Sige, punahin natin ang midya. Pero dapat pa rin nating ipagtanggol ito. Ang pagpuna ay hindi pagkutya kundi indikasyon ng pag-aalala. Sa kaso ng midya, dapat na ginagawa ang pagpuna para umunlad ang kalidad ng pag-uulat.

Kung ang pagpuna’y sa konteksto ng pagbibigay ng makatotohanang pagpapaliwanag – at ginawa sa paraang magalang – sa aking palagay ay nakabubuti ito sa epektibong paggampan ng propesyon. Gusto kong isiping handang makinig ang sinuman, kasama na ang ating mga kaibigan sa midya, kung ang kritisismo’y nasa lugar.

Ang nagiging problema lang sa kasalukuyang pamahalaa’y ginagamit nito ang pagkakataon para maging katanggap-tanggap ang sensura’t iba pang porma ng kontrol sa midya. Nariyan ang pahayag ng isang opisyal na dapat magkaroon ng news blackout tuwing may maselang pangyayari tulad ng hostage-taking. Mayroon ding nagsasabing dapat nang isabatas ang mga etikal na pamantayan ng peryodismo dahil hindi na raw kayang bantayan ng mga peryodista ang kanilang hanay.

Kaya sa kabila ng pagpuna sa mga kakulangang kapansin-pansin noong Agosto 23, kailangan ng isang paglilinaw: Hindi dapat isuko ng midya ang kalayaan nito. Hindi dapat hayaan ng publiko ang panunupil sa pangunahing pinagkukunan ng impormasyon.

Kung may pagkukulang, totoong ang solusyon ay disiplina. Pero hindi ito puwedeng magmula sa mga nasa kapangyarihan. Kung sila ang magtatakda ng mga nararapat gawin, ano pa ang saysay ng peryodismo? Mabuti pang huwag nang ituro ito sa mga pamantasan dahil ang kailangan lang gawin ng isang peryodista, kung masusunod ang pamahalaan, ay alamin kung ano ang gusto ng huli. Itapon na lang sa bintana ang mga etikal na pamantayan dahil pinapasok na sa pinto ang sensura!

Kung hindi manggagaling sa pamahalaan, kanino manggagaling ang pagdidisiplina sa midya? Saan pa kundi sa midya mismo? Makakaya ba ng midyang ayusin ang hanay nila? Maiigpawan kaya ng mga organisasyong pang-midya ang kompetisyong namamagitan sa kanila tungo sa makabuluhang pagkakaisa?

Kung susuriin ang mga pahayag ng ilan sa kanila sa gitna ng pagkamatay ng siyam na tao sa hostage-taking na nangyari noong Agosto 23, may tuwirang pag-amin ang midya sa ilang pagkukulang nila. Bukas din sila sa pagkakaroon ng malawaka’t malalimang pag-uusap para masiguradong hindi na mauulit ang mga naging pagkakamali.

Oo, hindi sapat ang mga ito pero kailangang tandaang nasa posisyon ang publiko para maningil sa mga pagkukulang ng midya. Kung naniniwala ang isang tao sa argumentong midya ang may kasalanan sa pagkamatay ng walong hostages, pati na ang mismong hostage-taker, walang pumipigil sa kanyang ipahayag ang kanyang saloobin. At kung sakaling walang organisasyong pang-midyang maglalabas ng pahayag niya, maipapakalat pa rin niya ang kanyang pagsusuri sa ibang paraan. Ang dalawang mabilis na pumapasok sa isipan ay paggamit ng blog at social media tulad ng Facebook.

Oo, abusado’t arogante ang ilang peryodista. Pero maniwala kang marami pa ring responsable sa kanila. Nakalulungkot lang na maraming nasa Quirino Grandstand noong Agosto 23 na tila nakalimutan ang malinaw na nakasaad sa pag-uulat ng mga sitwasyon tulad ng hostage-taking. Sa kabila nito, nakikita ang responsibilidad sa dalawang bagay – (1) sa indibidwal na pag-ako sa anumang pagkakamali; at (2) institusyonal na pagbibigay ng paliwanag sa publiko.

Ginawa naman ang mga ito ng iba, bagama’t may ilang piniling manahimik na lang o ipagtanggol ang malinaw na kamaliang nagawa. Aaminin kong naiinis ako sa isang sikat na brodkaster na sinabing ang kanyang panayam sa hostage-taker ay “dinamita” lang pero hindi naging “mitsa” ng madugong pangyayari. Malinaw na nagiging matalinghaga lang siya para pagtakpan ang kanyang pagkukulang!

Pero ang anumang inis o galit sa midya ay hindi dapat mangahulugan ng paghingi ng tulong sa pamahalaan para kontrolin ito. At lalong hindi dapat payagang maging oportunidad ito ng pamahalaan para maging katanggap-tanggap ang sensura. Ang lahat ng mapanlikhang paraan para supilin ang midya’y kailangang ilantad at tutulan ng sambayanan.

Sa katunayan, walang lugar ang news blackout o media blackout sa isang lipunang pinaniniwalaang may kapayapaan at demokrasya. Sa kaso ng maseselang sitwasyon tulad ng hostage-taking, ang posibleng mangyari’y limitadong pag-uulat (limited coverage) o naantalang pagbabalita (delayed coverage) na minsa’y tinatawag ding news embargo. Sa pamamagitan ng epektibong koordinasyon ng kapulisan sa midya, maaaring magkaroon ng kasunduan ang dalawang panig para masiguradong hindi makokompromiso ng midya ang gawain ng mga pulis. Kung wala kasing koordinasyon, malaki ang posibilidad ng adelantadong pagbabalita ng mga taktikal na impormasyong may kinalaman sa aktuwal na operasyon. Hindi ba’t ito ang nangyari noong Agosto 23?

