaud their attempt at trying to be more intellectual, I guess, to a certain extent, it’s also quite difficult to perhaps run away from that aspect—the question of identity is always there, the question of recognising who they are, and where they belong, will eventually be part of the equation, I suppose. And, I guess globalisation is also not an easy thing to deal with for a community. Eventually, these are the touch points and the areas that they will eventually want to start exploring, start thinking about.
I know what kind of materials you’re referring to when you describe these things—movements that started out trying to intellectualise stuff but they eventually arrive at a conclusion that, you know, and—there were a lot of attempts at trying to justify or find or this alternative side of history that perhaps back their beliefs or their way of understanding things. Their concerns are different, maybe they’re more invested in wanting to perhaps defend their position, defend their beliefs, defend who they are, or maybe they’re even finally trying to find themselves, I think, to a certain extent.
It’s difficult to talk about our culture in that sense, because I think I’m not the best person to talk about it because I feel like my lens is quite privileged as well, I come from a slightly more privileged position, obviously. While not necessarily English speaking during my formative years, I eventually became one so I guess I always have that—I won’t say advantage, but I always have that. My lens has always been from that particular perspective. And because I come from that position, but at the same time, my personal background is also slightly different, because I am not an urban kid, or whatever, I can, perhaps empathise, but not necessarily totally understand where they’re coming from.
But I'll probably say that it’s driven by a sense of trying to find their own identity. And there is always this fear of losing our identity, which, honestly even as a—I don’t want to use labels—but as someone who is in this slightly more “liberal,” “progressive” bubble, I do think about, as well. I may not necessarily adopt the more nationalistic undertones of these groups but it’s something I do ponder about as well, and not in a very defensive way but in a more like, okay, yeah, but how do we still have our identity at the same time be “modern” or “progressive.” It’s a very nuanced subject and I feel like it’s not as easy, which is why I empathise with these groups, I suppose only because my exposure is different.
If you want to make it personal, yeah. Because my exposure is different, therefore I can be on this side of the fence as opposed to on their side of the fence. But you know, if I’m not as exposed, I can easily be on their side of the fence as well. So privilege plays a huge part in that as well. I personally feel and that’s how I’ve been, thinking about things these days—through the lens of privilege. So it tends to be like, I don’t know, maybe it’s a crutch but sometimes I can’t run away from the fact that you know what, you're “lucky” because you’re privileged, that it’s is easy for you to be on the “right” side of the argument of the equation.
TINA CARMILLIA: I know that you’re trying to not cause a lot of controversy with your response, I get that. But I also want to say that we’ve had a lot of conversations like this, in private, you and I. And the reason why I wanted you to be my social commentator on this subject, is because you are in a pretty unique position as someone who has a foot on one side and the other foot on the other side, and therefore you can have that more, I suppose, intersectional perspective on this subject, I feel that that’s very valuable.
And I know that you’re really swamped with work, but I feel that you need to write more or produce more content on this subject, because I think that that kind of perspective is, maybe—I wouldn’t say lacking, I wouldn’t say that it’s not a subject that's been written about, but—I feel that it can help tip the scale a little bit and have a more balanced approach to subjects about national identity and cultural pride, and those kinds of subjects. I mean, it is a very touchy subject, and we are as a, as a country, we tiptoe around it, because we tend to not want to offend anybody. But the good thing, like you said, is that we are having this conversation.
But another thing that mushrooms around the same time in the mid-2010s, is indie publishers, and a lot of them publishing Malay literature, and you see that resurgence of interest in Malay writings, which is great, because I remember in that same period, people were asking, what’s the last book in Malay that you’ve read? A lot of people were quoting books that they read in high school for their SPM. Right, that was the last book, that anthology that they have to read for their Malay paper in school. But now likeI’m sure people can name recent books that they’ve read that’s not because they have to read it for school.
You know, indie publishers,—how much have they helped shape the conversations around Malay content? Original content, specifically, not so much translations.
