Issues That You Are Already Getting Fed Up With

[judE_Law]

^^haha.. thanks sa pagsagot sa mga tanong ko.. nasagot nga ba?


Senator Legarda's stand on IIRC's report:

Tinutulan ni senator loren legarda ang rekomendasyon ng iirc na kasuhan ang ilang media outlets at  personalities kaugnay ng nakaraang hostage crisis. Tutoo anya na may kontrol pa rin ang gobyerno pagdating sa regulation ng broadcasting franchise ng mga local tv stations pero hindi  ginamit ng pamahalaan at mga ahensya ang karapatang ito  sa paggabay sa coverage ng telebisyon sa trahedya. Dapat daw agaran nang nag-isyu ng direktiba o advisory ang gobyerno sa media sa limitasyon ng coverage.Pinaalala niya, ang pamahalaan, gayundin ang police organization, ang may overall na responsibilidad sa insidente.

[carpediem]

^ There should be self-restraint. You do not need government to issue a blackout before you stop.

Consider the case of the kidnapping of Ces Drilon, didn't ABS-CBN hold all media from reporting the story? Did the government have to issue a blackout? If "dapat walang restrictions as far as coverage is concerned", e di dapat nireport din agad yun diba? Isn't it a bit hypocritical why the two similar situations were treated differently? Dahil ba walang media personality sa Quirino Grandstand Hostage?

[ctan]

Hindi ko sana gusto magcomment kasi I'm not an expert naman on the topic pero since I have things in my mind to say, let me participate na lang din. :-) Hehehe!

About the IIRC report on media's part:
Sa akin, I think iba yung scenario on Ces' kidnapping mishap and the Quirino hostage taking. Yung kay Ces, napakatagal ng event, it went on for days. The media can't air a real-time blow by blow account of what has happened because of the nature of the crime. But I do think the kidnapping was not concealed from the public and even the news on its development. We knew what generally happened as another day unfolded. Regarding the Quirino hostage taking, it was characterized by unpredictable events that could happen anytime. Nakita ng media that people are glued to it kasi para kang nanonood ng suspense-action film in real action. So basically for me, the two were quite different from each other.

However, for me, the media indeed should have used proper discretion on when to air and not. Earlier during the day, they knew that the hostage taker ay nanonood ng TV sa loob ng bus and that nanonood siya ng live coverage ng media. Moreover, dahil sa napanood ng criminal, his aggressive actions were aggravated by the news that he was watching. Dun pa lang, media should have properly behaved. They can report and be true and free media men but not to the point of risking security/safety of the hostage takers. After all, there should still be ethics in every action all people do.



About the bad news vs good news:
I agree that sometimes, people need good news. Pero what's of more concern, and I believe this is one of media's primary role, is that they exist to make the public aware, alert, and be socially informed of what really is happening around. Imagine this, if media won't report na may mga criminals na nag-hoholdup sa isang lugar, would people be wary about going to that place kung hindi nila malalaman? Would they be extra careful? What if hindi nairereport ang mga batang inaabuso? Would we know these things are rampant? How then can you show concern and be socially participative in these aspects? So I guess, it's just right that these things are being reported. After all, may mga good news din namang nairereport ang media today.

[judE_Law]

^ There should be self-restraint. You do not need government to issue a blackout before you stop.

Consider the case of the kidnapping of Ces Drilon, didn't ABS-CBN hold all media from reporting the story? Did the government have to issue a blackout? If "dapat walang restrictions as far as coverage is concerned", e di dapat nireport din agad yun diba? Isn't it a bit hypocritical why the two similar situations were treated differently? Dahil ba walang media personality sa Quirino Grandstand Hostage?

i do not want to sound bias pero i have to say this..
kung walang self-restraint ang media, eh di sana pumayag na kami na pumunta sa loob ng bus nung time na humihingi ng media si mendoza? although i must admit na merong ilang media personality na nagkukumahog maka-scoop.. for what? para sa kanilang sariling interes.
napanood niyo, nakita niyo ng live.. and that's our purpose, ipakita sa inyo ang isang malaking istorya na nangyayari.
sabi nga ni Ctan unpredictable ang mga pwedeng mangyari... tumakbo ng 11 long hours ang hostage taking may nagbawal ba sa Media? may nagdirekta ba ng 'news black-out'? fact is, yung mga government officials, kampante pa sa mga kaliwa't kanang  interviews sa telebisyon, sa radyo.. how do you expect us(media) to behave on this?
i hope maintindihan niyo ang role ng media dito...

