Freedom of the Press in the Philippines
Link: Report of the Humanitarian and Fact-Finding Mission to Maguindanao
The massacre in Mindanao on Monday the 23 of November in which at least 57 people including 30 journalists were murdered as they traveled to file candidacy papers for next year's elections, has been roundly criticised by the Philippine government, but considering the tiny amount of convictions (only 4) for the murders of any of the 67 journalists or 1013 activists killed under President Gloria Arroyo's nine year reign beginning in 2001, it is hardly surprising that the perpetrators of the Maguindinao Massacre seemed so at ease with acting above the law.
I am devastated by these deaths.
My thoughts are with all Filipino journalists, peace builders and activists who have worked so hard to try and bring about peace in their country, lift it from some of its war induced poverty and call those in power to account. The only good thing to come of this tragedy is that at last the media is actually naming names and the Ampatuan Clan and other Clans run by war lords in Mindanao might finally be held responsible for their violence.
Many people I spoke with about the embattled peace process in Mindanao mentioned the Ampatuan Clan as being part of the problem, but only off the record.
Quite rightly they believed they could continue their journalism or advocacy better by staying alive and not criticising the Ampatuans in print, than by naming them and ending up dead.
The Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR), had this to say of the Maguindanao Massacre: the killings, “are likely to trigger a cycle of reprisals and counter-reprisals that will raise even higher the levels of violence in Maguindanao, quite possibly in the rest of Mindanao, and even the entire Philippines itself. Violence has a way of begetting further violence, as Philippine experience demonstrates.”
“It was not only an attack on a local politician, on his supporters, and on journalists. It was also an attack on what’s left of Philippine democracy, in which free and peaceful elections have never been as urgent an imperative as today.”“Only the quickest and most decisive response in terms of arresting and bringing the perpetrators to court can prevent the November 23 killings from turning into one more incident to inspire the killers-of journalists, political activists, local officials, priests, lawyers and judges-who roam this country with impunity to keep on killing.,”
I did an email interview in August with Noynoy Espina, vice-chair of the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP), about the state of the media in his country. Can I just say what a fan I am of the email interview. No transcribing, no being unable to read your own shorthand, no painful phone conversations where the bad line means you have to ask everything three times. Also the interviewee has time to think carefully about what it is they want to say. Obviously email is not appropriate for all situations but sometimes it can be a stroke of genius. In this case it worked particularly well and I was amazed and very grateful to the comprehensive answers Noynoy gave to my questions about the Filipino Press. Later I met Noynoy at the NUJP anniversary party where his gravelly voiced Karaoke rendition of "Wonderful World" was something else....
I've decided to publish the interview in full as I think his analysis stands up on its own without me writing it into a news report. However I would like to add some commentary and comments from conversations with other journalists.
While not a direct response to the current massacre hopefully the following interview will provide some background to the killing of journalists in the Philippines and relationship between Manila and the rest of the country as well as an overall background to how the Philippine media works in general. I've put Noynoy's statements on media killings in bold.
Noynoy:
"I'd like to be clear that my answers are my personal opinion and do not necessarily reflect the NUJP's positions or those of any media outfit or organization. The state of the Philippine press is quite complicated, in my own opinion, and far from ideal. There are several levels or divides, if you will, that all affect how the Philippine press performs or fails to perform its watchdog function. At one level, there is what I call the media industry - perhaps what you could call the ownership structures or the business side of media - and the media workers, both groups having different, often conflicting interests. On another level are the so-called “national” (read Manila-based) media outfits and the hundreds of mostly small outfits based in the regions and provinces. And on yet another level are the “mainstream” outfits and the “alternative” media. On the first level, I am sure you are aware that practically all the major outfits - whether print, broadcast or new media - are owned by either business or political interests. The same actually holds true with major regional outfits and even with many smaller provincial newspapers and radio stations. For most of the owners, the bottomline is either profit or the protection of their interests. While by and large, the working media - editors, reporters and other news staff - do strive to perform their jobs as best they can, this may sometimes clash with the interests of their employers, the media owners."