Oo, may malaking kasalanan ang mga pulis noong panahong iyon pero may mga pagkukulang din ang midya. Tungkulin ng pamahalaang pangasiwaan ang anumang kinakailangang reporma sa kapulisan, pero labas na sa tungkulin nito ang direktang pagkontrol sa midya, sa porma man ng pagpapatupad ng news blackout o pagsasabatas ng etikal na pamantayan.

Ang pagbibigay ng puna ay salik sa pagbabagong hinahangad sa hanay ng midya. Kung susuriin ang pagpuna ng ilang organisasyong pang-midya sa sarili, gusto kong isiping handa naman silang makinig. Pero ano naman ang ating gagawin kung sakaling sila’y magmatigas at sabihing wala silang malaking pagkakamali sa kanilang mga naging gawi?

Maraming maiisip na mapanlikhang paraan para ipakita ang pagtutol ng nagagalit na sambayanan sa midyang mali. At malinaw na ang paghingi ng tulong sa pamahalaan para rendahan ang midya ay hindi isa sa mga ito.

Para makipag-ugnayan sa awtor, pumunta sa www.dannyarao.com.

Journalists and media workers should know crisis reporting,
Aquino administration must be held accountable for disorganized police

Statement from 10 faculty members, 155 students and 4 staff
from the UP College of Mass Communication led by Dean Roland Tolentino
dated August 27, 2010

As the police need to review the handling of crisis situations, it is necessary for journalists and media workers to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses in reporting the hostage-taking last August 23 which left nine dead (including the hostage-taker) and seven wounded. Even if the media’s role is to help shape public opinion, the reporting of relevant information should be also in the context of ensuring the safety of civilians.

While our friends in the media should be commended for providing up-to-date information on what transpired, some media organizations should be criticized for the same reason because they ended up giving TOO MUCH information.

Commendation, however, cannot be given to the police as it failed not only to properly coordinate with media but also to ensure the peaceful resolution of the hostage-taking. Those responsible for the failed operation should even be punished. The disarray in the police operation reflects the disorganization and chaos in the Philippine National Police (PNP), the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) and the Aquino administration.

We need to remember some basic rules in covering hostage-taking incidents. First, journalists and media workers should refrain from interviewing a hostage-taker and reporting the latter’s statements while the situation is not yet resolved. Second, broadcast news anchors and field reporters who give live reports must not engage in speculation and innuendo as they try to “kill time” during a lull  in their reportage. Third, journalists and media workers should avoid interviewing elements of the police (e.g., snipers taking aim of their target) while an operation is ongoing. Fourth, they cannot report a hostage-taker’s state of mind or mental condition while there is still a standoff because it can make the situation worse. Fifth, they should be very careful when interviewing family members or friends of a hostage-taker as their statements could either even more agitate the latter. Sixth, they cannot give a live, blow-by-blow account of actual police operations as doing so eliminates the element of surprise in ending the crisis.

In analyzing the media’s coverage of what happened last August 23, there was  information that proved to be relevant not to the public but to the hostage-taker as he became desperate and ended up killing the hostages. That media covered live the arrest of the hostage-taker’s brother apparently did not help in resolving the situation.

It is appalling that the live coverage was done not to help the public make sense of the situation but only to milk it for all it is worth. The competition for higher ratings among broadcast stations was evident as they tried to provide “exclusive” reports, even going to the extent of interviewing another hostage-taker in 2007 who expressed no remorse in what he did. He even claimed that he did it for the country.

Just like the police, media should use the time to reflect. Journalists and media workers, after all, should not allow themselves to be held hostage by their  ignorance of ethical practice because they will end up doing a disservice to the victims and the public. And on the part of the Aquino administration, it should be resolute in resolving crisis situations affecting not only visiting tourists but also the majority of the Filipinos.

Maikli lang naman ang aking reaksyon pagkatapos kong mapanood ang pelikulang Sigwa (2010) noong Agosto 21 sa Cine Adarna ng Unibersidad ng Pilipinas (UP) Diliman. Wala pa ngang 10 salita ang aking pagsusuma: Sadyang hindi ako karapat-dapat na matawag na aktibista!

Umiinog ang kuwento ng pelikula sa anim na aktibistang magkakaibigan noong dekada 70 – Dolly, Cita, Oliver, Azon, Eddie at Rading. Sa paglipas ng halos 40 taon, may nagpatuloy sa pakikibaka, may nakisimpatiya na lang, may naging ahente ng militar at may tuwirang bumaligtad. Ipinapakita ng pelikula ang komplikadong buhay ng progresibong kabataan noong panahon ng Batas Militar – ang kanilang agam-agam sa landas na tinahak, ang kanilang pagkatakot sa buhay na pinili at ang kanilang kasiyahan sa bawat maliliit na tagumpay.

Isang kalakasan ng pelikulang Sigwa ang epektibong pagsasalarawan ng buhay ng mga aktibista. Sila’y marunong din palang tumawa’t umiyak, tulad ng ibang taong pinili ang buhay na “normal” at “tahimik.” Ipinapakita sa pelikula, halimbawa, ang kanilang kuwentuhan habang nag-iinuman, bagama’t ang paksa ng kanilang pinag-uusapan ay ang lipunan. May pag-aaway din ang magkasintahan habang nasa welga ng isang pagawaan. Kahit sa kabundukan, nakita ang pag-usbong at pagkawasak ng relasyon ng mga nagmamahalan sa maraming dahilan.

