Introduction – Media as a pillar of democracy

Regarded as one of the pillars of democracy, media plays a vital role  in determining the makeup of society and is capable of influencing the  people’s perception on diverse issues. With its free and healthy  exercise of freedom of the press or freedom of media, media has  established itself as an indispensable instrument that strengthens the  check and balance function of a democracy.

Such freedom of the press which involves proper gathering and  dissemination of news & information is intertwined with the people’s  right to be kept informed about the current political, social, economic  and cultural life as well as the burning topics and important issues of  the day. Hence, media’s appropriate use of press freedom is important  for people to know the current news that satisfies their interest and in  the process, evolve themselves into a society which is well informed  about domestic and foreign affairs in governance.

To achieve this end, people need a clear and truthful account of  events from responsible media practitioners who subscribe to the  principles of truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality,  fairness and public accountability (as these apply to the acquisition of  newsworthy information and its subsequent dissemination to the public).  This way, the people’s belief, emotion, attitude and opinion are  correctly formulated and eventually translated into a course of action  not for vested interest but for the common good or for national  development.

The character of a responsible media

While media’s role in society is noble and is somewhat related to  public service, it is in itself an industry that needs income or revenue  to sustain the complexity of its operations. Media as a business  industry implies a comprehensive collection of communication channels of  different scales for it to become a rated competitor in the field of  commercially sponsored activities of news reporting, entertainment,  education and advertising/promotional messages (from where its profit is  obtained). Therefore, it goes without saying that media may not be  totally vulnerable to the possibility of lucrative enticements and  machinations by sponsors (whether entities or personalities) with vested  interest to promote and protect.

As Tony Burman, ex-editor-In-chief of CBC News once said: “every news  organization has only its credibility and reputation to rely on”, then  people as audience must always be vigilant at all times and be adept in  using their power of discernment to distinguish between propaganda and  real news. Likewise, it is a must for the audience/listeners/viewers to  be constantly aware of the character of a conscientious and responsible  media, one that would always stick to the highest ethical standard of  journalism and one that would say NO to malpractices in media industry  as enumerated below:

NO to media bias – Media bias is the bias of journalists and  news producers within the mass media in the selection of events and  stories that are reported and how they are covered. The term “media  bias” implies a pervasive or widespread bias contravening the standards  of journalism, rather than the perspective of an individual journalist  or article.

NO to sensationalism – Sensationalism is a type of editorial  bias in mass media in which events and topics in news stories and  pieces are over-hyped to increase viewership or readership numbers.  Sensationalism may include reporting about generally insignificant  matters and events that don’t influence overall society and biased  presentations of newsworthy topics in a sensationalist, trivial or  tabloid manner.

NO to yellow journalism or the yellow press –  Yellow journalism is a type of journalism that presents little or no  legitimate well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines  for increased readership or viewership. Techniques may include  exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering, or sensationalism. By  extension “Yellow Journalism” is used today as a pejorative term to  decry any journalism that treats news in an unprofessional or unethical  fashion.

NO to trial by media – a popular phrase to describe the  impact of television and newspaper coverage on a person’s reputation by  creating a widespread perception of guilt or innocence before, or after,  a verdict in a court of law. During high publicity court cases, the  media are often accused of provoking an atmosphere of public hysteria  akin to a lynch mob which makes it nearly impossible to attain a fair  trial. Moreover, the accused is unnecessarily subjected to intense  public scrutiny the rest of his life regardless of the trial outcome.  There are different reasons why the media attention is particularly  intense surrounding a legal case: the first is that the crime itself is  in some way sensational, by being horrific or involving children; the  second is that it involves a celebrity either as victim or accused.

NO to religious discrimination – In a 1979 consultation on  the issue, the United States commission on civil rights defined  religious discrimination in relation to the civil rights guaranteed by  the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution as follows:  Whereas religious civil liberties, such as the right to hold or not to  hold a religious belief, are essential for Freedom of Religion (in the  United States secured by the First Amendment), religious discrimination  occurs when someone is denied ” the equal protection of the laws,  equality of status under the law, equal treatment in the administration  of justice, and equality of opportunity and access to employment,  education, housing, public services and facilities, and public  accommodation because of their exercise of their right to religious  freedom.”

One of the leading voices in the U.S. on the subject of Journalistic  Standards and Ethics, the Society of Professional Journalists put it  this way: Public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the  foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those  ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of  events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and  specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty.  Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist’s credibility.

The paradigm of irresponsible media practice

On June 18, 2009 the program Case Unclosed of a Philippine TV Network  GMA7 hosted by a broadcaster named Arnold Clavio aired a controversial  one-sided documentary feature of a self confessed rapist Daniel  Veridiano aka “Puto”. If anything, the episode merely accomplished what  may be considered as trial by publicity or trial by media of Bro. Eli  Soriano, the spiritual leader of a religious group known as Ang Dating  Daan (ADD). In that program, Bro. Eli was repeatedly accused by Puto of  “rape”, notwithstanding the fact that same case had already been  submitted for judicial determination during that time (sub-judice).  Without the benefit of “cross examination” and Bro. Eli’s account of the  other side of the story, Puto and Clavio teamed up to make “home runs”  of unopposed prejudices, in the absence of Bro. Eli, on that show.

Evidently, this was one of those instances of media bias and  sensationalism (in a rare practice of yellow journalism). Likewise, it  betrayed a network’s insensitivity to issue marked with significant  religious undertone. A no nonsense media practitioner who fully  subscribes to ethical standard of journalism would likely shy away from  such a discriminatory project. The TV network involve could have easily  acquired information about the real background of things that matters  most unless such information would deliberately be ignored for devious  purposes.

With utmost disregard to Bro. Eli’s rights under a democratic set-up,  GMA Network through its Channel 11 replayed the same episode last  August 03, 2011 and in the process, adds more insult to injury. GMA7,  not once but twice, had promoted the interest of Bro. Eli’s foremost  detractor, the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC), the church where Puto sought  refuge and comfort immediately following his excommunication from ADD  for various offenses. GMA7, in this particular case of trial by  publicity should have taken into consideration the common knowledge  about the deep seethed animosity between INC and ADD and the fact that  the INC had been subjecting Bro. Eli to all forms of persecution and  religious discrimination for many years.  http://socyberty.com/politics/indecent-political-affair-and-injustices-to-remember/

Puto, the self-confessed rapist http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9zc0lf52Ms&feature=related was an excommunicated former member of ADD who filed his case  against Bro. Eli the moment he became a member of INC. Was this  controversial episode involving INC and Bro Eli of ADD a stage managed  media event sponsored by INC to put Bro. Eli in bad light or just a mere coincidence it  happened that way? GMA7, INC, Clavio and Puto surely know the answer.  On the other hand, the right thinking audiences know that Bro. Eli need  not suffer from this kind of media bias, sensationalism, yellow  journalism, trial by media and religious discrimination.