*Me:
While the phenomenon of business ownership of media effects most countries it is particularly poignant in the Philippines where it is said that practically the whole of the country, including the media, is owned by 10 wealthy families of Spanish and Chinese descent, who of course very interested in maintaining their wealth.
In America's Boy, James Hamilton-Paterson , describes them as "The Manila 400", referring to the number of people fitting into the ballroom of a famous Manila socialite rather than 400 families.
According to DJ Acierto at human rights group Karapatan, most problems occurring in the Philippines "are rooted in the basic conflict between the poor and the ruling classes and until this is fixed we will continue to have the same type of conflict."
Noynoy:
"On the second level, there is a vast difference between the way the Manila-based media and the regional and provincial press view and cover events. Being situated near the centers of national political and economic power, the Manila-based media often look at events from the perspective of these power centers. This tends to relegate events in the regions and provinces to the sidelines except when these involve armed conflict or natural disasters. On the opposite end of the spectrum, I think the regional and provincial press have a tendency to be overly hyperlocal in their perspective, often failing to situate events in their localities in the broader frame of the national life. In some cases, Cebu for example, there is an element of resentment at the chauvinism of what is derisively called in the provinces the “imperialism” of Manila. In most cases, though, it is because the bulk of local outfits lack the resources to maintain reliable news links to the national center. The result is what I call a lack of dialogue, not only between the national center and the regions but even between the regions themselves. On the third level is the divide between the “mainstream” and “alternative” media. By mainstream, I mean outfits that profess to hew to the Western model of journalism and its mantra of objectivity. Profess because, in my opinion, the interests that control outfits in the mainstream media often use “objectivity” as a convenient excuse for protecting and promoting the social, political and economic status quo, to which their owners belong. This is true even of those mainstream outfits that take a progressive or even oppositionist posture. These outfits can be overtly, even shrilly, critical of the ruling order of the day but seldom venture beyond the shallow spectrum of political partisanship to the deeper social roots of national problems. In marked contrast are the alternative media, ranging from the likes of the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, which, despite a history of churning out reports critical of corruption, nepotism, and the other ills that afflict the political system, nevertheless professes a strict adherence to the Western conventions of journalism, to the openly left-wing online publication Bulatlat.com, to regional outfits like Mindanao's Mindanews and Davao Today and northern Luzon's Nordis that advocate regional concerns they rightly believe get scant attention from the national center and the rest of the country. These outfits do take a deeper look at the problems afflicting the nation and its people, very often incisively and with deep passion and commitment. However, their individual and collective output is mostly shunted to the fringes of mass consciousness, mainly by the dominance of the mainstream giants but also because they do require more of their audiences. On the plus side, a number of mid-level media executives, even in the mainstream giants, began their careers in the alternative press, especially during the waning days of the Marcos dictatorship and the Aquino years. But while many of them strive to imbue their staff with a more critical or analytical approach to the craft, they nevertheless remain constrained by the interests that control the outfits they work for. On the minus side, the repression of 14 years of dictatorship made for a rather small community of professional journalists following the so-called democratic restoration of 1986. As publications mushroomed in the years after the dictatorship's ouster, many of these staffed their desks with fresh graduates with little or no experience in working the field. This, plus the exigencies of protecting or promoting media owners' interests, has led many outfits to stick to the standard “he said, she said” or, as you rightly put it, “waiting for official sources” mode of reportage. Of course, with such mentors, many of the new crop of journalists have imbibed this admittedly lazy way of coverage. Given this milieu, are the Philippine media performing their watchdog function? Broadly, I would say yes, since, notwithstanding the weaknesses I have outlined previously (and I have just skimmed the surface, really), the Philippine media, to a large extent, seem to relish taking an adversarial position vis a vis