MOST MEMBERS of the Davao media favor a proposal to review the manner the media, particularly television, covered the August 23 hostage-taking at the Quirino Grandstand at the Luneta which turned into a bloodbath that killed eight Hong Kong tourists and the hostage-taker, a dismissed police captain.
This was the result of an opinion survey conducted by Edge Davao through mobile phones among a mixture of 25 editors, reporters and correspondents belonging to print, radio and television media on August 29-30.
Many of those who want a review said media had some lapses in covering the 11-hour drama. They said there is a need to formulate guidelines on covering a sensitive incident like the Luneta hostage fiasco that ended in a carnage which shocked the world and focused the spotlight on a stunned, embarrassed–nay, shamed–Filipino nation.
But the call for review was by no means unanimous. At least six of those polled believe that media practitioners involved in some way were only doing their job and that news persons and their outlets should be left alone in deciding how to go about covering such high-profile incidents as hostage-taking or hijacking. Those interviewed were unanimous in claiming that the police were mainly to blame for mishandling the critical situation, short of saying heads must roll.
The Senate committee on public services, which has the authority to approve or disapprove franchises of broadcast media, will look into possible lapses in the conduct of media coverage of that bloody Monday drama in a public hearing next week. Senator Ramon Revilla Jr., committee chairman, ordered the issuance of invitations to certain media personalities to the hearing that will be jointly conducted with the Senate committees on public information and mass media, and public order and drugs, headed by Sen. Gregorio Honasan.
“A review is necessary if only for us in media to learn from it. Surely, the media work is not without its flaws, and the tragic Luneta hostage-taking mess must provide us space to revisit the role of media as the Fourth Estate. While media, in their avowed mission of delivering the truth to the public, must hold its ground as messenger of information. Media must be very careful in doing its job to not make a messy situation like a hostage crisis messier,” said Jeffrey Tupas, Mindanao correspondent of the Philippine Daily Inquirer. “The bloody Luneta crisis and whatever role played by media must be dissected,” said Tupas, who is the local representative of the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP).
Serafin “Jun” C. Ledesma Jr., editor-publisher of the Mindanao Journal and one-time television news anchor, had this to say: ’’Yes, I’m for it because media are being blamed for contributing to the murder of hostages. It’s not only the ratinga war and profit that the TV giants are after. There’s too much corporate hubris that affects their employees, too.”
“Yes, it was media overkill,” says Sun.Star Davao desk editor Ana Dulay.
“A review is needed, particularly in the manner of reporting tactical movements of state agents,” texted in Joey Dalumpines, senior reporter of the daily Mindanao Times who is also a veteran radioman. ”Troop maneuvers must not be compromised at all times. Media have no business describing them during actual operations. That’s where responsibility is needed most.”
‘I agree to the review. But I am confident that media aren’t accountable for the bloody incident. The PNP was clumsy enough to have neglected coordination with the media. In contrast, our Davao PNP personnel do not fail to advise the media to hold crucial info as it may preempt their operations,” says Maymay Benedicto, anchor of ABS-CBN radio.
“I believe media must take another look at itself subjectively and review its sense of objectivity when handling a sensitive news event,” according to Manny Cabrera, retired broadcast executive and current disc jockey.
Ethel Cantor Constantino, NBN television news anchor and registered nurse: “Yes, to prevent a similar tragedy from happening in the future. Media should have guidelines in covering hostage drama and similar volatile events.”
“Very bad live media coverage!!! It compromised lives of the hostages. I think the coverage influenced the decision and actions of the hostage-taker resulting to multiple deaths,” says Ednar Dayanghirang, television public affairs anchor and peace advocate.
“In our zeal and enthusiasm to perform our noble tasks, sometimes we get entangled in the complex web of the law. The safer way is for government to lay down guidelines, because in our eagerness to inform the public and mold their opinion, our actions could collide with public interests as viewed by the government, resulting in catastrophe.”- Ben Diansay, editor-publisher of the Mindanao Gazette chain of seven local publications.
