Freedom of the Press?

Political camps are throwing black propaganda at each other, with the supposedly free press serving as a medium for a price. An election doomed to be rigged draws closer. The stakes have gone up; so have the prices, so have the caliber of ammunition, so have the stakes for the Filipino people. Is the free press binding its own people in chains?

5 December 2009
Manila, Philippines
Presidential Elections 2010

Our nation’s democracy is under attack. Not only by the government that has vowed to uphold it, but also by the very hallmark of any working democracy: the free press.

Part of the problem is that in this country, the press is not in fact free, but rather, some members come for a fee. With the elections just around the corner, the mating ritual between the press and politicos has begun, and it’s heated up.

That’s not to say every single member of the press has whored their services out to the highest bidder. On the contrary, I’d like to believe that most of them have kept their journalistic integrity. But for those who have not, local columnist Billy Esposo classified their reporting in two: the prostituted and the irresponsible. Both threaten society in much the same way.

Prostituted journalism is easy to define, and is far easier to discern. Some of their claims, for example, are so outright inane, yet you can’t believe any respectable newspaper would hire anyone that dim.
There is of course the possibility of mere ignorance, but that is certainly no excuse. The purpose of the news media is to inform, to educate, to empower. Ignorant journalism, like lazy, un-researched reporting, is downright irresponsible. Mulder and Scully had it right: The truth is out there. You just have to find it.

The line between irresponsible and prostituted reporting is crossed when ignorance prevails by choosing to turn a blind eye, as so often happens these days.

There is an old saying in the journalistic community, very simple, and unfortunately largely forgotten in Philippine newsrooms: Get it Right.

I had a professor in J-school who would give me big fat F’s and never read the rest of my copy, no matter how wonderful and groundbreaking I thought it was, if I misspelled so much as a name. I’ve also had a few editors who, every time I turned in a piece, would never fail to ask, “Are you sure?” And every single time, you think twice before you answer. Sadly, this kind of editor is a rare gem in today’s newsrooms. Perhaps we need some retraining. The stakes are too high.

The Pew Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism outlines the purpose of the news media very clearly. Journalism has an obligation first to the Truth, second, to its citizens. The essence of journalism is its discipline of verification, and its practitioners must remain fully independent of the news they cover. It must serve as an independent monitor of power. Last but not least, every journalist must have a moral compass.

(Major papers including the New York Times employ a Public Editor, who function as news ombudsmen. They call out members of the press, even their own, for any transgressions against the public. Adopting a similar measure seems necessary in the Philippine media landscape. Hopefully, they are incorruptible.)

The point of the matter is this: the news media is the vanguard of democracy, and in this country, as in many others, its walls are crumbling. The free press was instituted to serve as the public’s watchdog, to countercheck the activities in government, to blow the whistle, to protect. But with the multiple salvos of half-truths and outright lies being volleyed from every which way, where should the public turn? Does the public now have to learn how to countercheck the activities of the press? 

Why even have a press?

Simple: because a free press is necessary to democracy.

While this problem is not unique to our country, steps must be taken lest this institutional crisis begins to match the moral crisis in government. We cannot have both.

To the Philippine press, I hereby challenge you.