government, even if within the narrow confines of political partisanship or focusing mainly on official malfeasance. Of course, there is very little investigative journalism to speak of, or very little of the sort that takes a critical and unflinching look at the problems besetting Philippine society. On the part of the mainstream media, this has mainly to do with the fact that such journalism would invariably run smack into the interests of their owners and that such reportage hardly commands a wide audience and is, thus, not all that commercially desirable. For the alternative media, the resources serious investigative journalism demands often are prohibitive. Unfortunately for the Philippines, our experience with a dictatorship that shut down the media, replacing these with its propaganda machinery, has given development journalism a bad, almost obscene, reputation. For this is what the dictatorship called the crap it dished out. This partly explains why many journalists and media outfits are wary of venturing into development journalism, preferring to stick with their adversarial role with most of the focus on politics and corruption in government. While there are a number of journalists and alternative media outfits that engage in development journalism, especially in the context of grassroots and civil society efforts, there is really no sustained coverage. And all too often, the subjects of development journalism of this kind tends to fall within the ambit of the social conflicts besetting Philippine society and, thus, in many cases the reportage comes across as advocacy journalism. Do the media reflect the various peoples, groups, interests and ambitions? Many journalists strive to. However, the interests that control much of the media preclude a true reflection of the broadest spectrum of groups and interests. Journalists in the Philippines face a whole range of obstacles to the effective practice of the profession. The skill level of many journalists across all platforms remains sadly wanting. This has much to do with both the quality of education in the country and the hiring practices of media owners, particularly in the regions. I am not a big fan of credentials, being a dropout myself. To be sure, I am not downplaying the value of a good education, although to be frank, I personally do not believe a journalism degree or any degree necessary to becoming a good journalist. Except for a few schools, there really are not that many good journalism schools in the country anyway, and most of the instructors have had little experience in the profession as well. Unfortunately, the trend of the post-dictatorship years, when the dearth of experienced journalists saw greenhorns manning desks or covering beats traditionally reserved for veterans - like Congress or the presidential palace - has continued to this day. There is thus little depth to much of the coverage of these crucial beats. The old newsroom culture, with its tradition of mentoring, has also all but become extinct. Technology has made it unnecessary for young journalists to report to the newsrooms where, in the past, they often got a better education in the craft from their editors than they ever could in classrooms. In the regions, a lack of resources prevents many small outfits from hiring real talent. There is also a lack of appreciation for the safety of journalists, especially those assigned to hazardous coverage like conflicts and natural disasters. Only a handful of outfits provide their staff with training and safety equipment, though to be fair, not many outfits can afford to equip their personnel with such gear. Fortunately, there are media organizations like the NUJP that offer free safety training to journalists. All too often, ownership patterns and hiring practices also lead to a breakdown in ethics. It is often argued that ethics is a personal issue. But to be practical about it, the only one who can really enforce ethics is the employer, through the power of the purse. Which begs the questions: what if the employer is unethical or imposes work conditions that often force ethical dilemmas? In some provinces, managers of radio stations have been known to require their reporters to solicit advertisements, sometimes in lieu of a regular salary. Even in major outfits, stories have been “killed” to suit the owners’ interests. Many journalists are also paid very meager wages."
Me:
With provincial salaries going as low as 15 pesos a story, several journalists I spoke with reported having to do extra work on top of their daily reporting when they first started out, such as selling their stories to the wire, inorder to make ends meet.
"You work everywhere, you "scoop" (tabo) everything to earn a living, from local TV and radio to PR work," one ex-correspondent journalist told me.
It is these journalists who work outside Manila who are in the most danger of being murdered but because they have to resort to other kinds of work as well, the government tries to dismiss them as the deaths of "blockclimbers" rather than journalists.
