EYE ON ETHICS

The Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR) noted in its monitoring of the news coverage of the 2010 campaign and elections that despite the early preparations and efforts to improve the quality of reporting, the Philippine press still has the tendency to prioritize the exclusive and the sensational over the significant to the detriment of the ethical principles of truth-telling, fairness, balance, and public accountability.

The recent incident which involved one of the biggest multimedia networks in the Philippines sparked a debate among the media and the public on the use and protection of (anonymous) sources, corroboration of facts, and the possibility that the media are used as propaganda tools by candidates during the campaign and election period.

Read below the CMFR statement which scored the faulty news item presented by ABS-CBN 2, and the network’s response.

More »

by the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility

COMMISSION on Human Rights Chair Leila de Lima has rightly reminded the media that Andal Ampatuan Jr., no matter how strong the evidence against him may be, still has rights, among them the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. The clan that spawned him may not have accorded others the same respect, but he and his kin are nevertheless entitled to the rights, among them the right to life and to lives free from fear, they may have denied them.

Media people, some of them members of the National Press Club, waved photographs of the victims of the November 23 Maguindanao massacre in Ampatuan’s face, perhaps in the vain hope of seeing some indication of remorse from the stone faced warlord. But at least one photojournalist managed to hit him with his camera, in the process adding physical assault to the legitimate expression of media outrage.

One would hope that the camera emerged in better condition than Ampatuan, who is said to have suffered a concussion as result. But the media workers’ and journalists’ outrage was understandable. The killing of their colleagues last November 23 was not only the worst in the entire history of the mass media, it was also done with a brutality so exceptional that it defied understanding.

The ethics of journalism however, does support Chairperson de Lima’s reminder. Not only is the presumption of innocence among the principles journalists are expected to honor. They’re also expected to limit their outrage to the words that constitute the sword and shield of media practice, even as the admonition not to cause harm includes not only the imperative of minimizing harm, but a prohibition as well against physically attacking those one does not agree with.

Journalist outrage and energies are better directed towards rigorous examination of the factors that made the massacre inevitable. These factors include the system of political alliances and the institutionalization of electoral fraud that have made the coddling of warlords a continuing problem, in addition to the corruption that has doomed the areas of warlord rule to perpetual and worsening poverty. Providing the information and analysis the public needs to put the November 23 massacre in context so it may use its sovereign power to prevent future ones is a responsibility that rightly belongs to the media. It may cause harm, but only in terms of the exposure that information makes possible, rather than the physical harm that attacking anyone with a camera or any other handy piece of equipment inflicts.

When news of Britain’s Prince Harry’s secret deployment to Afghanistan was revealed by the media, the decision of the British press to agree not to report the deployment became a subject of lively debate in journalism circles in the West.

Some media critics such as Roy Greenslade of the British newspaper The Guardian said the British press was wrong, since by agreeing not to report the Prince’s deployment it exercised self-censorship and failed in its duty of informing the public.

Other media groups including BBC and UK’s Society of Editors said it was correct to hold back coverage since it was a national security matter and reportage would have only unnecessarily heightened the risks Prince Harry would encounter in Afghanistan.

But the decision was surprising for two reasons. First, the British press has a reputation for closely following the lives of the Windsors—or the “royals” as a whole. And second, it doggedly covered the negotiations to get Harry sent to Iraq last year, which made British military authorities decide against his deployment there.

More »

In the two months since they arrested over 30 journalists covering a protest by a former Navy lieutenant who is now a Philippine senator and a group of soldiers under trial for mutiny, Philippine security forces and other officials did not stop threatening the press.

The Secretary of Interior declared a week after the incident that journalists would still be arrested when covering similar events. The Philippine National Police (PNP) said it would use force to remove journalists who refuse to obey police orders.
Last January 15, however, PNP Director General Avelino Razon went further. He said the police had evidence that one of the soldiers involved, Marine Capt. Nicanor Faeldon, escaped the police raid with the help of one of the reporters covering the incident.

Although Razon did not identify the reporter, he said she was female. The Philippine press followed up the leads and reported that Razon was refering to Dana Batnag, a reporter for the Japanese wire service Jiji Press.

Razon insinuated in his public statements that Faeldon was romantically involved with the female journalist who allegedly helped him escape. The basis for Razon’s accusations was video footage from a government-managed station which showed Batnag interviewing Faeldon. The police did not explain how the footage proved that Batnag had helped Faeldon escape.

More »

Should journalists heed authorities’ request to leave the scene of an unfolding news event, or should they stay? Which should take precedence for journalists, the presumably lawful orders of the authorities, or the public’s right to information? These are among the questions now being debated among journalists and journalists’ groups in the Philippines in the wake of a November 29 incident in which dozens of journalists were arrested for ignoring police requests to leave the scene.

The incident

The usually busy lanes of a street leading to the Manila Peninsula Hotel in the central business district of Makati were suddenly empty at around noon of November 29, save for Philippine senator and former Navy officer Antonio Trillanes, several civilians including former vice president Teofisto Guingona , and a number of soldiers carrying long firearms. The group was marching towards the Hotel. They were accompanied by an equally large group of journalists.

The group had walked out of a courtroom in Makati City, metro Manila, where Trillanes and some of the soldiers with him were under trial for an alleged mutiny in 2003.

After a two-kilometer walk, the group entered the five-star Manila Peninsula Hotel, where Trillanes and companions arranged for a press conference. From an original group of about a dozen that had been covering the trial, the number of journalists swelled as different news organizations smelled a developing story and sent reporters to the hotel to monitor events there.

More »

Mr. Macale is assistant editor of the Philippine Journalism Review Reports.

_____________________________________________________________________

Media’s classic dilemma: how to balance the need to serve as the public watchdog by providing accurate, honest, complete, and crucial information, and the need to rely on advertisements to earn profits amid high production costs and dwindling circulation revenues.

What happens when the clear line between news and advertising begins to blur? –when news begins to sound like advertisements or commercial endorsements? Would readers, listeners, and viewers know the difference?

Take a Nov. 6 story of The Philippine Star about the opening of a new facility inside a shopping mall. The feature article, which appeared in the paper’s front page, was an enumeration of the amenities offered in the new facility—a convention center.

More »