Judy Quiroz, veteran reporter of the Mindanao Daily Mirror: “In isolated crisis situations such as the Luneta hostage-taking with human lives at stake, media should police their own ranks even without official directive calling for restraint or news embargo. I am for a set of rules in black and white for covering such situations, with penalties if possible.”
Lan Daval, Mindanao Journal columnist and cartoonist: “The inquiry must focus on television because certain footages of the Luneta carnage were shown worldwide and just aggravated the situation. Television networks always want to scoop each other. And this has happened many times before.”
Derf Maiz, GMA television news anchor: “Yes, for the sake of looking into how the operatives handled or mishandled the situation. But I believe that media’s presence in the incident is important in preserving human lives and observing human rights.”
Carmelito Francisco, Mindanao Times managing editor and Business World correspondent, said, “Yes, protocols must be established and followed.”
Al Genoguin, radio anchor and SunStar Davao Superbalita columnist, suggested that the inquiry should look into three things – a television anchorman’s long conversation with the hostage-taker; media’s coverage of the SWAT attack on the bus, and media’s describing of the police sniper’s movement.”
Greg Deligero of Edge Davao said, “There’s a need to define the scope and role of media in hostage situations so that while they are exercising their rights as journalists, their actions must not compromise the lives of the protagonists.”
Lorie Ann Cascaro, also of the Edge Davao, said: “There were lapses. The live coverage had worsened the scenario because the hostage-taker was able to use it to his advantage.”
Review rejected
However, Nikki Gomez, weekend editor of the Mindanao Daily Mirror, said “No, the media conduct should not be reviewed. If anything should be reviewed, it is the conduct of the Manila police and Manila City Hall. For one, Mayor Lim had command responsibility.”
“Review? What for, to see if there was impropriety? The stations did not go overboard. Cameras were far enough so as not to impede police work. Media covered fair. It exposed police blunders. Is media to blame? No sir!” said Ricky Jimenez, retired Radyo ng Bayan station manager and now consumer columnist of Edge Davao.
Ben Tesiorna, Manila Bulletin correspondent for the Davao region, thinks the review is unnecessary. “What’s important is to come out with a clear set of guidelines on what to do when it happens again and that it must be strictly adhered to by the media. Dapat yong PNP ang i-review, not media, dahil PNP ang may palpak na ginawa.”
Dian Suelto of the Mirror: “The media was just doing its job. It is the authorities who should be reviewed.”
“No, because media were just doing their job. The problem was in the way the police handled the situation, from the negotiations up to the retrieval of the hostages. If the police wanted to limit the coverage they could have established temporary barricade such as tarpaulin or anything that would block camera shots of the bus,” argued Roy Geonzon, station manager of DXUM-Radyo Ukay and chapter chairman of the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas.
“Who will review? Government? If government, no. If individual outlets, yes. We know better. It’s about time media outfits get a clear picture of their role in a crisis situation,” says Ed Fernandez, Times columnist and journalism instructor.
Edith Caduaya, senior reporter of Mindanao Daily Mirror, said: “For what purpose? No, if review is for public to criticize. Yes, if review is for PNP to reflect where the lapses occurred.”
This writer also favors a review of media’s manner of covering the Luneta incident. But the review should be proactive, not allowed to deteriorate into a blame game.
I suggest that ace broadcaster Ces Oreña Drilon and her camera man who were kidnapped by the Abu Sayyaf in Sulu last year be invited to give input to the review.
Their testimonies as hostages are important because they were in a situation similar to that of the hostages in the tourist bus, eight of whom were killed. Ms Drilon could perhaps be asked, if she was one of the hostages in the bus, would she have approved of the way the police, the negotiators, the media, including her network, and even the gawkers behaved during the incident?
Everybody, not just media, should know what to do in situations like this. Take note that hostage-taking is just a “minor” act of terrorism that threatens the world today. In other countries, they have graduated to suicide bombing. That is a major, major terror. [ANTONIO M. AJERO]
