Sustaining Vigilance: From Media to The Public
What good is democracy if the ordinary Filipino is weakened by pangs of hunger? If workers couldn’t find jobs to sustain their families? If people are dying due to sickness that was not even attempted to be cured? For me, this is where the important role of media comes in: To safeguard democratic processes and monitor governance. To make leaders constantly aware that someone is watching. To ensure for example, that corruption does not hinder the delivery of social services.
Professor Rachel Khan explored the role of the media in preserving democracy and fostering good governance through its efforts in exposing corruption. She viewed responsible journalism and press freedom as contributory to a heightened transparency. This is amidst corruption causing human rights violations, as funds are redirected instead of being utilized for our welfare. She delivered a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) Analysis of the Philippine situation.
Under Strengths would be the tried and tested power of media as seen in critical moments in Philippine history. When people had to say “enough is enough,” media is at the forefront of the struggle. Also, there are many skilled and dedicated journalists who stay in what they believe as a noble profession. They appreciate writing, seeing that their words mobilized people. Clearly, journalism is a profession that impact on society, a form of public service that is both challenging and exhilarating.
But the fact remains that journalism here is not that financially-rewarding. This financial instability also leads practitioners to resort to corruption (accepting bribes in exchange of favourable coverage). Covering events also threaten the safety of journalists, with assignments in hostile situations or in controversial stories. Prof. Khan discussed under Threats how killings continued due to impunity. She recalled how the Philippines was dubbed as the deadliest country for journalists in 2009 due to the Maguindanao massacre, referring to the January-December 2009 statistics of New York-based Committee for the Protection of Journalists. Though media is a potent pillar to fight corruption, we are still hoping that time will come when journalists would not be afraid to divulge the truth in their reports. That we would not anymore view journalists as easy targets and ask if a story, no matter how big, is worth dying for. While Prof. Khan saw sustained reports on policy issues or against corruption as Opportunities for heightened public pressure on government, the trauma brought about by images of dead journalists bear upon today’s practitioners engaged in anti-corruption advocacy.
The reactor, Dr. Grace Jamon, brought up the problem of our “Celebrity Culture,” making us run after celebrities rather than clarificatory issues. I may also relate the problematic of Filipinos’ “collective amnesia”. That is why news must be accurate not only in getting the details right but also in the sense that it presents the larger picture in a given issue and the implications to society. A report that gives background information, illustrates the context well, and explains consequences can empower communities. Knowing the problem is one thing. Embarking on solutions is another. I need not elaborate on the potentials of major newspapers and primetime news in defining national problems.
However, when it comes to investigative reports, there still exists a problem in reaching the audience. Considering that online journalism has a rising audience and that investigative programs are being produced / aired by the major commercial networks, it is still the “intellectual” group that pay close attention to these messages. I see this as contributory to what Prof. Jamon referred to as a “structural malaise”: The lack of capacity to choose good leaders. According to her, it is more of a problem of citizenship. What I see as a probable solution is the exertion of greater creativity, devoting more running time, and increasing the quantity of investigative content in our mainstream media. Our goal then, is to develop a taste in favor of this kind of reporting.
Speaking of governance, it would be imperative to look at the different beats and table some comparative descriptions based on the article “Life on the Beat” published in PJR Reports on July 2006.
BEAT / DESCRIPTION:
DOJ: Reporters spend most of the day in the press rooms waiting for memoranda and Supreme Court decisions. The DOJ holds press conferences and reporters rely on interviews with the Justice Secretary. Covering the DOJ is welcomed by reporters. Stories come effortlessly. Reporters need only wait for faxed stories. Others turn to prosecutors and fiscals.
Police: Reporters need to hop from one police headquarters to another to get stories.
Manila City Hall: Beat reporters roam City Hall and can get stories from the courts. Stories are guaranteed on Tuesday and Thursday when the City Council of Manila holds sessions. Copying another reporter’s story is a prevalent practice. The mayor chooses who to invite to press conferences because he wants only the good news to be written. Some broadsheet and tabloid reporters rely on press releases and photo releases from the Mayor’s office. Some words are just changed or paraphrased.
