Monitors: Print

The big falling-out
The Philippine Daily Inquirer lives by the slogan “Balanced views, fearless views,” but the paper’s Oct. 28 headline, “It’s Palace vs ‘The Firm’: SC vote on Cha-cha confirms falling out,” was hardly an example of balance and fairness.

Reporting on the alleged falling-out between President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and the Carpio Villaraza & Cruz (now known as Villaraza & Angangco) law firm due to their divergent views on Charter change, the Inquirer started by speculating: “‘The Firm’ does not seem to see eye to eye with its most important client, President Macapagal-Arroyo, on Charter change.”

“The Firm” refers to the Villaraza & Angangco law firm that handles legal matters for the Arroyos.

The Inquirer based its story on the say-so of an anonymous Malacañang official. According to the official, “Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio’s caustic opinion rejecting the people’s initiative petition only showed that Ms Arroyo did not have the backing of her most trusted law firm as far as her goal of amending the Constitution was concerned.”

Carpio formed the law firm in 1980 together with former defense chief Avelino Cruz Jr. and F. Arthur L. Villaraza. Named to the Supreme Court on Oct. 22, 2001, Carpio is one of 10 appointees of President Arroyo to the high court. Cruz resigned from the Cabinet last Nov. 30 reportedly because of his stand against Cha-cha.

“He (Carpio) is the intellectual force against Charter change among the justices. We’ve always suspected The Firm to be against Charter change, and his vote confirms this,” the Malacañang official told the Inquirer.

Aside from the unnamed Palace official, the paper also quoted an unidentified “top lawyer” who claimed that  legal circles  were abuzz with stories about “a purported falling-out” between the President and the law firm over some soured deals. Carpio’s dissenting vote on the people’s initiative issue before the high court “appeared to have bolstered the talk,” said the lawyer.

The Inquirer sought the reactions of other government officials like justice secretary Raul Gonzalez, who blamed “The Firm” for killing the people’s initiative. Presidential chief of staff Michael Defensor refused to comment on the alleged rift between the President and her legal counsel. But he told the Inquirer that the President was “perplexed” not by the way some justices, especially her appointees, objected to the people’s initiative but by the use of “stinging” words in their opinions.

For the rest of the report, the Inquirer got the reaction of people’s initiative proponent Sigaw ng Bayan to the high court decision.

The paper had a sidebar that provided background on “The Firm,” which changed its name after founding partners, Cruz and Carpio, joined the Arroyo administration.

But the headline story and the sidebar did not  carry the side of “The Firm” and Carpio. Readers had to wait the following day to hear  from The Firm: “All the partners of The Firm declare that they remain fierce and loyal defenders of the President and her administration” (“We remain loyal to GMA’: The Firm denies hand in SC’s Cha-cha ruling,” Oct. 29).

Inq7.net and the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) deserve praise for providing links to the Oct. 25 Supreme Court decision on the people’s initiative as well as the opinions of the high court justices on the issue. Readers can access and read the documents in full either through Inq7.net (http://services.inquirer.net/print/print.php?article_id=28689) or PCIJ’s blog “Inside PCIJ” (http://www.pcij.org/blog/?p=1266).

Troubles of the Left
Veering away from the usual stories about communist rebels and militant personalities in the country, the Philippine Daily Inquirer published a four-part in-depth report about  issues allegedly confronting the Left. The series, which came out from Nov. 9 to 12, revisited controversial but dated topics about the Left such as the division within the ranks of the communist movement, the revolutionary taxes of the New People’s Army, the extrajudicial killings, and the purging of alleged military deep penetration agents within the Communist Party of the Philippines.

Nicole’s other travail
Rape victims are not supposed to be identified by their real names in news reports. The anonymity is media’s way of protecting victims from more harm. This is why the media gave the complainant in the Subic rape case —the name “Nicole.”

