January 23, 2008 – (Manila) – This is all about the talk of principles and the opening of a can of worms in the manner journalism is practiced in the Philippines.
Should journalists be arrested while conducting their work in seeking out information?
This question was raised by a local television network whose personnel were ‘arrested’ or ‘invited for questioning’ after the ‘surrender’ of former Philippine Navy Lt. Antonio Trillanes who is now a duly elected Senator and Brig. Gen. Danilo Lim of the Philippine Marines last November 27, 2007.
The two supposedly led a stand off at another posh Metro Manila hotel to call for a reform in the government short of saying to ‘overthrow’ or “have President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo resign from office.’
For almost half a day, the two and their supporters held their ground at the Manila Peninsula Hotel in Makati City and with their ‘actions’ viewed on national television as members of media were on hand to cover the event.
The Philippine government led by a contingent of special action forces from the Philippine National Police and elements of the Philippine Marines were given orders to ‘storm’ the hotel and end the stand off.
Luckily, the stand-off ended peacefully, save for some damage to property and light injuries for some caught in-between.
Members of media who were ‘trapped’ inside the hotel or ‘insisted to remain’ inside the hotel were handcuffed with nylon plastic and brought to a police camp for questioning, released immediately after.
A few months have passed and a television network whose personnel were among, if not most of those who were brought to the police camp with nylon plastic cuffs is now spear heading a head-on collision questioning the government’s position with regards to the conduct of coverage in a severely volatile situation such as the one that happened on November 27.
I sympathize and empathize with this network’s personnel, with some worked with me in the past. Ironically, the lead field producer whose face is regularly featured on network plugs on ‘covering where the action is’ once worked for me in the early years of ‘live news coverage of events.’
Before I go on, pardon the use of the apostrophe symbol in some words. In recent times, the use of words could cause so much sensitivity that it doesn’t pay to get a summon in court. I prefer to describe and write items here in an ‘open ended’ manner since a lot of things happening in this country is usually ‘open ended.’
Going back to what I was saying, I sincerely take notice of the means as to how a journalist could be whisked away in a paddy wagon with no clear or precise reason.
Please take note that ‘definition of terms’ will play an important role in this item.
The police authorities have explained that prior to their operation against Trillanes and company, the authorities have appealed and demanded civilians who were not part of the renegade group should have left for safer areas, outside the hotel.
Members of media were also addressed directly by authorities claiming that their safety was in danger should the police attempt to enter the hotel premises.
Other media organizations ordered their personnel to withdraw and some did remain.
The others who remained, continued to cover the event and brought live moving pictures of how tear gas brought an end to what was a defiant group of ‘reformists.’
When the police rounded up the ‘reformists,’ several members of media were there and identifying each and everyone was not an easy task.
It was a simple case of, who among you is a ‘reformist’ or a ‘journalist?’
Like in many ‘crime scenes,’ the goal is to sort things out and anyone within the area should be catalogued and identified at least.
True to suspicion, some members of the ‘reformist group’ attempted to slip out after the stand off by ‘blending-in’ with civilians and members of media.
The Philippine police, with all its ‘good intentions,’ failed to explain to the people inside the hotel that the matter was ‘procedure,’ and necessary to identify those who participated in the ‘stand-off.’
The trouble with some members of our police service is that they act sometimes without thinking or explaining the rights or in particular the crime of the individual.
The matter would have been easily resolved if the police was polite enough to tell the people inside the hotel that in order to separate the ‘reformist’ from the general public, they will be invited for questioning and identity verification.
Of course, the voice clips heard from a live report on this television network showed that prominent faces seen on television were being ‘forced’ into a corner with no direct explanation resulting in panic and confusion.
Now the incident has grown beyond what it simply meant to be and it has opened a ‘can of worms’ where the rights to access information which is the privilege of any journalist is about to be trashed and trampled upon.
The real issue here is the need to determine, where is the place of media in a given on-going situation that is worth reporting to the public.
The sad reality among some if not most members of media is the urge and if not the desperate need to get the story first or what we call a scoop.
In a tense level of competition among broadcast organizations, the need to be first in reporting an on-going breaking story means a boost in ratings (ratings is something which is also being fought in the airwaves, in the judicial courts and in the court of public opinion between two rival television network which is one boring and annoying topic to discuss in future articles. Heaven spare us!).
