ICQ No. 5399378
add me if you like
Email
me!
Copyright
© 1998-1999
Brian
Dexter M. Medija
Davao City, Philippines
Proudly
Davaoeño!
|
|
Dissecting The Philippine
Mass Media Today
by Brian Dexter M.
Medija
Introduction
Philippine Mass Media today is a hybrid of Libertarian
and Authoritarian stock, inheriting incongruous qualities
that render it complicated and oftentimes confusing.
Philippine Media prides itself as the "freest in
Asia"; the constitution-backed protection of press
freedom gives it a characteristic Libertarian flavor.
However, contrary to Libertarian principles, this press
freedom is regulated to some extent by the government.
This is where its Authoritarian personality sets in.
It is widely accepted that Libertarian governments have
some degree of control over their Mass Media. But such
controls, in the form of laws and other such policies,
are formulated with the thrusts on responsibility and
over-all public welfare, and not in order to cow the so-called
"Fourth Estate." This Libertarian definition is
twisted by Authoritarian technocrats of the Martial Law
period in the person of then Information Minister
Francisco S. Tatad, by saying:
The
liberty of the press never has been absolute. It
has always yielded to higher considerations. It
has always balanced against other community
interests such as the security of the State, the
right and duty of the State to provide for the
well-being of its citizens, the maintenance of
decency and public order, the protection of
reputation and the need for fair trial
proceedings, among others. ("The Right to
Know," The Times Journal, August 26,
1978).
|
His explication on the inherent need for government
regulation of the media in a Parliamentary Democracy (the
Philippines assumed a Parliamentary form of government
during Martial Law), is one of the many paradoxes in a
society wielding the democratic Bill of Rights on one
hand and authoritarian State supremacy on the other. In
short, the convoluted definition of control (causing it
to take on an authoritarian tone) over the media is, in
essence, political propaganda. It is to be noted that in
Libertarian theory, the power lies ultimately on the
people and the state is a mere venue on which "man
can develop his potentialities and enjoy a maximum of
happiness" (Maslog, 1989). To the Authoritarian
theorist, whose contentions run parallel to the martial
law technocrats', "the state is the 'ethical spirit…
Will… Mind… the state, being and end in itself,
is provided with the maximum of rights over against the
individual citizens, whose highest duty is to be members
of the state" (George Hegel quoted by Maslog, 1989).
This clash of principles between the government and the
media fuels their unebbing animosity for each other. The
state contends that without restrictions, media have the
ability to threaten the truthful dissemination of
information and that this irresponsibility, coupled with
unrestricted liberty, will inevitably threaten the State's
security. The media rebut that when government
institutionalizes controls over them, it has the capacity
to manipulate these regulations to cow and threaten them;
that the government will exploit every creative means it
can to muzzle the Fourth Estate.
With these overlapping yet contradictory qualities of the
Philippine Media, it is inevitable that many will
question the nature of these controls. Are these
regulations instituted merely as safeguards to the Bill
of Rights or are they an attempt at authoritarian
regulation which goal is to attain conformity from the
otherwise predominantly leftist press? Simply, are these
controls formulated ultimately to cow the Fourth Estate?
Is this institution of government restriction a precursor
to the return of authoritarian control over the media?
This paper assesses the complicated and confusing
tapestry that is Philippine Mass Media, delving into and
dissecting its two personalities-Libertarian and
Authoritarian-and how they are manifested within the
system. The discussion will be divided into two subtitles:
"Political Role" and "Social Role."
In the process, this author necessarily examines the
political and social landscapes that are the backdrop of
the ironies in Philippine Media.
Assessing Philippine Mass Media
Media has a
tripartite role in society: Political, Economic and
Social. Its political role includes its duty as an
information disseminator, its responsibility in creating
and reflecting public opinion and its function as
watchdog on government.
Political Role
Philippine Media
assumes a libertarian stance in its role of disseminating
information. Foreign news, information and entertainment
programs have a rather unregulated entry into the
mainstream of Philippine Media. Likewise, editorials
harsh on the government and other such unflattering and
sensitive articles are given the right to publication or
airtime. However, this seemingly untrammeled liberty
exists with a dark speck. In the words of Supreme Court
Justice Enrique Fernando, quoted by Paredes (1986),
"the greatest threat to press freedom is national
security." This, paired with the afore-quoted words
of Francisco Tatad, undeniably glisten with an
authoritarian sheen as they give the impression that the
State's security precedes individual liberty. To this
author, this paints an incongruous image of a society
bearing two aeges-authoritarian State supremacy on one
hand and libertarian Bill of Rights on the other. The
state can choose only one priority and strive to protect
it.
Fearing possible seditious results, former President
Corazon Aquino ordered against the airing of a DZXL
interview with coup attempt leader Gregorio "Gringo"
Honasan. To justify her order, she contended eloquently
that Honasan sees the media as a "weapon of
destabilization aimed at the institutions that protect
the fundamental rights that give life to media and
democracy." This bears a semblance of political
propaganda, seeming to give stress on the words "media
and democracy" for empathic effect when its meat
speaks of the precedence of the state in the spectrum of
rights. This undeniably compromises the libertarian
principle of allowing all and every shade of information
and opinions in a marketplace of ideas, in protection of
what it deems is a higher priortity-the State and its
security.