But media can at times be careless, which adds to the trauma of the victim. A glaring example  was the Manila Times report that disclosed the real name of “Nicole.” (“Accused claims Nicole cried rape to save face,” Nov. 7). Ironically, part of the report said the victim was “given the name Nicole by the court to hide his [sic] true identity…”

Naming Nicole was not the only mistake committed by the Times. Its report was based only on the memorandum submitted by principal suspect Lance Corporal Daniel Smith to the Makati Regional Trial Court. The memorandum questioned the motives of “Nicole” for filing the rape case against Smith. The story did not bother to get the side of Nicole or the reaction of her lawyer.

Tragedy as comedy
Compassion for women is apparently not one of the strong suits of The Philippine Gazette.

In its Nov. 13 to 19 issue, the paper ran a story about actress Lara Morena who was reportedly beaten up by her former boyfriend. The report started by focusing on the physical attributes of the victim: “Halos bugbog sarado umano ang magandang mukha ng sexy actress…”

In another story, the weekly paper compared a housewife who allegedly attacked her husband to boxing heavyweight Mike Tyson (“Ginang ginaya si Mike Tyson,” Nov. 13-19). To justify the analogy, the report gave a background of how Tyson bit off Evander Holyfield’s ear  during  their heavyweight title match.

Where’s the story?
When two prominent personalities engage in a word war, it is almost certain that the media  will focus on the fireworks rather than the substance behind the exchange of insults.

The Manila Times played up the name-calling between “a mentally unstable justice secretary” (Raul Gonzalez) and an “ex-convict” (former Manila Rep. Mark Jimenez) (“Fight erupts between ‘ex-con, mad justice exec’,” Oct. 25).

According to the report, Gonzalez “fired the first salvo” when he said Jimenez would be investigated for his questionable assets.  The justice secretary alleged that the money donated by Jimenez to a housing project of the Armed Forces of the Philippines could have come from illegal sources.

The Times got the reaction of Jimenez who described Gonzalez as “Tustado utak n’yan.”  The Times went back to Gonzalez to get his reaction to Jimenez’s reaction and came up with: “I don’t want to start a fight with an ex-convict.”

The Times indeed got quotable quotes from the two gentlemen, but the story might have been better off if the paper had tried to determine if there was any truth to Gonzalez’s accusations. That would have been legitimate news.

Campaigning in the news
With the 2007 elections  just a few months away, politicians have started making headlines. A report in The Philippine Star seemed like an early campaign material for Sen. Panfilo Lacson (“Lacson confirms bid to run for mayor of Manila,” Nov. 14).

The Star discussed Lacson’s plan to join the Manila mayoralty race, the reasons why he is gunning for a local elective post, and his potential rivals for the mayoralty. The paper did more: the report included details of Lacson’s campaign platform, what he could offer Manila residents, and his priorities in case of victory. To complete the premature campaign, the report included a background on Lacson before he was elected senator.

Mistaken identity
The caption of a front-page photo in The Manila Times’s Nov. 14 issue must have confused a lot of readers. Bukidnon Rep. Teofisto Guingona III, one of the politicians in the photograph who expressed support for Sen. Panfilo Lacson’s candidacy for mayor of Manila, was identified as Iloilo Rep. Rolex Suplico.

Unproven guilty
Persons accused of crime have a right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Yet The Philippine Star labeled robbery suspects arrested in Marikina City as “criminals” in its Oct. 30 report (“31 criminals arrested in Marikina this month”). The paper quoted Marikina police Chief Supt. Sotero Ramos Jr. who referred to the suspects as criminals. The Star went along with the police officer and described the arrested suspects as “criminals” at least thrice.

The usual suspects
A Manila Times front-page story about security measures being enforced by the police  on All Saints’ Day  almost certainly helped harden existing negative perceptions  of Muslims (“8,000 cops to secure cemeteries in Metro,” Nov. 1). The report said the tightened security was due to terrorist bombings that had occurred in some parts of the country in the past. Adding background informa-tion, the Times noted: “In the past, Muslim extremists have bombed or tried to bomb public places on Christian holidays.”