Is it really necessary for journalists to ‘stand in the line of fire’ or stand beside the event or incident wherein an official operation or endeavor should be done yet media is ‘obstructing the way?’
The police tape is a symbol telling the public and indirectly the endearing members of media to ‘respect’ yet more often than not, once a police tape is rolled out, there is little respect for it even for its aesthetic value. Members of media smell a story and the yellow tape is a call to go ahead and give no hoot at all if they’re in the way or are about to destroy evidence.
Members of media (like I am) should recognize the fact that there are universal rules in covering events that need to be respected and obeyed.
The incident at Manila Peninsula meant that members of media should have considered the situation and should have withdrawn for their own safety otherwise there could be less members of media practicing today should there have been a real blood firefight.
No News Director should even allow his or her team to remain in harms way and when it was necessary to order a withdrawal then regardless if there are any equipment that will be left, the news team should leave.
In an earlier statement, a news person handling operations initially said that the team inside the hotel were advised to leave and ‘not ordered out,’ leaving instructions to ‘take care of themselves’ in an unlikely event since they (the personnel0 voluntarily decided to remain.
That statement alone made by this news person should be considered as irresponsible.
No amount of breaking news is enough to justify placing the lives of your people in harms way.
And finally, the government of Mrs. Arroyo should make everything clear and on paper, what do they really mean in what they say and resist playing word games. Government’s role is to convey information and not distort information or withhold them.
The government should also take into account that they are not really shinning examples of fair play and the rumble from among the media is legitimate and the freedom or at least the right to acquire information should not be threatened.
The threat to the freedom of journalists to conduct their tasks (or abuse and misinterpret the task also) is no laughing matter but there are limits to what we journalists should be demanding, there is a universal ‘rule of engagement’ to follow in doing our work and if we journalists violate the ‘universal basic rules of engagement, in conducting news coverage,’ then we, members of media are just part of the promotion of anarchy in society and not as examples of what is proper.
I sincerely think that the news desk in Atlanta will not let its crew to insist and remain in Taleban territory if there is a real danger to their safety both from the Taleban and Coalition forces. How come you let your team remain in harms way? You should know any better that the risks were there and now you act like Joan of Arc. It’s as simple as that and all the talk and gobble of ‘principles’ is just ‘a lot of hot gas.’
Should journalists be arrested while conducting their work in seeking out information?
This question was raised by a local television network whose personnel were ‘arrested’ or ‘invited for questioning’ after the ‘surrender’ of former Philippine Navy Lt. Antonio Trillanes who is now a duly elected Senator and Brig. Gen. Danilo Lim of the Philippine Marines last November 27, 2007.
The two supposedly led a stand off at another posh Metro Manila hotel to call for a reform in the government short of saying to ‘overthrow’ or “have President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo resign from office.’
For almost half a day, the two and their supporters held their ground at the Manila Peninsula Hotel in Makati City and with their ‘actions’ viewed on national television as members of media were on hand to cover the event.
The Philippine government led by a contingent of special action forces from the Philippine National Police and elements of the Philippine Marines were given orders to ‘storm’ the hotel and end the stand off.
Luckily, the stand-off ended peacefully, save for some damage to property and light injuries for some caught in-between.
Members of media who were ‘trapped’ inside the hotel or ‘insisted to remain’ inside the hotel were handcuffed with nylon plastic and brought to a police camp for questioning, released immediately after.
A few months have passed and a television network whose personnel were among, if not most of those who were brought to the police camp with nylon plastic cuffs is now spear heading a head-on collision questioning the government’s position with regards to the conduct of coverage in a severely volatile situation such as the one that happened on November 27.
I sympathize and empathize with this network’s personnel, with some worked with me in the past. Ironically, the lead field producer whose face is regularly featured on network plugs on ‘covering where the action is’ once worked for me in the early years of ‘live news coverage of events.’
Before I go on, pardon the use of the apostrophe symbol in some words. In recent times, the use of words could cause so much sensitivity that it doesn’t pay to get a summon in court. I prefer to describe and write items here in an ‘open ended’ manner since a lot of things happening in this country is usually ‘open ended.’
Going back to what I was saying, I sincerely take notice of the means as to how a journalist could be whisked away in a paddy wagon with no clear or precise reason.
Please take note that ‘definition of terms’ will play an important role in this item.
The police authorities have explained that prior to their operation against Trillanes and company, the authorities have appealed and demanded civilians who were not part of the renegade group should have left for safer areas, outside the hotel.
