JThe accreditation of bloggers provided by the choice of Marcos Junior as press secretary (she will also head the Presidential Office of Communications Operations or PCOO) is not new. It was also considered by its predecessor, but dropped due to issues over which bloggers would join the Malacañang press corps to cover the president.
There are thousands of bloggers who report and comment on public events and issues, but only a few can be so accredited. The PCOO will of course only choose those it approves. Like the new PCOO leader herself, Marcos Junior’s greedy supporters who most likely helped him campaign will have his preference.
The exclusion of others who do not meet this “qualityIfcation” will make the accreditation of chosen bloggers, if it occurs, an additional means by which the incoming regime can control the manner and extent to which its policies and actions are reported. And that seems to be the exact intention.
In a similar vein, the planned ‘overhaul’ of the representation of print, broadcast and online media in the coverage of OfIfthat of the President. The exact content of this review has not been disclosed, but the fact that it is even planned suggests that only journalists from “friendly” media organizations might be allowed to cover Malacañang.
If implemented, both would be consistent with the experience of some journalists and media organizations with Marcos Junior and his spokesperson during the campaign and after. The former did not participate in debates and roundtables where other candidates were present, and instead granted only one-on-one interviews with selected broadcast and social media hosts. For his part, the latter ignored media reporters who asked the tough questions that neither he nor his boss could answer with any credibility.
The apparent policy is to allow only certain journalists and media outlets access to Mr. Marcos. It was also highlighted after the elections. On May 26, for example, only NET25, Sonshine (sic) Media Network International (SMNI) and GMA 7 were invited to the IfMarcos Junior’s first press conference after his proclamation as president-elect.
NET25 and SMNI TV had both supported the Marcos Junior-Sara Duterte team and even broadcast misinformation and personal attacks against Vice President Leni Robredo, her family and supporters before, during and after the May 9 elections. .
The apparent discrimination in favor of the three networks was explained by a prior commitment to grant them the interviews they allegedly requested during the campaign period. But online news site Rappler said other media had been misled by a notice that the so-called ‘BBM Media Center’ where the press conference was being held would be closed on that date.
However, more than putting independent media at a disadvantage, limiting media access to information violates both press freedom and citizens’ right to know. In supposedly democratic societies like the Philippines, this right is based on the need of the people to monitor through the media what the officials to whom they have delegated their sovereign powers are doing and to hold them accountable.
This same right has already been compromised by the misinformation that many bloggers and the usual mercenaries of the written and audiovisual press have disseminated so successfully that it has aggravated the information crisis so detrimental to the formation of a informed.
But in addition to these infirmities, there is the media network that PCOO runs. Its antecedents date back to the dictatorship of Marcos Senior, who created the governmental system of media and communication that successive administrations have inherited. The system provided information about the government, but also limited the ability of the private media organizations that were then authorized to operate to monitor the policies and activities of the regime.
The system was guided by the regime and its allies in the academic interpretation of ‘communication for development’, of which the idea that development requires the collaboration of the media with the government was most important. In practice, this meant the censorship, surveillance and even imprisonment of critical journalists, and the broadcasting through the defunct Ministry of Information and the agencies it controlled only of “good news” about the regime. He called it “public information”, but what the system was really doing was developing and enhancing a positive image of the regime.
Some journalists dismiss public information as just another name for public relations. But its function is to provide citizens with information that they have the right to know. After 1986, there were attempts to reform the government media system. But politicians who saw it as essential to their need for favorable publicity that can mean more votes at election time made that nearly impossible.
Through Executive Order No. 4, the Benigno Aquino III administration reorganized the office of the press secretary and created the PCOO in 2010. EO 4 declared the need for a public information system that would inform the public of what the executive branch does. But the same EO emphasized broadcasting presidential “achievements,” which under the Aquino III and Duterte administrations led to the exclusion of “bad news” from the information provided by the system. And yet, reporting on relevant issues and events – both good and bad news – can improve public understanding of the problems facing the country and the policies needed to address them.
One of the essential elements of a genuine public information system is therefore its openness to the diversity of points of view. This is unthinkable for managers of the government information system as it was transmitted from the Marcos dictatorship to his successors. But opening it up to a diversity of views by making the media under its control spaces for debate and discourse on public issues is the only way for the system to render a real service to citizens who need the most information. complete and as accurate as possible so they can make intelligent decisions about things that affect them.
This has been demonstrated in other jurisdictions. The example of the British Broadcasting Corp. (BBC), a public media outlet that provides information not only about government but about anything worth publishing, is frequently mentioned in academic circles.
Ending their dependence on the administration in power is what public radio and television need to make their programming as relevant and open as possible. Since the Marcos Senior dictatorship, they have essentially served as the public relations arms of current administrations rather than providing reliable information. As an analysis of their performance in the last election campaign will show, this has resulted in unprofessional reporting biased in favor of the administration candidates and against their opponents.
The autonomy of the governmental media system, to begin with, can be obtained by obtaining a source of financing independent of any administration. The BBC is primarily funded by an annual television license fee paid by every household and organization that records and/or receives television broadcasts. Creating a similar source of funding will require legislation, the details of which can be forged by the legal geniuses of the new administration in accordance with Philippine law. Once this funding has been secured, the reorientation, reorganization and professionalization of government radio and television should follow.
Unfortunately, if the plans for the next PCOO leader are indicative of anything, it’s that recognizing the independence and respecting the diversity of all media in promoting the people’s right to know is not what the administration incoming has in mind, but the exact opposite.
Luis V. Teodoro is on Facebook and Twitter (@luisteodoro).
www.luisteodoro.com