Unverified report
On Oct. 25, the BusinessMirror reported that gambling lords in Bulacan were using the small-town lottery (STL) to cover up their jueteng operations (“Gambling lords using STL as cover for jueteng operation?”).
The information came from Anastacio Inoncillo, provincial manager of the Diamond Gaming and Research Corp., the company given a franchise by the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office to operate STL in Bulacan. Inoncillo identified the financier of the illegal STL or jueteng in the town of San Miguel as the brother of a former mayor in a nearby town. The report did not elaborate and did not try to verify the claim with other sources.

Observer or advocate?
Three days after the Supreme Court slammed the door on the people’s initiative, Manila Standard Today reported a supposed opposition attempt to convince Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban to join its senatorial lineup (“Opposition wooing SC Chief for its Senate Slate, Oct. 28”). The story was attributed to pro-Charter change (Cha-cha)  politicians, principally Eastern Samar Gov. Ben Evardone, who shared information he claimed to have heard from other sources.

Adding more spice to the story, other pro-Cha-cha politicians were quoted as saying that Panganiban would lose in their districts. Neither the Chief Justice nor the opposition was asked to confirm or deny whether Panganiban was indeed offered a slot in the opposition senatorial ticket in the first place.

When Cha-cha advocates filed a motion for reconsideration against the Supreme Court ruling, Standard Today reported on an indignation rally against the decision last Nov. 20. The newspaper described the ruling as “dubious.” Again, only pro-Cha-cha politicians were interviewed for the story. As expected, these politicians said the high court showed “a manifest partiality and utter failure to recognize the undeniable right of the people to exercise their sovereign power to amend the Constitution” and that “the motion for reconsideration gives the justices the opportunity to rectify the error in following the logic of Justice Antonio Carpio.”

Taking sides
Biased reporting by Manila Standard Today has not been confined to the Charter change brouhaha. In the Liberal Party squabble between the group of Manila mayor Lito Atienza and the faction of Sen. Franklin Drilon, the newspaper has consistently sided with the camp of the Manila mayor, an administration ally.

In its Nov. 17 report, Standard Today carried the statements of Atienza and Eli Quinto, who both blamed Drilon for the party split. As in past articles, there was no reaction cited from Drilon’s camp. Quinto is reportedly one of the party’s longest-serving directors-general.

Who’s a newsrooster?
In the old days, media referred to women journalists as newshens. The term is all but forgotten now—except by the Manila Standard Today and The Philippine Star’s online version, philstar.com.  In the headlines of their Nov. 14 stories about the attempt of the police to arrest BusinesMirror reporter Mia Gonzalez, the two media organizations described her as a “newshen.”

What’s wrong with calling Gonzalez a journalist or a reporter?

Unpaid advertisers
The Philippine Gazette tried an old promotions strategy when it published a photograph of a group of supposed Binay supporters reading the paper during the Makati city hall standoff.  The broadsheet’s front page was placed in the photo’s center.

Just ranting
Using a cartoon that said, “Sinungaling ’yang SWS,” the Nov. 6 to 12 The Philippine Gazette article “SWS survey on hunger misleading–solons” was biased and confusing. Quoting Reps. Antonio Cerilles and Federico Sandoval, the story described the survey as misleading because it did not point out the government’s efforts to address the problem of hunger.

The report, which gave space to Cerilles’s pitch for Charter change, did not explain the scope of the survey. It did not even check Cerilles’s claim that most surveys were conducted in Metro Manila, implying that the views of rural folk  were not part of the survey (Social Weather Stations, Third Quarter 2006 Social Weather Survey: Hunger hits record 16.9% of families again; 51% are Poor/Mahirap, 31 October 2006, www.sws.org.ph).

Victims twice over
The Philippine Gazette has picked up another bad habit: identifying abused children.  “Batang ina hinagis ang anak sa ilog” (Nov. 6-12) named the abused children, aged five and two, respectively.

In a separate story, “Anak ng TV host, 2 pa nabiktima ng ‘budol’ gang,” the paper identified two minors and revealed their addresses. The Gazette played up the fact that one of the victims is the son of broadcaster Kata Inocencio.

The cycle was repeated in another story on the same issue, “Lalaki nalitson sa sunog.”

Comments are closed.