Philippine media sees itself as the champion at creating
public opinion. Although the inherent control against
seditious material is still in effect, several accounts
on the media's creation of a definite public opinion can
be observed. One instant is the public demand for the
cancellation of the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) on
the execution of incestuous rapist Leo Echegaray. The
media, having fed the public of the verbosity on the Leo
Echegaray story to the surfacing of daughter-victim Baby,
to the proclamation of death penalty, and to the
suspension of the execution via TRO, with all the
sensational appendages, have brought the public into an
outcry for 'death justice.' This has likewise built
enough pressure on the Supreme Court and caused it to
give in to the clamors of the "nation."
This, however, paints the underlying political setup of
the Philippines, particularly of the judiciary, bringing
to question the integrity of the highest judicial office
which gave in the demands of the people without standing
pat on its decision to halt the execution. Another
political factor which may hint the successful lifting of
the TRO is that the President himself is in favor of the
death penalty that Echegaray's death comes as a guarantee
to this "supreme will." It is noteworthy that
the president's conviction blends seamlessly with the
opinion of the "masa." Thus, given this
scenario, it becomes more questionable whether this
process of mobilizing public opinion (resulting to the
successful lifting of the TRO) occurred as a natural
Libertarian process or a process facilitated by the
highest office in the land.
The watchdog function of Philippine Media is the source
of problematic accounts from the practitioners. Dean
Armando Malay, quoted by Paredes (1986), says that "although
the regime has tolerated the publication of sensitive
articles, there is always an attempt to muzzle the press."
This brings to mind the "cow tactics" of the
martial law regime where attempts to thwart libertarian
policies are enacted in the guise of upholding the "virtuous"
laws of anti-sedition and anti-subversion. This brings
one to recall former President Aquino's move to deprive
air time to the DZXL interview with the state's "enemy",
Honasan.
The fact that such laws become the major aegis of the
state to silence the otherwise "vitriolic"
press in order to protect its security brings to image a
media system behind the bars of manipulable legislation.
Anti-sedition and anti-subversion laws have long been in
effect yet the threat of another possibly pliable law
looms anew: the Anti-Media Bribery Law being pushed by
Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago. This bill, while
promising at first sight (it may have arisen to curb the
corrupt AC/DC practices of media, discussed in the
following paragraph), becomes increasingly porous when
examined up close. The fact that one Manila columnist
admitted that "it is very easy to indict journalists
for receiving gifts" is testament to this author's
contention that such gifts, which may come out of
wholehearted charity or with birberous intent, can easily
be construed by scheming prosecutors as bribes-hence
valid grounds for indictment. Media Bribery may not be
used against seditious practitioners (although they will
more likely be convicted of accepting "bribes"
from politicians seeking their support), but the "flexibility"
of this law illustrates the manipulability of established
legislation.
With mounting poverty and other ills ambient in modern-day
Philippine society, it is inevitable that these socio-economic
factors will be mirrored in the operation of mass-media.
This has led to the evolution of a different kind of
media tactics-AC/DC-or the "Attack-Collect/Defend-Collect"
strategy. Under this practice, a journalist (or any
practitioner) comes up with material attacking a person
of rank, the person attacked will give money to the
journalist expecting a "retraction" of the
attack. Correspondingly, the journalist will publish (or
broadcast, etc.) a new article in defense of the person
of rank, and approaches the latter for "gratification
fees." The cycle continues and becomes a tradition,
corrupting the image of the Fourth Estate, in the process
pulling down the quality of reportage. The degradation of
the Media worsens.
Social Role
The other end of the
spectrum is Media's Social Role. This includes the role
of establishing Pop Culture, the task of building a
nation, and entertainment.
Popular Culture is established when media programs become
ingrained into local culture. Hence, when the "Ang
Dating Doon" program of GMA 7 became phenomenally
popular, expressions such as "Alien!" and
"Raise the Roof!" (corruptions of "Amen"
and "Praise the Lord") found their way into the
daily vocabulary of its patrons. Likewise, the Voltes V
theme was also popularized, kindling the audiences'
interest in the anime (Japanese cartoon program). This
may be interpreted as some crafty commercial tactics of
GMA. It is to be remembered that during Martial Law, the
Voltes V series was banned from television as the
analysts of the Marcos regime believed it to have
seditious or rebellious qualities that purportedly affect
the psychology of its patrons. Hence, fearing rebellion
at a time when student activism was already rampant, the
state deemed it most logical to remove all violent,
rebellious programs from the air.
Apparently
resulting from the "Ang Dating Doon" fever, the
Voltes V mania has resurrected, and, curiously, the move
to ban the airing of the series has resurfaced. It is
alarming to many that such drive for control, which the
country has supposedly already rid itself, still has
germinated through the nation's authorities. This speaks
of the omnipresence of authoritarian tendencies in the
government.