Kitang kita ang relasyon ng aktibismo sa rebolusyonaryong pagkilos noong dekada 70. Ang Kabataang Makabayan (KM) na kung saan miyembro ng anim na magkakaibigan ay napilitang mag-underground dahil sa diktadura. Hindi na nakakagulat ang desisyon ng marami sa mga miyembro nitong tumungo sa kanayunan na kung saan, ayon kay Oliver, ay “patas ang laban.”

Ano nga ba namang bentahe para sa mga aktibistang manatili sa kalunsuran? Una, malakas ang puwersa ng pamahalaan. Ikalawa, limitado lang ang maaaring pagtaguan. Kahit na hindi tuwirang binabanggit sa pelikula, alam ng mga pangunahing tauhan na sa kanayunan lang sila makakaasa ng malawak na suporta mula sa masa.

At bakit suportado ng maraming masa sa kanayunan ang rebolusyonaryong pagkilos? Sila kasi ang direktang nakakaranas ng pang-aapi’t pagkakait, ng pagsasamantala’t pagnanakaw ng mga nasa kapangyarihan. Ang rebolusyonaryong kilusan lang ang kanilang takbuhan para sa anumang pangangailangan – lupang masasaka (sa pamamagitan ng rebolusyonaryong agraryo) at kahit patas na desisyon sa anumang hindi pagkakaunawaan (sa pamamagitan ng rebolusyonaryong hukuman).

Bagama’t madali para sa isang estudyanteng kumilos sa kalunsuran at maging aktibista, mahirap na desisyon naman ang sumama sa armadong pakikibaka. Tulad ng ipinapakita sa pelikulang Sigwa, malaking sakripisyo ang mabuhay sa kabundukan. Wala ang luho ng kalunsuran. Iba ang kultura’t kalakaran lalo na’t ang seguridad ng mga kasama ay dapat pangalagaan.

Apatnapung taon na ang nakaraan mula nang mangyari ang First Quarter Storm na siyang pangunahing paksa ng pelikula (kahit na ang istorya’y tungkol sa paghahanap ni Dolly sa kanyang nawawalang anak). Maraming nagsasabing iba ang sitwasyon noong dekada 70 at wala nang batayan ang diumanong mapusok na pagkilos ng kabataan.

Napakadaling balewalain ang aktibismo, lalo na sa bahagi ng nakatatandang naging bahagi ng kilusan. Hindi man nila sabihin nang direkta, iisa lang ang mensahe nila sa kabataang aktibista: “Papunta pa lang kayo, pabalik na ako.” Para sa kabataang may malalim na kaalaman sa kanilang ginagawa, may simpleng sagot sa walang-batayang patutsada: “Mawalang-galang lang po, pero bakit hindi na lang po kayo nanatili? Tila naligaw po kayo sa inyong pagbalik.”

Aaminin kong ang epekto ng pelikulang Sigwa sa akin ay pagpapalakas ng paniniwalang ang titulong “aktibista” ay ibinibigay lamang sa mga piling indibidwal. Sila ay dapat na handang magsakripisyo’t talikuran ang buhay na kinagisnan para sa makahulugang pakikipaglaban. Sila ay mga natatanging mandirigmang hindi magdadalawang-isip na ialay ang lahat, kahit ang sariling buhay, para sa ikabubuti ng iba pa. Sila ay katulad ni Cita na dala-dala ang aktibismo sa kanilang pagtanda.

May progresibong mag-isip at kontento na sa sariling buhay. May progresibong mag-isip at kumikilos para ang buhay ng nakararami’y magkaroon ng saysay. Naniniwala ako sa sinabi ni Rading sa isang eksena: Hindi lahat ng sumasama sa mga rally ay aktibista. Mas malalim pa sa pagmamartsa’t pagtataas ng kamao ang esensiya ng aktibismo. Ang hindi tuwirang nakikita ay ang nangyayari sa likod ng mga naiuulat sa midya – ang pag-aaral sa mga teorya at ang pagsasapraktika ng natutuhan sa pamamagitan ng integrasyon sa masa.

Pero tulad ng sitwasyong ang mga pelikulang tulad ng Sigwa ay bihirang mapanood sa ating bansa, mas nakapangingibabaw ang negatibong pagtingin sa mga aktibista. Tinitingnan silang baliw at salot dahil sa paniniwalang ang ating lipunan ay may kapayapaan at kaginhawaan. Pilit na ibinibenta ang ilusyong hindi kailangang labanan ang pamahalaan dahil kailangan lang magtiwala rito.

Sa huling pagsusuri, maiintindihan lang ang aktibismo kung iuugnay sa mga nangyayari sa lipunan. Sa pagbasag sa ilusyon at tuwirang pagkamulat sa kabulukan ng lipunan, nakikita hindi lang ang pangangailangang sumuporta sa mga aktibista kundi maging kabahagi nila.

Para makipag-ugnayan sa awtor, pumunta sa www.dannyarao.com.

A student from the University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB) emailed questions on my experience as a campus journalist. Here are my answers. Since the questions were written in Filipino, I took the liberty of translating into English both the questions and my answers.

What motivated you to work for the Philippine Collegian in particular and the student movement in general?

I joined the Philippine Collegian (official student publication of the University of the Philippines Diliman) during my sophomore year in the late 1980s. At that time, I only wanted to develop my journalistic writing skills as I may be considered a “late bloomer” in campus journalism. I was not part, after all, of student publications in my elementary and high school days. In other words, I took writing seriously only in college!

It was only much later that I realized that journalism does not only require excellent writing skills but also a keen sense of awareness of what’s happening around us. It is through the latter that we could provide analytical depth to the articles we write.