HANIFF BAHARUDIN: Unfortunately, I don’t consume these books as much but the same time it is a phenomenon. So I’ve spoken to enough people in the industry that I’ve gained a bit of understanding of the situation. To a certain extent, it’s funny, because in my engagements with them, whenever I said, “Are these groups responsible in bringing about interest in reading?” The answers that I get sometimes, are like, “Oh, well, actually, the culture of reading has always been there, it’s just that we have never had enough materials for us to read.” And therefore, I guess indie publishers have helped bring that back out.
TINA CARMILLIA: Feed the hunger.
HANIFF BAHARUDIN: Feed the hungry, I suppose. Not that I don’t want to give them credit in helping out but at the same time to totally dismiss that point is not fair either. I feel like to a certain extent, they have helped, they have contributed to increasing the interest in reading Malay language literature a lot more. And these have been proven by how popular the more mainstream book fairs are, you know. To a certain extent, at one point, maybe it became a bit of a trend. I don’t think that’s necessarily a good thing, either, but it has become a trend, you know, that you’re cool kid when you read indie books.
If you want to critically take a look at the kind of reading materials, then that’s another thing that I think a lot of people have argued about as well. And I think I also, having read some of the works from these indie publishers, I can attest to that kind of writings that they produce as well. But it depends on the taste of the people, right, you have some good stuff, you also have things that are pretty pop-ish. So, the quality can be questionable sometimes because as much as they try to be edgy—they do try to be critical in certain things—it can also feel pretty juvenile sometimes, pushing the boundaries for the sake of pushing the boundaries, without actually injecting some form of criticality to it.
But because the mainstream market has always been very homogenous to a certain extent, it’s not that easy to break that barrier. The fact that you do something different, people are like, okay, you’re doing something different, therefore, you’re cool. You want to be a bit more critical, looking at it through a more critical lens. And these are things that have been said by other people as well. The fact that the bar is so low—and again, I'm not dissing the mainstream market because I feel like the mainstream market also serves a certain market, right, it’s a supply and demand.
But going back to indie, because the bar has been set so low, the minute you do something quite different, you’re already considered breaking the boundaries or pushing the boundaries. So this might sound a bit controversial, based on people I’ve spoken to and the kind of reading material that I’ve read, it’s not that difficult to actually get a book published. And we have a lot of people using social media these days, right and you have authors writing stuff on social media, long posts, and everything. So what happened is that a publisher sees that, follows him on Facebook or Twitter, he has very interesting, long-form writing, he has very interesting opinions and thoughts on certain things, observations. So what happened is that said it’s either they approach the publishers, or the publishers approach them, offer them a book deal. And what they’ll do is this, whatever they wrote on Facebook, they compile into a book, and then they add a bit of stuff and they started selling it. So there’s also that.
Not to say that these reading materials are not interesting, because some of them are quite interesting, but these are also the things that are being produced—basically, musings on Facebook. And again, the quality while they can be good, interesting stuff, but—or maybe I'm just being traditional—they don’t necessarily shape the way writing should be. But maybe that’s modern writing for you, I don’t know. I’m trying to be critical of my own thoughts as well, and didn’t help their case when some of the editing was a bit poor. But sadly, the industry also didn’t last that long. Funny, because they were doing so well. And most of them said this, they were doing well, because the government of the day then was giving them book vouchers. And all these students actually spent their watches by buying all these indie books. Once they stop that programme, people stop buying the books, because they don’t have the funds for it.
Maybe some publishers are still staying strong but a lot of them are just barely surviving. But we also have then a lot more other interesting offshoots of this, you know, the more mature kind. Because you can tell that the indie market also caters to a slightly younger demographic. So people like you and me might be more invested in or more interested in reading alternative books are alternative books published by indie publishers, but content that’s a bit more mature as well. And this is where you see, for example, a former colleague of mine Rahmah [Pauzi] who is now working with Iman Publication that does mostly religious books—she told me that that’s a big market as well. So people are buying these kinds of books now—self help books, spiritual books, which are a bit more critical. A bit more insightful, but not necessarily mainstream.
Sometimes when you come in, you use formal words, formal sentences, people tend to feel like, okay, this person is a bit above me. So when you start hearing people talking in your style, in your slang, while still being able to flesh out ideas in a very good way, you tend to have slightly more respect towards that person.