"20 PLUS FOREIGNERS HELD HOSTAGE ON A TOURIST BUS IN QUIRINO GRANDSTAND" -kami the moment we received the initial infos alam na namin kung gaano kalaki ang istorya na ito.. ewan ko lang sa gobyerno at pulisya.. 'isolated' lang daw eh.. kung lahat ng nangyayari ay isolated sa kanila, hindi na ako magtataka na pagkatapos ng pangyayaring iyon ay maninisi sila. 

regarding Ces Drilon.. nasagot na ni Ctan. thanks Doc!

[carpediem]

On Ces Drilon. It was concealed at first, even ABS-CBN admitted there was a blackout. And because as ctan said the case went on for days, it was inevitable that it be revealed to the public.

Why is it needed to be ordered from the top first? Is media so immature and mischievous like a child who needs to be restrained by their parents? Or is it because of the attitude, "other children are doing it anyway, I'll only stop when others stop."

Fact is, media could show it after the incident, and not live. By airing it live, the hostage taker was agitated, and hostages' lives were put at risk. Were the news watcher's interest more important than the hostages' lives? Or maybe ratings was even more important?

[pinoybrusko]

^^haha.. thanks sa pagsagot sa mga tanong ko.. nasagot nga ba?


Senator Legarda's stand on IIRC's report:

Tinutulan ni senator loren legarda ang rekomendasyon ng iirc na kasuhan ang ilang media outlets at  personalities kaugnay ng nakaraang hostage crisis. Tutoo anya na may kontrol pa rin ang gobyerno pagdating sa regulation ng broadcasting franchise ng mga local tv stations pero hindi  ginamit ng pamahalaan at mga ahensya ang karapatang ito  sa paggabay sa coverage ng telebisyon sa trahedya. Dapat daw agaran nang nag-isyu ng direktiba o advisory ang gobyerno sa media sa limitasyon ng coverage.Pinaalala niya, ang pamahalaan, gayundin ang police organization, ang may overall na responsibilidad sa insidente.

so fan ka na din ni Legarda because of this? hehehe 

[pinoybrusko]

On Ces Drilon. It was concealed at first, even ABS-CBN admitted there was a blackout. And because as ctan said the case went on for days, it was inevitable that it be revealed to the public.

Why is it needed to be ordered from the top first? Is media so immature and mischievous like a child who needs to be restrained by their parents? Or is it because of the attitude, "other children are doing it anyway, I'll only stop when others stop."

Fact is, media could show it after the incident, and not live. By airing it live, the hostage taker was agitated, and hostages' lives were put at risk. Were the news watcher's interest more important than the hostages' lives? Or maybe ratings was even more important?

hahaha baka ratings are far more important than people's lives na. Yung mga patayan, aksidente, all types of crimes normal na lang sa araw araw ng buhay na nababalita sa news. Kung gusto lang naman talaga iinform ang tao about na nangyayari sa kalye maraming ganyang issues dati pa simula pa ng hinde pa tayo pinapanganak andyan na ang crimes sa Pinas. Wala ng magbabago dun at alam na ng tao iyan. Sabi ko nga paulit ulit na lang. Naging aware na ang mga tao sa crimes kaya pati mga teenagers malalakas na ang loob gumawa ng mga crimes ngayon kasi malalagay sila sa TV kasi puro ganun ang balita  . Anong awareness pa ang kailangan ng tao?  may magandang balita nga naman si Charice makikita na sa palabas na Glee  big deal ba? hehehe. It's her job as a singer and actress. Bakit yung mga magagaling na pinoy sa ibang bansa sa larangan ng science, technology, etc hinde nababalita? puro entertainment at boxing legend Pacquiao  nakakasawa na

with regards to hostage taking  IIRC result is not bias. They provide fair and just judgement.

[joshgroban]

just to make it clear... talent namin si ces at kapamilya.... sino ba dapat maging concern una... di ba kami.... bat namin ipapangalandakan yung news na ito kung at stake ang buhay nya.... dun sa  hongkong hostages ... mali nga siguro kami na nilabas yun sa ere pero malay ba naman namin na may tv yung mokong na yun sa loob ng bus.... lumapit yung kapatid sa media simpy because alam nya sa media di sya magagalaw.... o kung may mangyari man alam kung sino ang kumuha sa kanya... this is not the time to point our fingers... media is media pa rin mahirap basta pigilan parang instinct na yan e... ang tanong instinct din ba ng mga pulis at pulitiko na tumulong.... sana di na tumagal ng ganun ang negotiation kung may consultation na naganap among the authorities....   