As a result of a better appreciation of Philippine social reality, I also got involved in student activism. I actually joined the now defunct Kabataan para sa Demokrasya at Nasyonalismo (KADENA, loose translation: Youth for Nationalism and Democracy) whose mandate was to organize the out-of-school youth.

What were your good and bad experience of being part of the Philippine Collegian?

Through my involvement with the Philippine Collegian, I learned the importance of journalism in society. I appreciated the power of the media in the movement for social change. The demands of producing a weekly publication made me become more patient and diligent. I learned how to better deal with stress and other related problems that are considered part of being a journalist (particularly that of an editor, reporter and layout artist which were among my major tasks).

I cannot classify the problems I encountered as “bad experience” because I learned from them. It would be safe to assume that my college life became more memorable because of my work as a campus journalist.

What are the important lessons you learned from your experience in the Philippine Collegian?

I learned that journalism is more than just writing skills even if the latter are very important in communicating the intended message. Equally important to form (e.g., grammar, syntax, diction) is the substance of the article that can only be produced if a journalist knows how to analyze, if he or she knows how to make sense of the social reality.

As a campus journalist in your student days, what do you think are the duties of a campus publication?

A campus publication is essentially a student publication. This means that it is oriented toward promoting and upholding student rights and welfare. That it has a pro-student orientation doesn’t mean that a campus publication will turn a blind eye to the excesses or mistakes (if any) of students and student organizations. Through constructive criticism, a campus publication may actually end up exposing what it believes to be shortcomings of certain student groups and ideologies. Through in-depth analysis of issues and concerns, campus publications could help raise the level of discourse and contribute to the shaping of public opinion.

Had there been changes in the orientation of campus publications through the years?

I would like to think that today’s campus publications still have a pro-student orientation although there could be different interpretations of it. From my interaction with some of them, there are faculty advisers and student editors, for example, who think that campus publications should distinguish between national and local/community issues and that they should focus on the latter. I always stress that this is wrong because issues to be covered in a campus publication depend on the significance in the lives of the primary audience, the students.

Besides, what makes campus publications different from the mainstream/corporate print media is that they could better analyze national issues in the context of local concerns. Conversely, the so-called local concerns should be discussed in terms of how they relate to pressing national issues.

What factors caused such changes?

I think the culture of reading is not as strong as before among today’s youth. The latter are now more immersed in television and the new media. That Generation X is sometimes referred to as the TV generation shows the popularity and wide influence of audio-visual stimuli coming from the broadcast media. While today’s youth are more technology-savvy and media-savvy, it is unfortunate that they sometimes do not have the patience and diligence to read and understand important media texts.

In the face of suppression of press freedom, how did you cope with the times and continued your duties as a journalist?

Despite the threats I experienced in the past (the latest of which was when a radio program I co-hosted got cancelled in 2006 due to the government’s imposition of a state of national emergency), I try to continue my work as a journalist because the Filipino people deserve nothing less. I have no illusion that I will be read by everyone. But I cannot turn my back on those who are interested to know more about the issues and concerns I have chosen to analyze. They may agree or disagree with me, but what’s important is that I communicate my intended message. As a result of my being a campus journalist in college, I now have a firm grasp of my responsibility as a journalist.

What is your message to young writers so that they could develop and help uphold press freedom?

All of us should be aware of what’s happening in society so that we could better analyze burning social issues and put everything in proper context. As mentioned, the intended audience deserves nothing less but quality coverage. That’s the only way journalists can help in the shaping of public opinion.

Want to know more? Please read “Campus journalists as `torch bearers’ (August 12, 2010),” “My views on campus journalism and the Philippine Collegian (April 20, 2007)” and “My experience as a campus journalist (October 10, 2007).”

In the Philippines, the Office of the Press Secretary gets transformed into a “communications group” with three heads instead of one. What used to be the government portal is now called the Official Gazette. The Aquino administration is also maximizing social media in trying to reach out to the people.

One of the three heads, Herminio Coloma, said that the new communications group wants to establish “free-flowing communication” between the people and the government. Coloma said that his group would use the three Fs in public communication — feed in, feed forward and feedback.

With the help of a centralized website and social media like Facebook and Twitter, the Aquino administration hopes to get “all kinds of input and feedback.” Even if Coloma and the two other heads (Ricky Carandang and Manuel Quezon III) did not explicitly say it, they are apparently open to getting input and feedback both positive and negative. How can they, after all, get the people’s perception if they ignore the latter?

How the website is created could help in getting input and feedback from online users. Analyzing the source code of selected pages in the Official Gazette, one immediately notices the use of WordPress (WP) as a content management system (CMS). Its source code needs to be reviewed as there is no disclosure in the footer as regards the use of WP as CMS (which is usually the case for many WP-generated blogs and websites).

That the website uses WP simply means that articles could be designed and laid out like blog entries where it becomes convenient for an online user to leave a comment. This is apparently the case with some entries like President Benigno S. Aquino III’s state of the nation address (SONA) last July 26. However, there are pages where comments are not allowed, as in the case of an article titled “A Social Contract with the People” which outlines President Aquino’s campaign platform which he intends to implement.

It is too early to tell if this is a case of selective openness on the part of the administration. The website, after all, is still a work in progress as more content needs to be uploaded. One can only hope that the Aquino administration’s communications group would enable comments in all posts and pages.

While it is laudable for the Aquino administration to maximize social media in trying to get its message across, there seems to be no explanation from the communications group on the nature and orientation of the message it wants to convey. Yes, the powers-that-be always harp on truth and accountability in governance, but what is lacking in their policy pronouncements is how they would set up an effective public information system in the country.

