Media VIPs Probed in the Senate

Encouragements from the private and public sectors for us to move on from the tragedy of the bloodbath in the Park seem not enough as the issue refuses to die a natural death.

Recently, media executives from ABS-CBN, GMA-7 and TV-5 were grilled in the Senate on issues about the role of the press when “between life and death” situations happen. It is recalled that many point a finger on the fourth state as part of the cause of the tragedy that severely tarnished the image of the country in the family of nations. CNN’s and BBC’s live video hook up of the incident uncovered how poorly trained and ill-equipped our police officers.

A tough talking human rights lawyer and Sen. Joker Arroyo warned the TV VIPs “Don’t tempt us to use our powers here, to now issue a general broadcast policy—that will be a law.” 

The issue in question primarily revolves from the coverage the press gave to the hostage crisis that resulted in the death of eight Hong Kong nationals and the hostage-taker, a former cop. While the media were busy doing their job, former police officer Rolando Mendoza was also busy inside the tourist bus watching the police movements mounted against him from the bus’ TV monitors. Mendoza clearly saw his police brother manhandled that proved him to be agitated to a point of no return per his interview transcript. Broadcast anchors from a radio station also acted as negotiators although it is believed that they have no training to do that or were they authorized.

So, why did the press not stop covering the crisis when it deteriorated to a dangerous level? Well, we heard a lot of things that they were just doing their job informing the public of a very important on-going event. Some also say that the security officers did not stop them in covering.

In another Senate hearing, one of the broadcasters involved in the incident in the person of Erwin Tulfo, (If I understood correctly what I heard from an internet live broadcast.) as if there was the “out scoop” issue where TV or radio stations compete in their coverage to achieve a better rating than the other.

While it is true that it is the duty of the press to inform the public, that must end when lives are in danger or when the security of the State is in the front line.

They should have stopped their coverage. It is as simple as that. If they did early, some could have survived and we would not be the laughingstock of the world in having an inept police.

For the Senate to enact a law regulating or telling the press how to do their job, that is tantamount to prior restraint that equals to censorship. In the end, who could stop the Senate in doing so if the Philippine press remains truculent? The Senate is fully entitled to safeguard lives, properties and the dignity of the State. -30-