TINA CARMILLIA: It’s interesting to see books that are in the mainstream market that’s more—I don't want to use the word constraint, but I suppose, they follow more rigidly the rules of DBP. And then you see alternative books that use, not just big English words in place of maybe Malay words, or maybe because that word doesn’t exist, or it’s not well known in the Malay language—but what’s more jarring for me isn’t the English words, it’s the bahasa wicet (Sabrina Noor, Cilisos). It’s almost like a different language because I’ve never been in the WeChat generation, I don't know if you have, but, wow….
HANIFF BAHARUDIN: Definitely not. Yeah, I guess that’s another thing. If you want to observe it more closely, I think that has something to do with the fact that we don’t like to be skema (“orderly”). And I think to a certain extent, I don’t know why,—and this is something that I’ve always been wondering as well until as recent as the past six months, since last year. Not to say I finally get it, get it, but I am beginning to see the appeal of not being a “skema”.
In fact, I think throughout my time doing BLM, I couldn’t run away from being skema because only because that’s how I talked and that’s how I approached and constructed my sentence, so I don’t personally—
TINA CARMILLIA: I love it, by the way, Haniff.
HANIFF BAHARUDIN: Yeah, but that’ something that I wish to be able to do, I think—not being that skema, but unfortunately I can’t run away from it but I am comfortable with that identity as well. The reason why I brought that up is because I don’t know why as a society we are very averse to skema-ness. And again, that’s what DBP seems to be offering or rather the mainstream readings books and mainstream publications seem to be offering reading materials are very formulaic in terms of language, right.
So, again, another appeal of indie publication is their writing is very, I won’t say true to life, but almost there. Because people are aware of the fact that this is not how people talk in real life, you know, like in a very stilted language. Even TV series, films, some of them used to have that kind of very stilted language. They know that that’s not how real people talk and they find that they can relate more to this kind of indie publications because they tend to use languages or slangs that are more “relatable,” that mimics “real life” and hence, they gravitate towards that.
For me, I understand what you mean about bahasa wicet because the bigger thing that we should be looking at is our averseness towards skemaness. And I’m not saying that because I’m pro-skema, I find it quite interesting that we are so averse to rigidity as a community, because we can be quite filial, can live within a certain set of codes or set of rules, and they can respect that. But at the same time they need to find the avenue to get out of that. And I suppose when it comes to language, I guess that’s one of the avenues where they’re like, “You know what, we live with a set of rules, we respect this and that, let’s be a bit more fluid when it comes to language, let’s be more hip when it comes to language.”
And that’s how they push away all forms of formality and rigidness and embrace this whole way of talking that’s perhaps true to life, which I don’t blame, to be honest, because I can understand why that’s appealing. I started watching a football show on Astro called Borak Borak Botak where one host talks to two guests about football. It’s done in Malay, which is good because they talk about the English Premier League, obviously the most watched league in here, in Malaysia. But the main presenter doesn’t talk in that professional tone. This guy talks in a very sempoi gila (casual way). While I’m still slightly uncomfortable with it sometimes, only because I’m so used to a very formal approach to TV to presentation, I can understand the appeal of it. And the show is also pretty popular because of that, because I think sometimes maybe indirectly, we also feel like we don’t like to be talked down to.
Sometimes when you come in, you use formal words, formal sentences, people tend to feel like, okay, this person is a bit above me. So when you start hearing people talking in your style, in your slang, while still being able to flesh out ideas in a very good way, you tend to have slightly more respect towards that person. So, I guess, this is the whole dynamic that I am to a certain extent still struggling with but at the the same time am beginning to understand why, I suppose.
TINA CARMILLIA: Prior to our conversation today, Haniff, I felt like, I’m a bit more conservative about language use and I and I like that skema, standard Malay style of delivery. I mean, obviously, in day to day conversations, if I’m going to the kedai mamak to order something, I'm not going to, you know, use super standard formal Malay, but I like deliveries especially in the media, whether traditional or new media that’s like very much the Bila Larut Malam delivery.
