CEBU CITY — This one is for Ripley’s Believe it or Not. Over 400 so-called “media representatives” are crammed within the Customs beat in Manila alone, columnist Boo Chanco snaps. Four weekly tabloids exclusively cover Customs. “Isn’t it obvious? Most of those people claiming to represent media are anything but?”
Set the figures in context. That’s about seven times foreign and local reporters accredited to Malacanang. The “Customs press corps” -— if that is what it is — equals 408 provincial newspapers (32 are dailies).
Confer with publishers of major papers and network managers to help sift out those who moonlight as fixers, mint-new Customs Commissioner Ruffy Biazon was advised.
If Biazon keeps his nose clean, he shouldn’t be afraid of those who flaunt oversize “Press” credentials, even if they threaten him, Chanco said. (Isn’t the correct word blackmail?)
Most are from tabloids that have no circulation. “Past Customs officials tolerated this outsized number of reporters” because they hid dirt.
In 1693, the dictionary logged in the word “journalist”. This meant “a writer or editor for a news medium.” Or “a writer who aims at a mass audience”. Since then, radio and TV came on stream. Many broadcast journalists distinguished themselves this craft.
But “fixer” for customs shakedown has never been among a journalist’s definition. And in the Customs beat and elsewhere, that we stumble across a unique Philippine creation — and problem: the ” block-timers”, aside from the notorious tabloid writer.
Radio stations in Europe or the US don’t have ”blocktimers”. Neither do Asean countries like Thailand or Malaysia. They claim to be journalists.
In reality, they’re “walk-in customers”. At any of 952 radio stations that the National Telecommunications Commission oversees, with a shaky hand, they plunk down cash for airtime. With no questions asked, they broadcast -— what?
News and comment, they claim. Character assassination or praise, for a price, their critics counter. They “give us the opinion of the uneducated that brings us in touch with the ignorance of the community,” Oscar Wilde once wrote.
Print media indicates what is “paid ad”. This is published distinct from editorial matter. Blocktimers rarely indicate who picks up the tab for their programs. But those praised -— or shellacked -— give a fair idea of who pays. Stations wash their hands, by saying: “The program does not reflect the management’s view.” Basta.
“Blocktiming is (also) a primary fund-generator for provincial radio stations,” Melinda de Jesus of Committee on Media Freedom & Responsibility noted earlier.
This proved to be the emerging problem for Kapisanan ng mga Brodkasters (KBP) as programs with little accountability proliferate in a country that works by the revised “Golden Rule”: He who has the gold, rules.
A CMFR study found lack of training and even more significant, ethical sense. Some 25 percent finished high school while 13 percent “had no record of educational attainment”.
There’s little, by way of training on objectivity, balance, fairness — and avoidance of conflict of interest, as journalism code of ethics provide.
Most “blocktimers” operate in a moral wasteland, where facts are few, and comments have a price tag. That sizes up the Customs beat. “Where the carcass is, there the vultures gather.”
Electronic gunslinging is abuse. “Power without responsibility has been the prerogative of the harlot through the ages,” Irish statesman Stanley Baldwin wrote.
KBP found fault with the no-rules-hold coverage in the Luneta hostage crisis. Eight Hong Kong tourists died And the Philippines today still copes with diplomatic spillover, as China presses for reparations. Fines were imposed on major networks.
“A mere slap on the wrist,” fumed Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism. Perhaps. But this was a 180-degree turn for KBP from the Chavez versus National Telecommunications case of February 2008.
In that en banc decision, the Supreme Court lashed KBP for playing footsie with the Macapagal-Arroyo regime’s gags on the “Hello Garci” tapes.
KBP’s Radio Code now prohibits open-ended contracts for “blocktimers”. And identifying sponsors of blocktime programs will increase transparency. But implementation of existing measures -— from certification that the “blocktimer” adheres to KBP’s code to monthly reports — has been spotty.
Perhaps, KBP can take a hard look at this farce of 400 “customs reporters” and ask: Who are really electronic guns-for-hire? Do blocktimers, on the customs beat, do their stuff on KBP member stations? That may reinforce the reform measures already adopted.
Indeed “our membership lists remain porous,” observed a Cebu Press Freedom Week editorial. “We’ve still to flush out hao-shiaos who flaunt press cards or blocktime microphones.”
