Reporting ‘Tanim-Bala’: The Need to Go Deeper

ON SEPTEMBER 18, Filipino-American Rhed Austria de Guzman recounted on Facebook her experience at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA), alleging that airport personnel found two bullets in her luggage and that they demanded money to let her through. She insisted the bullet were not hers but paid them just the same so she wouldn’t miss her flight back to Los Angeles. If de Guzman hadn’t railed on Facebook about what had happened to her, the press would not have known about it.

Six days later, on September 24, ABS-CBN 2’s TV Patrol and TV5’s Aksyon reported on de Guzman’s post, which by then was going viral. But even after the TV reports, it took a while before the rest of the press followed up. It was only in the last week of October when more passengers with similar experience came forward, thus fueling more media interest. The rest of the press readily provided coverage as the stories came, prompting warnings from no less than the United Nations and more attention by the international press.

Overall, the press did a good job covering what was now becoming a huge scandal called “tanim-bala.” But the coverage exposed certain editorial shortcomings borne out of the press’s tendency to focus on the individual stories of victims. Also, while the attention in social media helped break the story, the media could have used its professional tools to elevate the discourse, particularly in assigning accountability and demanding change in airport management.

Sources

CMFR reviewed coverage of the bullet-planting issue by three broadsheets (Manila Bulletin, Philippine Daily Inquirer, and The Philippine Star) and three television newscasts (TV Patrol, Aksyon, and GMA 7’s 24 Oras) from September 20 to November 15.

“Tanim-bala” is not a new problem. As the media coverage showed, there had been previous cases but had been largely unreported. Not only did the recent coverage bare the possibility of a scam — it also helped bring to public attention the laws, security procedures, and organizational structures that possibly require updating. It also compelled agencies to act and take a look at airport operations. The media did their part in pursuing the story after that Facebook exposé but, as always, this would only be the first step in providing the public information on an issue that, because of the large number of Filipinos, especially Overseas Filipino Workers, could affect, or has already affected them.

It did not take long for reports on TV to identify and seek officials from accountable agencies. Aside from the victims themselves, the press approached Office for Transportation Security (OTS) public information chief Jonathan Maliwat, OTS administrator Roland Recomono, Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) spokesperson David de Castro, Department of Transportation and Communication (DOTC) Secretary Joseph Emilio Abaya, and the Philippine National Police – Aviation Security Group (Avsegroup).

By late October, the newspapers had common sources like Presidential Communications Operations Secretary Herminio Coloma Jr., presidential spokesperson Edwin Lacierda, PNP-Avsegroup Chief Supt. Pablo Francisco Balagtas, and senators Ralph Recto and Miriam Defensor-Santiago.

Structures and Mandates

For a running story like this, when new incidents were happening even while the press was covering it, the need to immediately identify accountability is key, especially since this involves various government agencies. Theoretically, it should help the government address the problem quickly and prevent more incidents.

For the media to help the public understand the issue, reporters needed to know the organizational structure of the NAIA. Reports did seek the side of the DOTC, OTS, MIAA, and Avsegroup but did not exactly provide the scope of authority of each agency. For instance, the OTS and Avsegroup both handle security aspects to some extent. The difference between the two could have been highlighted in order to clearly draw the scope of their responsibility and how they are accountable in the allegations of extortion.

For its part, government failed to take the lead in sorting out for the public the maze of agencies in the NAIA and their separate and apparently uncoordinated functions. They need not have waited for the media to interview them separately, with reports providing information piece meal without establishing a map of accountability and the areas calling for investigation.

In an interview with ANC’s Headstart with Karen Davila on November 5, MIAA general manager Jose Angel Honrado revealed that 22 agencies operate in different areas in NAIA with their own set of procedures and mandates. Media could have done its own research to help pinpoint accountability way ahead of the Senate hearing that started in November 12.

A Bulletin report (“Validate tanim-bala, Aquino orders DOTC”, Nov. 3, 2015) mentioned Executive Order 311 and the need to review it but the story did not expound further. The press could have waded through executive and administrative orders that outlined the roles and functions of agencies and provided details. Among these are EO 311 that designated the OTS “as the single authority responsible for the security of the transportation systems of the country”; EO 778 that created the MIAA in 1982 and EO 903 that revised it in 1983 ; and Administrative Order 151 in 2006 that affirmed the authority of the MIAA in NAIA and also outlined the functions of the general manager. Comparing these would have clearly drawn the boundaries of their responsibilities and could have also helped avoid questioning other government officials who did not have direct authority over the matter.

Stories of Victims

But perhaps for understandable reasons, the press chose to focus on the stories of victims, like American missionary Lane Michael White, Filipino-American Rhed Austria de Guzman, and overseas Filipina worker Gloria Ortinez. The media dutifully noted the narratives of passengers caught with bullets, majority of whom also claimed innocence (although some admitted possession of bullet cases they were carrying in their luggage as amulets), and the alleged extortion by airport personnel.

Stories from the victims were obtained first-hand, although it was unclear how many cases had been reported since the story broke in September. The reports peaked by November, with the three broadsheet dailies publishing a total 66 news reports (The Star published 25, the Inquirer 22, and Bulletin 19 from November 1 to 15). Reports could have tallied how many were caught and claimed innocence since September, noting these instances as the story progressed and referred to them as they reported on new cases, thus presenting an accurate overview on the number of incidents. For its part, online news website Rappler posted cases on November 2 (“TIMELINE: Recent cases of alleged bullet scam at NAIA”).

The prominent media coverage of “tanim-bala” may not have stopped the scam but it helped compel agencies managing NAIA to act on the problem and identify improvements such as installation of additional surveillance cameras in strategic locations.

In general, the press did its job reporting the scam but it may have missed the opportunity to produce their own investigative or in-depth report that could have helped both the public and the government. It is after all this type of reporting that sets apart journalism from the rest of the information flowing in the age of Facebook.