Noynoy:
"The lack of transparency in government makes it difficult for journalists to gain access to accurate information. The Palace has itself made this practically a policy with the issuance of executive orders that bar government officials and employees from testifying before congressional inquiries without the personal approval of the president. This lack of transparency is abetted by the absence of a freedom of information law. There are media organizations that have acknowledged these problems and are working to address them. However, because of the great odds, including the difficulty of engaging media owners, has made the work slow. Very often, it is the journalists who seek ways to improve their work conditions and make it easier for them to perform their jobs well. This sometimes entails setting side competition and working together. This works particularly well during hazardous coverage, such as conflicts and natural disasters. The killing of journalists in the Philippines has definitely taken a turn for the worse under the Arroyo administration. Since 2001, when Arroyo became president, more than 60 journalists have been murdered. This is the worst toll under any president, almost double that of the 14-year dictatorship or the combined deaths during the three previous administrations. And yet, there have only been three convictions, all of them gunmen, none of masterminds. There is no proof that these killings are part of any official policy, unlike the murders of activists. But government inaction and the administration’s often contemptuous or hostile posture toward the media help foster an impunity that emboldens those who seek to silence journalists. It is also strongly believed that many of these murders were ordered by politicians, most likely allied with the administration, or even members of the security forces who are either in cahoots with crime syndicates or run these syndicates themselves. To be sure, many of the murders are a result of a less than ethical practice of the profession, especially in the provinces where politics often equates with warlordism and where criticism can be taken very personally. Many of the victims have been known to be retainers of political factions. But there are just as many who were killed because they were zealously pursuing legitimate stories of either official corruption or criminality and its links with power structures. And, as many media organizations maintain, a lack of ethics is no justification for murder. However, there has also been a disturbing trend under this administration - the inclusion of media organizations and journalists in so-called orders of battle of the military. In 2005, the media came across a PowerPoint presentation called “Knowing the Enemy,” which was produced by the Armed Forces intelligence service and which listed down organizations accused of being “legal fronts” of the communist rebel movement. Among these were the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines and the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism. Recently, another order of battle drawn up by the Army’s 10th Infantry Division was discovered. This also listed the NUJP as well as the group’s former secretary general, Carlos Conde, the Philippine correspondent of the New York Times and International Herald Tribune. Several journalists based in the provinces have also reported their inclusion in such lists. It is common knowledge that a number of persons whose names landed on such orders of battle have fallen victim to extrajudicial killings believed perpetuated by state forces. Aside from a glaring apathy towards media killings, this administration has itself sought to silence the press. In fact, it is only Arroyo who, since Marcos shut down the media, has tried a wholesale muzzling of the press when she declared a state of national emergency in 2006 and threatened to takeover outfits perceived to be inciting to sedition and subversion. During that short period, police were sent to raid an opposition paper and troops were sent to the headquarters of the two largest networks. This attitude has also led to the mass arrest of journalists who covered a failed mutiny by rebel soldiers who took over a hotel in Makati City in November 2007 and, more recently, to the brief detention by the Army of journalists covering the humanitarian crisis in Mindanao in late June. Our libel law, which dates back to the American colonial period and was designed to prevent the emergence of a press critical of the colonizers, has yet to be repealed or amended. Thus, libel remains a criminal offense. And the law has often been used to harass or even jail journalists who anger powerful interests, whether political or business. For example, Arroyo’s husband filed multiple libel suits against more than 40 journalists and media executives, withdrawing these only after he underwent open heart surgery and said he wanted to reconcile with his detractors. But the journalists he sued refused to take the bait and filed a countersuit accusing him of violating the Constitution by brazenly assaulting press freedom. The suit is still pending in court. The continued and worsening attacks and threats against journalists can be said to have made journalism more difficult under this administration, especially for reporters in the provinces where the danger of physical assault is many times greater. But if the Philippine media remain generally independent, it is largely because of the refusal of journalists to succumb to these threats despite the all too real dangers they face. Thus, yes, the Philippine press may be far from perfect, saddled with major issues of ethics, safety, the welfare of media practitioners and a host of others, but it remains free because journalists wish it to be. To be honest, there is a crisis of credibility too that many journalists believe is responsible for the lack of public sympathy and outrage over media killings. But I believe that should the media, as an institution, come under threat, the people will come to its defense to prevent a repeat of the experience under the dictatorship when the media was shut down and only government mouthpieces were allowed to exist. As for there being too much lifestyle and celebrity news, I cannot agree more wholeheartedly. This is because of the nature of media as, first, being an industry, a business, whose primary reason for existence is profit. And what sells better than celebrity and lifestyle? This is especially true in broadcast where more and more segments of primetime newscasts are devoted to entertainment news. But even many major newspapers have thicker lifestyle and entertainment sections than news. On the other hand, this can also be viewed in the context of how Philippine politics has regressed to the point where it now revolves around personality more than ideology or issues. The result is an obvious “dumbing down” of the news to pander to the least common denominator."
