A celebration of good journalism

On its 18th year, the Jaime V. Ongpin Journalism Seminar remains a happy event. The Center for Media Freedom & Responsibility (CMFR) regards the recognition of good works an important part of growing a quality press. And as in previous years, this year’s program drew an audience of 185 guests, mostly students and faculty of journalism courses in colleges and universities based in Metro Manila. This year, the boundary was extended to include Bulacan State University. All in all, sixteen schools were represented.

The Seminar has been drawn from used to be a larger program to give awards to outstanding reports of journalists in the past year, specifically investigative and explanatory stories. When we stopped giving the awards, that program was in its 20th year.

There were many reasons for ending a successful program. At some point, CMFR noted that the awards were going to a small circle of journalists. While the program succeeded in encouraging in-depth reporting, the competition had narrowed as investigative reporting (IR) practitioners raised the level of standards above the rest of the press.

The recognition of best practice is CMFR’s third flagship program, along with press freedom protection and journalism review. It is important for a community to name the good people in the field. The inclusion of a journalist among the panelists notes the body of work that this journalist has done, along with a quick check on values exuded and noted in his or her career. They are selected not for one particular story.

CMFR has always been aware that no selection process can ever be perfect. While judges do bring to the discussions a range of issues so as to reach consensus, no one ever pretends that there will be complete agreement about who they decide to include.

Thus, CMFR is trying to break the seminar activity from the the framework of a contest. All the panelists who are selected to be part of the program receive the same plaque and cash gift. They all become JVO Fellows. So if we are stuck with the language of competition, it is accurate to say that they are all winners.

For the last 16 years, CMFR has also done the selection for the the Marshall McLuhan Fellow (MMF), which gives the chosen journalist a study tour of around ten days, sponsored by the Embassy of Canada. In the past, the reporter of the best work received the top cash prize and was also automatically the MMF. But as there is no longer the case, the MMF is now a separate process but he or she is still selected from the panelists. Journalists who had already been chosen before for the Canadian tour may still be invited to take part in the panel but they would no longer be selected as MMF.

So the Journalism Seminar has another goal.

CMFR sees the program as a dynamic way to exhibit skills and qualities not necessarily demonstrated in the reports themselves. The questions that probe into the problems of research, of the paper trail or interviews, of corroboration and reviewing the validity of gathered evidence—all these take the audience to the actual details of reporting. Reporters also share the difficulties of reporting in the different environments they work in. Those working for international organizations have to find a hook that will interest their audience in another country. Investigating corruption in the local community can involve a journalist on reporting on a neighbor, an official who is popular or a family that is tied to the various interests that involve different sectors.

So there is an unspoken goal to try and include the diversity of the press community, especially those working in the provinces. The community press bears a significant burden in the exposure of wrongdoing in high places. The ones in the local communities become more vulnerable to reprisal by those disturbed by such exposure.

The seminar is probably the only one of its kind in the country at this time. It invites journalists from different media as well as those who come from rival organizations, and those working in different areas of the country.

We bring them together to talk “practice”—to share experience, ideas, and insight—and CMFR believes that the session is an effective alternative to two hours in the classroom. Faculty can take back to the classrooms important issues that can lead to more discussion among their students.

Despite the difficulties, CMFR hopes to be able to continue the program. It is their most valuable and visible link to the community of successor journalists  and those in charge of their training.

Despite the difficulties, a worthwhile undertaking.