[judE_Law]

On Ces Drilon. It was concealed at first, even ABS-CBN admitted there was a blackout. And because as ctan said the case went on for days, it was inevitable that it be revealed to the public.

Why is it needed to be ordered from the top first? Is media so immature and mischievous like a child who needs to be restrained by their parents? Or is it because of the attitude, "other children are doing it anyway, I'll only stop when others stop."

Fact is, media could show it after the incident, and not live. By airing it live, the hostage taker was agitated, and hostages' lives were put at risk. Were the news watcher's interest more important than the hostages' lives? Or maybe ratings was even more important?

of course it should be ordered from the top first!!
kanya-kanya na lang ba tayo? wala na bang batas na dapat sundin? pano namin malalaman na lumalampas na kami sa linyang itinakda ng pamahalaan kung hindi kami gagabayan ng pamahalaan??? kami pa ba ang magtuturo sa pamahalaan kung ano ang gagawin namin pag may hostage crisis? eh di kami na lang ang maging gobyerno. sino ba ang nagpapatupad ng batas? naipatupad ba ito ng mga panahong iyon? alam pala nila na pwedeng maka-apekto ang coverage ng media.. eh bakit hindi nila pinagbawalan ang media sa loob ng labing-isang oras na hostage crisis? again.. sinasabi ko.. masyado kasing minaliit ng gobyerno at ng pulisya ang sitwasyon. at isa yun sa dahilan kung bakit nangyari ito.
sige, sabihin mo nga anong oras dapat ipalabas sa telebisyon ang isang mahal;agang nangyayari? nang atakihin ba ng mga terorista ang world trade sa amerika hindi rin ba dapat i-broadcast ng live dahil yung pamilya ng mga biktima na naipit sa world trade eh posibleng mag-worry ng husto at posibleng atakihin sa puso at ikamatay?
hindi lang sa Pilipinas nangyayari ito... at 'wag sana tayong lumayo sa katotohanan na palpak na pagresponde ng pamahalaan ang siyang dahilan kung bakit nauwi sa trahedya ang lahat..
kung inisip niyo na bakit ipinakita sa telebisyon na inaaresto ang kapatid ng hostage taker.. inisip rin ba niyo o ng pulisya na maraming media sa paligid nila para arestuhin ito na maari namang gawin pagkatapos ng hostage crisis?

[ctan]

Pero sa tingin ko Jude, hindi nagamit ng media ang proper discretion at some point during the hostage crisis. Hindi naman kelangan na lahat may directive from the authorities especially on the aspect of discretion. Magiging puppet ang labas ng media nun. I believe that part of the ethical work of media is to know when is too much and when is enough. :-)

[carpediem]

talent namin si ces at kapamilya.... sino ba dapat maging concern una... di ba kami

Exactly! Ang difference sa Quirino Grandstand hostage is walang media personality na nahostage.

of course it should be ordered from the top first!!

So wala nga discretion ang media like an immature child? Everything must be ordered from the top? You must always be told what to and what not to do?

Tell me, you, as a citizen. There are laws that govern you. You are also free to do anything you'd like, which may or may not be governed by law. But I suppose you won't do anything that is "unlawful" or "harmful" that is not explicitly specified by law. Why? Because you have common sense. You do not need policemen na "nagpapatupad ng batas" to tell you not to do this and not to do that.

nang atakihin ba ng mga terorista ang world trade sa amerika hindi rin ba dapat i-broadcast ng live dahil yung pamilya ng mga biktima na naipit sa world trade eh posibleng mag-worry ng husto at posibleng atakihin sa puso at ikamatay?

There's a difference. That was not a hostage event. That was an attack, and it had been done. Reporting it live won't put the victims in more danger.



I am not trying to defend the government or the police. They are also responsible for the failure and I am not downplaying that. They were already there since the hostage started. Media only came in during the latter part of the crisis.

I am just isolating the case of media, on the topic of discretion.