The geographical makeup of the Philippines illustrates
its factionalized society. Being an archipelago of more
than seven thousand islands, the Filipinos are a multi-cultural,
multi-linguistic, geographically scattered nation. For
this reason, media's role of building a common culture
becomes problematic, as cultural unity is hard to
establish in a nation broken up by ethno-linguistic and
geographical differences. However, Philippine Media has
endeavored to bring issues into the grassroots in its
efforts to weave a more-or-less common culture via
information. The key to oneness is information, and it is
this that media strives to relay among the people,
uniting them in their opinions on the different issues in
the Philippines: the death penalty law, the Echegaray
execution, the VFA ratification, etc.
One of the major functions of the media is entertainment.
This is where the Filipinos are more engrossed.
Philippine politics has morphed from a contest of the
best and brightest into a stage of personality and
fanfare as Philippine society is "more seduced by
celebrity and fanfaronnade than the qualities of
leadership" (Benigno, 1998). Not only is the element
of "entertainment" felt in political reporting
but likewise in the news. It is not uncommon to find
front page stories touching on showbiz personalities. One
example is the Philippine Daliy Inquirer headline, "Kris:
I want to redeem myself as a daughter" on the
breakup of former presidential daughter-actress Kris
Aquino and actor Philip Salvador. A Sunday Inquirer
article is titled: "Manila Mayor Alfredo Lim Tough-and
Single" with the caption "is the Manila mayor
looking for a wife to play first lady, and will he use
his gestapo ways to restore peace and order if elected?"
tackling on the prospects of getting a future First Lady.
(Later he will be linked to former President Corazon
Aquino.) These are accounts of sensationalism-the
entertainment factor-on Philippine media, seeking to
attract the consumer-audiences by causing news reportage
to morph into entertainment.
Conclusion
Although the
Philippine Press is deemed the "freest in Asia,"
it still bears the legacies of its authoritarian past.
Hence, even if it lives the democratic promise of "freedom
of the press," it is still under a semblance of
control (and manipulation) by the government. The
libertarian mask of the present Media system in the
Philippines bears faint trimmings of the Authoritarian
flair.
This Authoritarian streak stems from the element of
control on the media, and the concept of State supremacy
so eagerly protected by the government. The licensing of
media operations and the existence of guilds to regulate
the different media are the other manifestations of
authoritarian regulation. To draw more clearly the
existence of these principles (Libertarian and
Authoritarian), one may assess how each role is carried
out.
Political Role
Disseminating
information-the Philippines is mainly libertarian in the
dissemination of information, although there is a streak
of authoritarian regulation when it comes to 'sensitive'
information that tend to violate anti-sedition and anti-subversion
laws. These laws mandate that no information scathing to
national security shall find its way to the media.
Creating and Reflecting Opinion-the Media is libertarian
on the large part, successfully mobilizing public opinion
generated out of its reportage. However, the question
arises whether or not this mobility factor stems from the
natural libertarian process (i.e., without the
interference of the state). Editorials and other
rebellious material are allowed publication/broadcast so
long as they do not infringe on the anti-sedition and
anti-subversion laws.
Being a Watchdog on Government-there remain flaws on this
function of the Philippine media as the manipulation of
anti-sedition and anti-subversion laws are within easy
reach for crafty politicians. This is the press'
Authoritarian personality. Likewise, the AC/DC practice
mars the ability of the press to accurately criticize and/or
commend the government, its officials, and its programs.
Social Role
Establishing Pop
Culture-the media cause the establishment of Popular
Culture when the programs become entwined with the lives
of the audiences. The problem stems from authoritarian
controls resurfacing for the move to ban programs hurtful
to the State's thrusts (public welfare, national security,
etc.) Otherwise, there is enough liberty to run programs
so long as they do not infringe on the policies
protecting decency, reputation, and over-all public
welfare.
Building a Nation-the media have succeeded in relaying
information to the different sectors of society, as well
as to far-flung areas in a country broken up
geographically and ethno-linguistically. However, more
problems still need to be addressed, especially those
that touch on national culture.
Entertaining the Nation-the media have reflected people's
preoccupation with media exposure (which has spilled over
to the political field). Media becomes an aid to the
"balkanization" (breaking into factions) as it
becomes the tool of these factions in forwarding their
views. The media becomes engrossed with entertainment,
causing news and information to morph into entertainment
(sensationalism).
Bibliography
______________, June 6,
1983, "Press Freedom and Responsibility",
Philippines Daily Express.
Benigno, Teodoro, June 6, 1971, "Literature of
Rebellion and RP Media", The Manila Chronicle.
Benigno, Teodoro, April 27, 1998, "Media and
Balkanization of Philippine Politics", Philippine
Star.
Constantino, Renato, May 17, 1998, "Made by TV",
Manila Bulletin.
Del Mundo, Clodualdo, 1986, Philippine Mass Media, A Book
of Readings.
Maslog, Crispin J., 1989, Philippine Communication: An
Introduction.
Siebert, Fred, et. al., 1963, Four Theories of the Press,
New York: Books for Libraries Press.
Tatad, Francisco S., August 26, 1978, "The Right to
Know", The Times Journal.
Tordesillas, Ellen, 1997, "Degradation of Media",
Malaya.
|