As I noted in a previous post, public information has become synonymous with pro-government propaganda through the years: “Unfortunately, the public has come to accept the likes of the PIA [Philippine Inforamtion Agency] and NBN [National Broadcasting Network] to always toe the government line. They have been conditioned to think that this is the normal state-of-affairs and that the people will just have to live with it… As a result, it becomes unthinkable for a government-owned or controlled news media organization to become independent or hard-hitting. That a public information system could be independent but still subsidized is possible but the government prefers not to do this.”

If the Aquino administration really aspires for transparency in all government affairs, it should start by openly declaring that the new public information system is the exact opposite of what past administrations had. As the term “public information” suggests, the Aquino administration should not think twice about disseminating information that matters to the people, even if these do not put some government officials in a good light. Public information is not about giving good publicity to the powers-that-be. As I wrote before, it should be “free from any political color and could therefore come from any source,” including the opposition.

If the powers-that-be have a firm grasp of the definition and essence of public information, they would know that sugar-coating reality through one-sided reports is counter-productive to the shaping of public opinion.

It is obviously not too late for the Aquino administration therefore to answer this very basic question: What is your concept of a public information system? For the administration’s sake, however, it should be answered at the soonest possible time.

A student from the University of the Philippines (UP) Diliman emailed some questions about election coverage in the new media. Allow me to share with you my short answers.

What are the major challenges in doing online coverage of the elections?

Online journalism is said to have the “permanence of print and the immediacy of broadcast.” Convergence, however, is not just limited to relative permanence or immediacy. It also has to do with combining various kinds of media texts and hypertexts (i.e., words, hyperlinks, images, streaming audio and video).

Just like the coverage of other issues, election coverage through the new media requires the immediate uploading of media texts without compromising the highest professional and ethical standards of journalism.

At the same time, the online publication should maximize social media to promote its contents. The uploading of media texts, after all, does not guarantee the immediate sharing of information.

How is it different from the coverage of traditional media (i.e. print and broadcast media)?

Unlike in the so-called traditional media, online publications do not have deadlines in the strictest sense of the word. Articles and other forms of media texts (e.g., photographs, video files) are uploaded as soon as they are ready. It is therefore possible for an online publication to have various “banner headlines” in one day. In the same way, an article could be updated several times especially in the case of breaking stories where new developments happen, say, every hour.

In the new media, feedback from audiences is made more expedient. Despite the moderation of comments in many online publications, the feedback is still relatively faster in terms of its publication.

What ethical issues are usually encountered in election coverage?

Given the nature of the new media, the temptation to immediately upload unverified information remains. Those who don’t have a firm grasp of journalism ethics argue that this practice is acceptable since the initially wrong information could be corrected anyway. This is obviously wrong because online visitors would be led to think that the unverified information is true.

Notwithstanding the nature of the new media, the professional and ethical standards should remain the same, and should remain high. It is unthinkable and unacceptable for anybody to adjust (read: lower) the high standards of journalism to justify the immediate uploading of information, even if unverified.

The convenience of taking photographs or footage could also make an online journalist forget the need to strike a balance between the public’s right to know and an individual’s right to privacy, especially in the cases of rape victims and juvenile delinquents.

Though the two cases rarely crop up during elections, photographs and footage of election-related violence should be treated with utmost care to ensure that the dead are properly given respect and what is presetned to the public is in “good taste.” This is the reason some crime scenes are pixelized (or rendered in black and white) to ensure that the sensibilities of audiences are not affected, especially the children who are watching.

How are these issues connected to the nature of the medium?

Technology makes it easy for people to publish online. A content management system (CMS) like WordPress, for example, makes it easy for anybody to put up an online publication or a personal blog. Notwithstanding the high cost of gadgets, there are many user-friendly, high-resolution digital cameras that can take quality photographs and footage which could be shared online even without the use of an Internet-connected computer. One can even argue that a high-technology cellphone which has a built-in video camera is more than enough for a blogger or journalist to take pictures or footage.

Are there any landmark ethical issues that occurred during this year’s elections, particularly in online media?

It’s hard to define “landmark,” but a blogger-supporter of a presidential candidate was removed from a newly-established Asian news website after the latter got complaints due to his irresponsible articles. This blogger became notorious not only for ungrammatical writing but also for engaging in character assassination. Incidentally, his favorite target during the election campaign was the leading presidential candidate. He took a leave of absence for a while but he is now back blogging in his old, irresponsible style. I’m sorry if I refuse to identify him as I might end up giving him the popularity he doesn’t deserve.

Were they resolved? If yes, how? If no, what would be the best course of action?

His being removed from an Asian news website did not prevent him from setting up not just one but several blogs. He still engages in maligning his pet peeves, though I noticed that he has gone soft lately on President Noynoy Aquino. For me, the best course of action is to ignore him publicly and to use his blog entries as case studies in media ethics, particularly on how NOT to blog.

Why do you think they occur?

The answer is simple: There are a few bloggers who don’t know the responsibility that goes with sharing information in the public domain, which is what cyberspace is (whether we like it or not).

What should online media practitioners work on to overcome such ethical issues?

They should be more conscious of the consequences of their actions, particularly the harm they would do to audiences if they give wrong or unverified information. I think a good start is to read and understand A Bloggers’ Code of Ethics.

A student from the University of the Philippines (UP) Diliman emailed a few questions about my involvement with the community press. Below are my answers.

What community presses have you been affiliated with? What positions did you occupy?

If we loosely define “community press” as media organizations that cater mainly to a defined area and therefore has a defined audience, my affiliation with the so-called community press started as early as college in the late 1980s: I was a reporter for the Philippine Collegian, official student publication of the University of the Philippines (UP) Diliman, where I eventually became its news editor.