But you’re right, it is a completely different kind of skill to be able to use this WeChat style, casual Malay and convey the thoughts. It’s not something that I’m used to doing, I’m familiar with bahasa SMS, because we’re from that generation, right, the 90s and early 2000s, where we use bahasa SMS to shorten our texts, because of, you know, it's another 20 or 30 cents. I suppose that it’s an offshoot of that, maybe—not that we have word count barriers now, but it’s so interesting how language evolved in that sense, no?
HANIFF BAHARUDIN: Yeah, and I guess we also have to take into factor that people come from very diverse backgrounds, right? And I think at the end of the day, you want a sense of familiarity as well, I suppose. Funnily enough, I used to be a bit more turned off by even dialects, to be honest, because I coming from a very “privileged” background, I tend to associate very localised dialect to traditionalism. And as I grew older, you learn about things, you become more mature, then you start appreciating a lot more.
So there’s also that, right, there’s also the fact that we need to recognise that not everyone has that background to be able to appreciate. It all falls back to relatability, right, like if I can find someone that can speak the way I do, but still talk about ideas, I definitely gravitate towards a person because at least the way that person speaks is not like talking in this very “posh” way of talking.
TINA CARMILLIA: Yeah, you know, you’re right because I remember when I was still with BFM, I had an interview with an anthropologist and sociolinguist, and we were talking about the Sabahan dialect and how Sabahan Malay versus standard Malay is very different. And same, to an extent, with Sarawakian Malay, and of course the East Coast dialects, and the northern dialects—and how when we come to the city, we mask that accent and we speak standard Malay instead so that we’re not identifiable and so that we don’t get these prejudicial treatments because of the perception of where we’re from.
HANIFF BAHARUDIN: That's pretty interesting. If you don’t mind me asking you, do you think that that comes from the potential treatment that might come from knowing where X person is from is necessarily prejudicial in nature? Because the mature me, the me right now will be definitely more appreciative hearing a Sarawakian speaking Sarawakian. Because you know, being that privileged, okay, when I was in uni last time, because I speak English, some people assume that I’m from KL. So I’m like, “I’m not from KL, I’m from Malacca,” and they were like, “Okay, cool, thought you’re from KL because you can speak English.” And then when you speak Malay, you sound like you’re from a different part of Malaysia, or you sound like you’re from KL, basically.
So maybe you can answer that: Do people from outside of KL, who have a very strong identity, language-wise especially, feel the need to mask their language when they’re in KL?
TINA CARMILLIA: Sure, I mean, I can speak personally, but also, from my conversation with the anthropologist who obviously has done work in this area, it’s a very common phenomenon. When you come to KL, and you can be easily identified as someone from Sabah or Sarawak, you get the microaggression, from the taxi drivers, and you—I mean, I’m walking you through this whole process. So you’re just arriving to KL, you have a one hour, one-and-a-half-hour ride from the airport to the city centre, you’re stuck with this taxi man who is asking you a billion questions about where you’re from. “Is this your first time to Malaysia?” when you know, Sabah and Sarawak is part of Malaysia. Or, “How long have you had electricity there?” “Do you have running water”? Do you still live in trees? You know, that kind of question? There’s definitely a difference in treatment because of the immediate assumption of the kind of customer we will be simply because of where we’re from.
HANIFF BAHARUDIN: Yeah, maybe I’m shielded from this that I am not that aware of, to be honest. I understand the need to obviously speak in a common dialect, I mean if you’re in KL, because sometimes, you can’t understand if let’s say you speak in a different dialect. So that one is understandable, but—
TINA CARMILLIA: It’s the accent, you can be identified by the accent. And that's the trouble.
HANIFF BAHARUDIN: Yeah, but I wish that we’re more inclusive in that sense as well. Like allowing for that accent to still be apparent. It shows how diverse we are, you know as a community but I can empathise with the fact that there are some prejudice when it comes to recognising where you’re from, I suppose.
Whether we have the vocabulary? I think we do, I think we do. But it requires a bit of work, in the sense that you have to create the tools first before you can use the tools. I definitely think that as a community, as a language, the Malay language is definitely fluid enough to be able to be used to discuss your serious stuff to discuss serious issues. But sometimes you have to create certain tools to enable it to be able to be used that way.