The House of Representatives: Reactionary. Reports are mostly based on the reactions of the congressmen on issues being taken up by the House. Besides the press releases issued via the Congress website by the Public Relations and Information Department, reporters may check the bills that have been filed or the resolutions at the index. There are press conferences, congressional inquiries, and committee hearings. They can cover sessions and do interviews. One can monitor print and broadcast news then contact committee secretaries. Common practice is to contact representatives of differing opinions in order to achieve balanced reports. Reporters are able to talk to legislators during a session and interview them near the exit or outside the session hall. Reporters, especially from broadcast, often cover events as a group. The House beat does not have a press corps.
Senate: The good life. A computer station is reserved for each reporter. Press releases, mostly arriving after lunch, come in the forms of press statements, news releases, photo releases, copies of resolutions, and interview transcripts. (Reporters do not have to jot down every word a senator says.) Breakfast, lunch and merienda are served in the press office free of charge. Free meals actually abound. Press briefings are held to get official statements from the senators. Reporters don’t have to go to every senator, the senators come to them.
I am highlighting here that the media as a pillar for good governance can only be as strong as its members. For instance in covering Congress, the level of research for every story depends on the reporter’s initiative. But sadly, we often see reports focusing on limited reactions to important issues. It depends in a great deal, I must say, on diligence.
Final Thoughts At The Close of The Colloquium
I came to reflect on possible implications for the government channel for which I am working. As there is an increasing need for Filipinos to gain better appreciation of the state of our nation and what can be done about it, I look forward to concrete action by the Communications Group to maximize the potential of NBN. Rather than papogi or mere paying tribute to what the government is doing, a different take would be engaging the public to participate in the changes they want to see in the Philippines. We can then start showing what communities are doing, in conjunction with the efforts of agencies like DSWD, NYC, and DOLE among others. To support the production of quality programs that will reach our target audience would of course require upgraded equipment, technologies, and skills.
Media being one of the eight pillars of good governance, the strength of the whole structure will also depend a lot on the interaction and degree of interdependence among these components. Then we come to view the system as greater than the sum of its parts. But more importantly, we realize that the media practitioner is in the first place a citizen who ought to be participating in the affairs and aspirations of his or her nation.
Professor Rachel Khan explored the role of the media in preserving democracy and fostering good governance through its efforts in exposing corruption. She viewed responsible journalism and press freedom as contributory to a heightened transparency. This is amidst corruption causing human rights violations, as funds are redirected instead of being utilized for our welfare. She delivered a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) Analysis of the Philippine situation.
Under Strengths would be the tried and tested power of media as seen in critical moments in Philippine history. When people had to say “enough is enough,” media is at the forefront of the struggle. Also, there are many skilled and dedicated journalists who stay in what they believe as a noble profession. They appreciate writing, seeing that their words mobilized people. Clearly, journalism is a profession that impact on society, a form of public service that is both challenging and exhilarating.
But the fact remains that journalism here is not that financially-rewarding. This financial instability also leads practitioners to resort to corruption (accepting bribes in exchange of favourable coverage). Covering events also threaten the safety of journalists, with assignments in hostile situations or in controversial stories. Prof. Khan discussed under Threats how killings continued due to impunity. She recalled how the Philippines was dubbed as the deadliest country for journalists in 2009 due to the Maguindanao massacre, referring to the January-December 2009 statistics of New York-based Committee for the Protection of Journalists. Though media is a potent pillar to fight corruption, we are still hoping that time will come when journalists would not be afraid to divulge the truth in their reports. That we would not anymore view journalists as easy targets and ask if a story, no matter how big, is worth dying for. While Prof. Khan saw sustained reports on policy issues or against corruption as Opportunities for heightened public pressure on government, the trauma brought about by images of dead journalists bear upon today’s practitioners engaged in anti-corruption advocacy.