Contrary to the popular notion that my “Konteksto” (Context) column started with Pinoy Weekly, it actually started in 2004 with the defunct community-based tabloid Alam ng Cagayan Valley which is based in Tuguegarao City. This publication did not last long.

In 2006, I decided to revive “Konteksto” when I was offered to write more regularly for Pinoy Weekly, which is technically not community-based given its broader Filipino audience in the country and abroad.

What sets a community press apart from a local newspaper or other forms of media?

A local newspaper is part of the community press. Strictly speaking, the word “press” refers to the print media, particularly newspapers and magazines. Through the years, however, “press” has become synonymous with “media” and therefore includes not only print but also broadcast and new media. This would explain why a journalist’s identification card is now usually called “press ID.”

What is the structure of the editorial staff of a community press? Does it differ from the editorial staff of newspapers/magazines?

Just like other media organizations, the community press has a defined hierarchy of publishers, editors, writers, photographers, graphic designers and layout artists, among other positions. Low-budget media organizations in communities, however, normally have journalists who take on various tasks. It’s not surprising to encounter community-based print publications that have only one or two people who do all the work.

How are the issues released? Are there any routine tasks you need to perform every day for that particular newspaper?

From my experience at the Philippine Collegian, the weekly issues were always on time as the work had a defined system. Despite our heavy academic load and other extra-curricular activities, most of the editors and staff were very committed to see an issue through and normally went the “extra mile,” so to speak, to make sure that certain tasks were done. Brownouts, computer breakdowns and other technical problems sometimes happened but these were not used as convenient excuses not to finish the job.

What makes working for a community press different from working for a commercial newspaper/publication?

Those who work for the community press, provided the media organization is not commercial in character, do so out of serious commitment instead of mere employment. They use their journalistic skills and knowledge to inform their community, without expecting to be compensated for their services.

What are the usual  problems encountered in the production of the newspaper?

Financial constraints normally plague the community press and this is primarily the reason many community-based publications come and go.

Being a “community press,” what role does the community perform in the production process?

The community residents do not only serve as audience of a community-based media organization. They are actually mobilized to provide leads with regard to issues that must be covered. Skills training may also be conducted in communities so that residents would eventually become part of the community-based media organization.

Is there any advantage in particular that made you enjoy working for a community press?

Editing and writing for the community press gave me the opportunity to deeply analyze social reality. My interaction with different kinds of people deepened my social consciousness. For me, journalism becomes not a career that one must develop but a commitment that one must pursue.

How can one prove that the culture of impunity still exists in the Philippines? Consider this: Five killings of activists in seven days, the first one on the fifth day of the new administration.

Benigno Aquino III assumed the presidency armed with a promise that he will put a stop to the killings. Less than two weeks before he was sworn in as the 15th President of the Philippines, Edwin Lacierda (who eventually became Presidential Spokesperson) said, “(Aquino’s) family has been a victim of human rights violation so it’s natural for him to ensure that the rights of everyone, especially the members of the media.”

Aquino’s promise of a “serious pursuit of justice” was done in the wake of media killings last month which left a carnage of three dead in just five days. In a statement, 32 professors, 14 staff, the college student council and 14 college-based student organizations of the University of the Philippines College of Mass Communication (UP CMC) made this analysis: “That three journalists were killed in one week is by itself sufficient evidence that the outgoing Macapagal-Arroyo administration has utterly failed to provide an atmosphere conducive to a free press. Even if there is no evidence to prove that any high-ranking government official actually pulled the trigger and consequently killed journalists Desidario Camangyan (June 14), Joselito Agustin (June 15) and Nestor Bedolido (June 19), the Macapagal-Arroyo administration remains accountable for the killings since 2001.” (Disclosure: The author is a signatory to the statement.)

As regards the recently slain activists, the culture of impunity is also apparent due to the brazen manner in which the murders were carried out.

According to a news report, “A lone gunman repeatedly shot (Fernando) Baldomero, (61), early morning of July 5 in front of his residence in the capital town of Kalibo in Aklan as he was about to take his 12-year-old son to school. The gunman fled on board a motorcycle driven by an accomplice.”

The same case applies to the second murder that happened last July 9, as a report states, “Pascual Guevarra, 78, head of the local Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Association (Arba) and Alyansa ng mga Magbubukid na Nagkakaisa 3100 (Almana 3100), died from bullet wounds in the chest.His grandson, Ronnel Viloria, 18, tried to help his grandfather but the gunman shot and wounded him, said Senior Insp. Almario Evaristo, the town police chief.”

Preliminary reports from reliable sources on the murder of the third activist show the same pattern: “On July 9, armed bonnet-wearing men killed Mark Francisco, (27), of ACT Teachers Partylist in Sitio Umawas, Brgy. Malabas, Palanas, Masbate.”

According to another news report, Francisco was not the only supporter of ACT Teachers Partylist who died on that day: “Edgar Fernandez, 44, another public school teacher from Barangay Central, Masbate City, Masbate, was shot dead by unidentified men on his way home…Fernandez and a co-teacher, both riding a motorcycle, were fired at by an unidentified man. Fernandez died immediately but his co-teacher survived with a bullet wound.”

And just last July 12, Josephine Estacio, 42, another member of ACT Teachers Partylist, was killed. According to a preliminary report, “(U)nidentified motorcycle-riding men shot dead…Estacio…shortly before the start of classes in Tenejero Elementary School. (She) died on the spot after she was shot at 6:45 a.m. in Tenejero village in Balanga City in Bataan.

