N.B. – This was published in The Lobbyist (June 14) where I write a column (Subtext).

A journalist from Vietnam requested an interview via email on how the media report on the Philippines’ territorial claims. Please allow me to share my answers.

Have the Philippine media covered thoroughly the recent clashes on the sea between Philippines ships and Chinese ones? What sources did Filipino journalists use to get information on these incidents? Besides official information from governmental offices, what other sources are available to journalists?

The Philippine media, as expected, provided up-to-date information on the tensions arising from the disputed territories in the South China Sea. In my opinion, there is a conscious effort to inform the public even if some off-the-cuff pronouncements by government officials are being given the publicity they don’t deserve.

An example is a government official’s call for a boycott of products made in China which, I think, deflects the major issue which is assertion of national sovereignty by the parties involved.

There is a healthy mix of sources as government officials are interviewed, as well as experts like historians. In my opinion, there should be more of the latter and less of the former so that people are better informed. I think that experts are in a better position to help in the shaping of public opinion through the media. They are, after all, more familiar with the issue compared to government officials who may not be deeply immersed yet on the country’s territorial claims.

Beyond the news on the events, what attitudes do Philippine media express about provoking actions from China and China’s intrigue on the South China Sea? How do they express their attitudes in the media products? Are those attitudes of Philippine media common or do they differ on some ways?

Both government officials and the media are careful about issuing provocative or confrontational statements that could be misinterpreted by the public within and outside the Philippines. In terms of journalistic outputs, editorials and column articles are expected to have varying levels of analysis and recommendations on what should be done.

The general sentiment of opinion-makers appears to be asserting Philippine sovereignty as regards its territorial claims. The difference, however, lies in how the problem could be resolved. There are those, for example, who want to bring the case to the United Nations (UN) while there are those who demand intervention from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

Are there any points in Philippine–China relationship which Filipino journalists have to consider or notice during their coverage and analyses on those clashes?

Given how passionate Filipino journalists are in asserting press freedom, I doubt if government would ever issue warnings to media on what should be reported just to avoid any misunderstanding with the Chinese. What is necessary for the Philippine media is to continue providing the context of the issue by providing not only a historical background but also soliciting comments from experts like historians, sociologists and lawyers. The problem with interviewing some government officials is that they may not have in-depth understanding of the issue and would only end up giving “colorful sound bites” that do not help in sharing relevant information.

What role does the Philippine government play in the information work of the media on those clashes?

In theory, the Philippine government should practice transparency in sharing information to people, through the media. That is what “public information” is all about. However, public information in practice has become synonymous to government propaganda so journalists end up only getting information which the government thinks is useful to give it a positive treatment in the media. There is an effort, for example, to downplay the military’s capability to protect the country’s territory.

The government’s “strength” tends to be projected only in its rhetoric. An example is the move to rename the South China Sea to West Philippine Sea in the Philippine government’s official statement. While government officials claim that there is nothing political about using the name “West Philippine Sea,” the timing is still suspect.

At what level does the Filipino audience pay attention to this information? With what means or way can they express their opinions and positions on this topic?

There is some level of discernment in reading, listening to or watching news from the media. One reason government broadcast stations are not that popular is because of the widespread perception that information coming from them is skewed to put the government in a good light. While audiences are interested in what the government has to say (especially on an issue as important as the Spratlys), they are nevertheless wary of just getting one side of the story, hence the decision to be exposed to different forms of mass media.

Are similar clashes between Chinese ships and other countries’ ships, such as Vietnamese, being reported in the Philippine media? At what level, from what sources?

Moves by the Vietnamese, Chinese and other concerned parties are being reported in the Philippine media, though these are understandably done in the context of how they affect the Philippines. There are primary sources of information (e.g., foreign affairs office, embassies) as well as secondary ones (e.g., wire agencies, other Internet sources). Of course, the main sources of overseas information are the international wire agencies. While the bigger media organizations in the Philippines are capable of sending their journalists to report on breaking developments abroad, the current situation does not yet warrant such a move.

What role do social networks play in media in Philippines generally? And what role do you see they play in the incidents we are talking about?

Social media give a person an opportunity to share useful online resources to his or her network (e.g., Facebook friends, Twitter followers). In the Philippines, social media could also be sources of information as selected status updates get quoted in news reports. It is also possible for journalists to find leads as they analyze posts, pictures and videos uploaded in social media.

In your assessment, could the Philippine media have any effect in making the Chinese reconsider their behaviors?

The biggest factor in a diplomatic solution to the problem is the government. Media could only indirectly affect the outcome through its reporting of the issue. If journalistic outputs would adhere to the highest professional and ethical standards, then it is possible for policy-makers and government officials to seriously consider the sound analyses provided in the reports, particularly in the editorials and column articles.