The reactor, Dr. Grace Jamon, brought up the problem of our “Celebrity Culture,” making us run after celebrities rather than clarificatory issues. I may also relate the problematic of Filipinos’ “collective amnesia”. That is why news must be accurate not only in getting the details right but also in the sense that it presents the larger picture in a given issue and the implications to society. A report that gives background information, illustrates the context well, and explains consequences can empower communities. Knowing the problem is one thing. Embarking on solutions is another. I need not elaborate on the potentials of major newspapers and primetime news in defining national problems.
However, when it comes to investigative reports, there still exists a problem in reaching the audience. Considering that online journalism has a rising audience and that investigative programs are being produced / aired by the major commercial networks, it is still the “intellectual” group that pay close attention to these messages. I see this as contributory to what Prof. Jamon referred to as a “structural malaise”: The lack of capacity to choose good leaders. According to her, it is more of a problem of citizenship. What I see as a probable solution is the exertion of greater creativity, devoting more running time, and increasing the quantity of investigative content in our mainstream media. Our goal then, is to develop a taste in favor of this kind of reporting.
Speaking of governance, it would be imperative to look at the different beats and table some comparative descriptions based on the article “Life on the Beat” published in PJR Reports on July 2006.
BEAT / DESCRIPTION:
DOJ: Reporters spend most of the day in the press rooms waiting for memoranda and Supreme Court decisions. The DOJ holds press conferences and reporters rely on interviews with the Justice Secretary. Covering the DOJ is welcomed by reporters. Stories come effortlessly. Reporters need only wait for faxed stories. Others turn to prosecutors and fiscals.
Police: Reporters need to hop from one police headquarters to another to get stories.
Manila City Hall: Beat reporters roam City Hall and can get stories from the courts. Stories are guaranteed on Tuesday and Thursday when the City Council of Manila holds sessions. Copying another reporter’s story is a prevalent practice. The mayor chooses who to invite to press conferences because he wants only the good news to be written. Some broadsheet and tabloid reporters rely on press releases and photo releases from the Mayor’s office. Some words are just changed or paraphrased.
The House of Representatives: Reactionary. Reports are mostly based on the reactions of the congressmen on issues being taken up by the House. Besides the press releases issued via the Congress website by the Public Relations and Information Department, reporters may check the bills that have been filed or the resolutions at the index. There are press conferences, congressional inquiries, and committee hearings. They can cover sessions and do interviews. One can monitor print and broadcast news then contact committee secretaries. Common practice is to contact representatives of differing opinions in order to achieve balanced reports. Reporters are able to talk to legislators during a session and interview them near the exit or outside the session hall. Reporters, especially from broadcast, often cover events as a group. The House beat does not have a press corps.
Senate: The good life. A computer station is reserved for each reporter. Press releases, mostly arriving after lunch, come in the forms of press statements, news releases, photo releases, copies of resolutions, and interview transcripts. (Reporters do not have to jot down every word a senator says.) Breakfast, lunch and merienda are served in the press office free of charge. Free meals actually abound. Press briefings are held to get official statements from the senators. Reporters don’t have to go to every senator, the senators come to them.
I am highlighting here that the media as a pillar for good governance can only be as strong as its members. For instance in covering Congress, the level of research for every story depends on the reporter’s initiative. But sadly, we often see reports focusing on limited reactions to important issues. It depends in a great deal, I must say, on diligence.
Final Thoughts At The Close of The Colloquium
I came to reflect on possible implications for the government channel for which I am working. As there is an increasing need for Filipinos to gain better appreciation of the state of our nation and what can be done about it, I look forward to concrete action by the Communications Group to maximize the potential of NBN. Rather than papogi or mere paying tribute to what the government is doing, a different take would be engaging the public to participate in the changes they want to see in the Philippines. We can then start showing what communities are doing, in conjunction with the efforts of agencies like DSWD, NYC, and DOLE among others. To support the production of quality programs that will reach our target audience would of course require upgraded equipment, technologies, and skills.
Media being one of the eight pillars of good governance, the strength of the whole structure will also depend a lot on the interaction and degree of interdependence among these components. Then we come to view the system as greater than the sum of its parts. But more importantly, we realize that the media practitioner is in the first place a citizen who ought to be participating in the affairs and aspirations of his or her nation.