[judE_Law]

talent namin si ces at kapamilya.... sino ba dapat maging concern una... di ba kami

Exactly! Ang difference sa Quirino Grandstand hostage is walang media personality na nahostage.

of course it should be ordered from the top first!!

So wala nga discretion ang media like an immature child? Everything must be ordered from the top? You must always be told what to and what not to do?

Tell me, you, as a citizen. There are laws that govern you. You are also free to do anything you'd like, which may or may not be governed by law. But I suppose you won't do anything that is "unlawful" or "harmful" that is not explicitly specified by law. Why? Because you have common sense. You do not need policemen na "nagpapatupad ng batas" to tell you not to do this and not to do that.

nang atakihin ba ng mga terorista ang world trade sa amerika hindi rin ba dapat i-broadcast ng live dahil yung pamilya ng mga biktima na naipit sa world trade eh posibleng mag-worry ng husto at posibleng atakihin sa puso at ikamatay?

There's a difference. That was not a hostage event. That was an attack, and it had been done. Reporting it live won't put the victims in more danger.



I am not trying to defend the government or the police. They are also responsible for the failure and I am not downplaying that. They were already there since the hostage started. Media only came in during the latter part of the crisis.

I am just isolating the case of media, on the topic of discretion.

carpediem.. iba-iba ang sitwasyon...
kung una palang hindi minaliit ng gobyerno ang 'hostage taking' sa quirino grandstand.. na-warningan na sana nila ang media.. tignan mo yung manila peninsula siege.. nag-utos si arroyo ng media black-out.. natapos ang stand-off ng hindi madugo.. at nakita mo naman na pati yung mga media doon inaresto diba?
saka pwede ba.. 'wag ang media ang pag-initan.. hindi kasalanan ng media na inutil ang rumesponde sa hostage crisis.. kahit daan-daang media coverage ang andun kung maayos ang responde ng pamahalaan maaring hindi ganun ang kinahinatnan nun.
ano ba sa tingin mo ang role ng media that time ng nangyayari ang hostage taking? 6:30pm karamihan ng mga news cast ng bansa ay umeere.. do you think hindi tama na ipakita namin na may nangyayaring hostage taking that time???
ano work mo carpediem? malayo ba sa field ng mass comm? kung sagot mo ay OO... hindi ko na kailangang mag-explain pa sayo.. i'm sorry, pero hindi mo rin kasi maiintindihan.

[carpediem]

Code Select Expand

carpediem.. iba-iba ang sitwasyon...

Indeed, Sept 11. and Quirino Grandstand hostage are different. And Ces Drilon's case is also "different" because a media personality was involved.

kung una palang hindi minaliit ng gobyerno ang 'hostage taking' sa quirino grandstand.. na-warningan na sana nila ang media.. tignan mo yung manila peninsula siege.. nag-utos si arroyo ng media black-out.. natapos ang stand-off ng hindi madugo.. at nakita mo naman na pati yung mga media doon inaresto diba?
saka pwede ba.. 'wag ang media ang pag-initan.. hindi kasalanan ng media na inutil ang rumesponde sa hostage crisis.. kahit daan-daang media coverage ang andun kung maayos ang responde ng pamahalaan maaring hindi ganun ang kinahinatnan nun.

Again, I am not downplaying the fault of government and the police. As I've said, I am treating the case of media in isolation, meaning, taking all other factors like the government and the police as already given, what should be the role of media?

ano ba sa tingin mo ang role ng media that time ng nangyayari ang hostage taking? 6:30pm karamihan ng mga news cast ng bansa ay umeere.. do you think hindi tama na ipakita namin na may nangyayaring hostage taking that time???

Discretion. You could report that there was a hostage taking. You could give the overall picture of the situation. But you didn't have to show it on live TV how the hostage taker's brother was being arrested, how the assault on the bus was being done.



Sigh. I guess that's the way it is. People won't accept faults.

[judE_Law]

Code Select Expand

carpediem.. iba-iba ang sitwasyon...

Indeed, Sept 11. and Quirino Grandstand hostage is different. And Ces Drilon's case is also "different" because a media personality is involved.

kung una palang hindi minaliit ng gobyerno ang 'hostage taking' sa quirino grandstand.. na-warningan na sana nila ang media.. tignan mo yung manila peninsula siege.. nag-utos si arroyo ng media black-out.. natapos ang stand-off ng hindi madugo.. at nakita mo naman na pati yung mga media doon inaresto diba?
saka pwede ba.. 'wag ang media ang pag-initan.. hindi kasalanan ng media na inutil ang rumesponde sa hostage crisis.. kahit daan-daang media coverage ang andun kung maayos ang responde ng pamahalaan maaring hindi ganun ang kinahinatnan nun.