Members of media were also addressed directly by authorities claiming that their safety was in danger should the police attempt to enter the hotel premises.
Other media organizations ordered their personnel to withdraw and some did remain.
The others who remained, continued to cover the event and brought live moving pictures of how tear gas brought an end to what was a defiant group of ‘reformists.’
When the police rounded up the ‘reformists,’ several members of media were there and identifying each and everyone was not an easy task.
It was a simple case of, who among you is a ‘reformist’ or a ‘journalist?’
Like in many ‘crime scenes,’ the goal is to sort things out and anyone within the area should be catalogued and identified at least.
True to suspicion, some members of the ‘reformist group’ attempted to slip out after the stand off by ‘blending-in’ with civilians and members of media.
The Philippine police, with all its ‘good intentions,’ failed to explain to the people inside the hotel that the matter was ‘procedure,’ and necessary to identify those who participated in the ‘stand-off.’
The trouble with some members of our police service is that they act sometimes without thinking or explaining the rights or in particular the crime of the individual.
The matter would have been easily resolved if the police was polite enough to tell the people inside the hotel that in order to separate the ‘reformist’ from the general public, they will be invited for questioning and identity verification.
Of course, the voice clips heard from a live report on this television network showed that prominent faces seen on television were being ‘forced’ into a corner with no direct explanation resulting in panic and confusion.
Now the incident has grown beyond what it simply meant to be and it has opened a ‘can of worms’ where the rights to access information which is the privilege of any journalist is about to be trashed and trampled upon.
The real issue here is the need to determine, where is the place of media in a given on-going situation that is worth reporting to the public.
The sad reality among some if not most members of media is the urge and if not the desperate need to get the story first or what we call a scoop.
In a tense level of competition among broadcast organizations, the need to be first in reporting an on-going breaking story means a boost in ratings (ratings is something which is also being fought in the airwaves, in the judicial courts and in the court of public opinion between two rival television network which is one boring and annoying topic to discuss in future articles. Heaven spare us!).
Is it really necessary for journalists to ‘stand in the line of fire’ or stand beside the event or incident wherein an official operation or endeavor should be done yet media is ‘obstructing the way?’
The police tape is a symbol telling the public and indirectly the endearing members of media to ‘respect’ yet more often than not, once a police tape is rolled out, there is little respect for it even for its aesthetic value. Members of media smell a story and the yellow tape is a call to go ahead and give no hoot at all if they’re in the way or are about to destroy evidence.
Members of media (like I am) should recognize the fact that there are universal rules in covering events that need to be respected and obeyed.
The incident at Manila Peninsula meant that members of media should have considered the situation and should have withdrawn for their own safety otherwise there could be less members of media practicing today should there have been a real blood firefight.
No News Director should even allow his or her team to remain in harms way and when it was necessary to order a withdrawal then regardless if there are any equipment that will be left, the news team should leave.
In an earlier statement, a news person handling operations initially said that the team inside the hotel were advised to leave and ‘not ordered out,’ leaving instructions to ‘take care of themselves’ in an unlikely event since they (the personnel0 voluntarily decided to remain.
That statement alone made by this news person should be considered as irresponsible.
No amount of breaking news is enough to justify placing the lives of your people in harms way.
And finally, the government of Mrs. Arroyo should make everything clear and on paper, what do they really mean in what they say and resist playing word games. Government’s role is to convey information and not distort information or withhold them.
The government should also take into account that they are not really shinning examples of fair play and the rumble from among the media is legitimate and the freedom or at least the right to acquire information should not be threatened.
The threat to the freedom of journalists to conduct their tasks (or abuse and misinterpret the task also) is no laughing matter but there are limits to what we journalists should be demanding, there is a universal ‘rule of engagement’ to follow in doing our work and if we journalists violate the ‘universal basic rules of engagement, in conducting news coverage,’ then we, members of media are just part of the promotion of anarchy in society and not as examples of what is proper.
I sincerely think that the news desk in Atlanta will not let its crew to insist and remain in Taleban territory if there is a real danger to their safety both from the Taleban and Coalition forces. How come you let your team remain in harms way? You should know any better that the risks were there and now you act like Joan of Arc. It’s as simple as that and all the talk and gobble of ‘principles’ is just ‘a lot of hot gas.’
* * *
No comments:
Post a Comment