Baldomero was provincial chair of Bayan Muna (People First) Partylist in Aklan. Guevarra, on the other hand, was chair of the Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Association and Alyansa ng mga Magbubukid na Nagkakaisa 3100 (Almana 3100) and worked closely with the Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP, Peasant Movement of the Philippines). Francisco, Fernandez and Estacio, meanwhile, were affiliated with ACT Teachers Partylist which won a seat in Congress, just like Bayan Muna and AnakPawis (Toiling Masses), the latter being supported by the KMP.

As if the five murders were not enough, there was also news that a journalist was “wounded when two unidentified men shot him in Nabua, Camarines Sur” last July 9. The report continues: “Miguel Belen, 48, was shot by two unidentified gunmen in Barangay San Jose at around 8:45 p.m…The victim was on a motorcycle and was tailed by his attackers, who were also riding a motorcycle…Belen was returning home from work as a field reporter of the dwEB-FM radio station of Filipinas Broadcasting Network based in Nabua. The shooting took place in a secluded part of San Jose, just three kilometers from the town proper…Belen sustained gunshot wounds in the neck and torso and remained in critical condition at the Doña Josefa Hospital in nearby Iriga City.”

Belen’s case highlights the fact that media killings are indeed the highest form of censorship in the country. In the same vein, the killings of activists serve as a way to permanently silence dissent. For the journalists and activists left behind, the murders provide a chilling effect and give a stark reminder of what would happen if they continue to be critical of the powers-that-be.

It is ironic that the murders continue and that the mayhem persists. To quote from the UP CMC statement, there is indeed a need to be vigilant of the future as “the culture of impunity knows no administrations as the violence knows no bounds.”

Walang masama sa desisyon ni Pangulong Noynoy Aquino na ipailalim sa isang pagsasanay ang ilang opisyal ng gobyerno tungkol sa tamang pakikitungo sa midya. Pero hindi ko maiwasang magduda sa intensiyon ng administrasyon kung susuriin ang pinagmulan ng desisyong ito.

Kung matatandaan ang nangyari sa mga unang araw ng panunungkulan ng bagong administrasyon, malinaw na napikon sina Presidential Spokesperson Edwin Lacierda at Education Secretary Bro. Armin Luistro sa mga tanong ng ilang peryodista. Bagama’t humingi ng dispensa at nagbigay ng paglilinaw ang dalawa, hindi nila naitago ang kanilang kakulangan sa pagbibigay ng respeto sa gawain ng midya.

At dahil ang kakulangan ay maiuugat sa kawalan ng kaalaman, mainam na bigyan sila, gayundin ng iba pa, ng pag-aaral. Dahil hindi ko nakita ang laman ng modyul na ginamit, paniniwalaan ko na lang ang balitang kasama sa pagsasanay ang paksa hinggil sa aktuwal na trabaho ng mga peryodista.

Siguro’y dapat ko ring bigyan ng kaukulang respeto ang kakayahan ng nagbigay ng pagsasanay, si Carol Esposo-Espiritu, na sinasabing eksperto sa midya at komunikasyon. Malawak daw ang kanyang karanasan bilang peryodista noon pang panahon ni Marcos. Wala akong karapatang ikumpara ang aking sarili sa kanya dahil apat na taong gulang pa lang ako nang ideklara ni Marcos ang Batas Militar sa Pilipinas.

Pero hindi ko pa rin mapigilan ang sarili kong magkomento sa napabalitang sinabi ni Espiritu sa pagsasanay: “Media have to do their job…If you make things easy for them, they will stop hounding you.” Una sa lahat, hindi na kailangang pagsabihan ang mga opisyal ng pamahalaan na maging bukas sa publiko. Kung ang layunin ng kasalukuyang administrasyon ay maging tapat sa tungkulin, magiging bahagi na ang bukas na daluyan ng impormasyon. Sa kontekstong ito, hindi na dapat maging isyu o problema ang pagpapahirap sa trabaho ng midya.

Puwede namang sabihing simpleng paalala lang ito sa mga opisyal na hindi sanay makitungo sa mga peryodista. Pero ang paggamit ng salitang pagtugis (hound) ay may implikasyon sa pagtingin ng kasalukuyang administrasyon sa gawain ng midya. Kung hindi mo lubusang naiintindihan ang esensiya ng pangangalap ng balita, maiisip mo talagang makukulit, makakapal ang mukha at matitigas ang ulo ng mga nagtatrabaho sa midya. At sa kontekstong ito, iisipin mong tinutugis (hounding) ka nila kaya dapat mong pigilan ang pangungulit nila sa iyo.

Sa madaling salita, ang nararapat na dahilan sa pakikisama sa midya ay ang intensiyong magbigay ng impormasyon sa publiko, at hindi ang pag-iwas sa pagtugis na ginagawa nila. Sa kabila ng tinaguriang media training na isinagawa sa mga piling opisyal, may malaki akong pagdududa kung magreresulta ito sa pagbibigay ng makabuluhang impormasyon sa publiko sa pamamagitan ng midya.

Sana’y mali ang balitang sinabi ni Lacierda noong Hulyo 5 na ang pagsasanay ay kung paano panghawakan ang midya (how to handle the media). Kung totong ito ang eksaktong salitang sinabi ng opisyal na tagapagsalita ng Pangulo, lumalabas na ang kanyang pagtingin sa midya ay mga instrumentong dapat manipulahin sa halip na mga organisasyong nagsisilbing daluyan ng impormasyon sa publiko.

Hindi tuloy nakakagulat na sa kanyang muling pagharap sa midya noong Hulyo 8, kapansin-pansin ang pagngiti, pagtawa at pagbibiro niya sa mga peryodista. Gayundin ang kaso ni Luistro na nagsabing magkakaroon na siya ng press conference tuwing Biyernes. Sa gitna ng kanilang mas maaliwalas na mukha, malinaw na ang kanilang layunin ay magkaroon lang ng positibong ulat, para sa kanila at sa buong administrasyong Aquino.