Again, I am not downplaying the fault of government and the police. As I've said, I am treating the case of media in isolation, meaning, taking all other factors like the government and the police as already given, what should be the role of media?

ano ba sa tingin mo ang role ng media that time ng nangyayari ang hostage taking? 6:30pm karamihan ng mga news cast ng bansa ay umeere.. do you think hindi tama na ipakita namin na may nangyayaring hostage taking that time???

Discretion. You could report that there was a hostage taking. You could give the overall picture of the situation. But you don't have to show it on live TV how the hostage taker's brother was being arrested, how the assault on the bus was being done.



Sigh. I guess that's the way it is. People won't accept faults.

ulitin ko.. 6:30pm live broadcast ng mga news.. sa tingin mo hindi mabo-broadcast sa tv lahat ng movements that time?? if you are glued in your seats the whole day nung araw na yun.. siguro naman nakita mong regular programing pa rin if not all, most of the tv networks...
i agree that there are some personality/ies sa media na nagkamali sa ginawa nila... pero yung tungkol sa coverage.. wala akong nakikitang mali, at wala akong nakikitang nilabag unless, ipinag-utos ng pulisya o ng pangulo mismo na itigil ang coverage. at uulitin ko pa rin at bibigyan ng diin.. 11 hours ang hostage taking.. kung nung umaga palang pinagbawalan na ang media.. baka pa hindi nai-broadcast yung mga sinasabi mong hindi dapat. at inuulit ko ulit.. pwede namang arestuhin ang kapatid ng hostage taker pag tapos na ang hostage crisis..  alam naman pala nilang pwedeng ikagalit ng hostage taker yun eh, ginawa pa nila... at sa harap pa mismo ng media.. am sure alam din ng mga pulis na may tv sa loob ng bus.
the problem kasi carpediem.. you are blaming (partly man o indirectly) the MEDIA ORGANIZATION.. where in fact.. meron lang individuals na dapat managot... you must understand na kapag may developing stories, breaking stories, ang media andun.. why do you think hinook ng live din ng cnn, al jazeera, bbc kung sila ay meron ganitong standard na bawal ring i-air? hindi mo talaga maiintindihan.. unless andito ka sa work namin.

[carpediem]

ulitin ko.. 6:30pm live broadcast ng mga news.. sa tingin mo hindi mabo-broadcast sa tv lahat ng movements that time??

So yun nga, like an immature child saying that "Other children are doing it anyway, so why should I not do it?"

i agree that there are some personality/ies sa media na nagkamali sa ginawa nila... pero yung tungkol sa coverage.. wala akong nakikitang mali, at wala akong nakikitang nilabag unless, ipinag-utos ng pulisya o ng pangulo mismo na itigil ang coverage. at uulitin ko pa rin at bibigyan ng diin.. 11 hours ang hostage taking.. kung nung umaga palang pinagbawalan na ang media.. baka pa hindi nai-broadcast yung mga sinasabi mong hindi dapat. at inuulit ko ulit.. pwede namang arestuhin ang kapatid ng hostage taker pag tapos na ang hostage crisis..  alam naman pala nilang pwedeng ikagalit ng hostage taker yun eh, ginawa pa nila... at sa harap pa mismo ng media.. am sure alam din ng mga pulis na may tv sa loob ng bus.
the problem kasi carpediem.. you are blaming (partly man o indirectly) the MEDIA ORGANIZATION.. where in fact.. meron lang individuals na dapat managot... you must understand na kapag may developing stories, breaking stories, ang media andun..

As I've said I never blame media as the only one responsible for the failure. And I have clearly pointed out that I am treating the case of media in isolation, given the fact that the other bodies that must be responsible (e.g. government and police) were already at fault.

why do you think hinook ng live din ng cnn, al jazeera, bbc kung sila ay meron ganitong standard na bawal ring i-air?

Because local media was already showing it.  


Let me ask this question, if you could go back in time, would you do the same, showing it live? If not, then that means you know you have fault. If the answer is still yes, then, well, I rest my case. Ratings are more important indeed.