TINA CARMILLIA: Yeah. So I guess my final question, if I can wrap it up, and I asked a previous guest about this as well because she’s a linguist. I like to know your perspective on this: Do we have the vocabulary and the cultural habit to discuss serious issues in Malay, to have intellectual discourses around serious information, serious thoughts whether it’s about the pandemic, for instance, or whether it’s about misinformation on social media? Are we going to leave behind a segment of the community who don’t have the vocabulary and or the cultural habit to do that?
HANIFF BAHARUDIN: Good question. Are you talking about the literal vocabulary or the semantic vocabulary because I feel like we need to differentiate between the two only because I recognise the struggles that we are facing right now when it comes to having to translate things even in the technological sense. I think that’s perhaps one of the struggles that the Malay language currently facing when it comes to trying to translate technical jargon from the tech world, right. So, which is why you have all these people—not making fun of, but we have terms like swafoto for selfie, and things like that, right.
But my position is I always lean on DBP’s side on this, when it comes to the creation of new words for jargon that we are not as familiar with, regardless of how they approach it, because when you speak to them, they have reasons for it. And sometimes some of their reasons are very cool like swa is a word that’s an old word, but you know, it’s our word. So, let’s use our our word to describe selfie. Right? So I feel like, that’s kind of cool.
I feel like in order to create the literal vocabulary sentence, you have to go through that process. And because of how fast-paced the world is currently when it comes to even terms these days, not only on the technological side of things, but also in our daily conversations, like, what, like, the word ‘cancel’ suddenly meaning something else? So how do you then translate this kind of term that we are now more familiar with, because that’s how fluid language is, right, slangs and terms. So I guess there is a need to first look at perhaps trying to find literal translations to some words.
Whether we have the vocabulary? I think we do, I think we do. But it requires a bit of work, in the sense that you have to create the tools first before you can use the tools. I definitely think that as a community, as a language, the Malay language is definitely fluid enough to be able to be used to discuss your serious stuff to discuss serious issues. But sometimes you have to create certain tools to enable it to be able to be used that way.
I don’t think the language has shirked from its responsibility to necessarily be formal communication to others now, but because of the world that we live in, and how fast-paced things are, and how fast new words come up and develop, and… how semantically different things are these days, it feels like there needs to be a form of catch-up that I guess the Malay language has to play as well.
But at the same time, we are also indirectly saying that there’s the main canon, and somehow the Malay language has to follow that canon, which I think is also a bit unfair because the Malay language is also its own world. And there are terms that perhaps the global canon can’t even fathom and understand but are still well-used in the Malay language.
So it’s a bit of both, like, I understand where your question is coming from? And yes, maybe the question of being in the middle of pandemic, when it comes to communicating issues relating to health, relating to the environment, perhaps, the Malay language has to play a bit of catch up, because the canon is perhaps in English or in a different language, and therefore that’s how it works. But at the same time, there are other things within the language that perhaps the global world needs to understand as well.
And because we were talking about skema just now, so translating is one phase of it, adapting it to the way the language is spoken among the community is another, I suppose. So I guess it has to go through that process because at the end of the day, if you want to communicate stuff, you will find a way to communicate, but the idea is to simplify things as much as possible or make it more adaptable so that people can understand that. Because the onus is on the communicator to somehow communicate, right, as opposed to the other way around? Because if you want the information to be disseminated then you have to do a bit of work, I suppose. And because not all people out there are always actively looking for information or new information or different information, right so the onus is perhaps on the communicator, I guess that’s my take on it.
TINA CARMILLIA: That’s radio producer Haniff Baharudin on Malay social commentary and discourse on The Starting Block.
If you would like to join me on the show for conversations like this, get in touch here.
Don’t forget to subscribe, if you haven’t, and if you enjoyed this episode, consider sharing it with someone. ‘Til the next one, goodbye for now.
CREDITS
Guest: Haniff Baharudin, BFM
Producer/Host: Tina Carmillia
Music: Theme for Harold (var. 3) by Kevin MacLeod, licensed under CC BY 4.0.