Kung sabagay, iba rin kasi ang pagtingin ng kanilang gurong si Espiritu sa relasyon ng midya at gobyerno. Ayon sa kanya, ang midya ay dapat tingnan ng mga opisyal ng gobyerno bilang kasama sa pamamahala (partner in governance). Ito ay taliwas sa prinsipyo ng nagsasariling katangian ng midya na pangunahing indikasyon ng kalayaan sa pamamahayag ng isang bansa. Kung may nararapat na pagtingin sa midya, ito ay ang respeto sa institusyong nagsisilbing tulay ng pamahalaan sa mamamayan.

Sa kontekstong ito, ang midya’y maaaring maging kaaway o kakampi ng pamahalaan at walang magagawa ang mga nasa kapangyarihan sa sitwasyong ito. At lalong wala silang karapatang manipulahin ang midya sa pamamagitan ng pagbibigay ng positibong anggulo. Hindi dapat maging layunin ng anumang pamahalaan ang pagkakaroon ng positibong pag-uulat dahil ang nararapat na prayoridad ay ang pagbibigay ng makabuluhang impormasyon. Ang huli’y maaaring positibo o negatibo para sa pamahalaan, pero kailangan pa ring ibahagi ito.

Kung mayroong pagsasanay na dapat gawin ang Presidential Spokesperson at iba pang may kinalaman sa komunikasyon sa publiko, ito ay ang pag-intindi sa konsepto ng impormasyong pampubliko (public information). Dapat nang tanggalin ang ugaling bigyan ng positibong anggulo ang isang pangyayari, lalo na’t kung pinaniniwalaang hindi magiging maganda ang balita sa opinyon ng marami.

Oras na malaman nila’t isapuso ang kanilang trabahong magbigay ng makabuluhang impormasyon sa publiko, mas maiintindihan nila ang gawain ng midyang iulat ang mga opisyal na pahayag. Hahayaan nilang magbigay ng sariling pagsusuri ang mga peryodista, pabor man o hindi sa pamahalaan. Para sa mga nasa kapangyarihan, iisipin nilang may pagkakataon namang magbigay ng klaripikasyon kung sakaling may makita silang mali sa mga ulat ng midya, at ito ang pinagmumulan ng malayang talakayan o debate. Sa pamamagitan ng palitan ng kuro-kuro ng mga opisyal at peryodista, mapapataas ang antas ng diskurso na kung saan mas epektibong mahuhubog ang opinyong pampubliko.

Malinaw kung gayon ang hamon sa administrasyong Aquino: Tratuhin nang tama ang midya hindi sa pamamagitan ng ngiti’t matatamis na salita, kundi sa bukas na pagbibigay ng mga angkop na balita.

Para makipag-ugnayan sa awtor, pumunta sa www.dannyarao.com.

A student from the Ateneo de Manila University asked me 10 questions on media coverage in war-torn areas. Please find below my answers.

What is the importance of media coverage in war-torn areas?

Aside from providing the necessary information to the public, media could serve as a deterrent to abuses that are wont to be committed by groups that are at war. Theoretically, non-combatants are assured of their safety and prisoners of war (POWs) are treated more humanely if the parties concerned are made aware of media’s presence.

What are the roles fulfilled by war journalists?

At a time of war, journalists should still practice accuracy, objectivity and fairness in their reportage. They should, at the same time, exercise extreme caution in going about their work. In particular, they should know when to pull out if ever the situation becomes too volatile or the group they are covering suddenly becomes extremely hostile to their presence. They should remember the age-old saying in journalism that “no story is worth dying for.”

Do you think media coverage in such areas should be restricted? Why?

Restrictions in media coverage are acceptable only if the authorities and journalists agree that media presence could jeopardize an operation and unnecessarily endanger the lives of combatants and non-combatants. Despite their duty to cover the war, journalists cannot allow themselves to be part of the news, as in the case of ending up, albeit unwittingly, as “human shields” or, most likely willingly, as “negotiators” during a standoff, for instance.

Do you think censorship conceals the truth? How come?

Censorship is unacceptable even if media organizations should maintain the highest professional and ethical standards. The truth should be reported, keeping in mind that journalists must remain critical of the official statements they get. They must always compare what they get from sources with what they observe on the ground.

Is it the public’s right to be able to view the reallity of the war through media? Why?

The public has the right to be informed, especially during a time of war. It is understandable for media organizations to sometimes fail in the delivery of news due to circumstances beyond their control. But they should try their best to get their message across, even if delayed.

How is society affected by the media coverage of war?

Media play a pivotal role in the public’s perception of the war, which is why they should be able to explain the context in a manner that is comprehensive and understandable. They cannot afford to give a “sports-like” coverage of the war where people become preoccupied with “who’s winning” and the “latest score” of casualties and injuries.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of media coverage in war-torn areas?

I cannot think of any disadvantages of media coverage in war-torn areas given media’s role in the shaping of public opinion. Media, in this context, should be allowed to fulfill their obligation to the people.

How can the release of graphic images in war be an eye-opener to society?

Images and footage of war provide evidence of what is being claimed and may also be used to expose the lies of so-called spin doctors who have their own agenda in projecting the war to suit certain interests.

What do journalists get from covering the news in times of conflict?

Journalists get the opportunity to fulfill their obligation in providing timely and relevant information. They put their lives on the line just to ensure that the people know what they need to know.

How can journalists become unbiased and professional toward the issue they are reporting?

Journalists need to have a firm grasp of the professional and ethical standards. They could get it through extensive training, meticulous reading and intensive practice.