Fair, Fooolish, in an Ethical Fix: Deadline Dec. 3 at 4pm. This space is for the second set of media monitor. Provisions: 1)avoiding “improper emphasis” and “distortion by omission of facts 2) airing all sides to a conflict; 3) correcting errors; 4) avoiding “degrading any person by reason of sex, creed, religion, belief, etc”; 5)observing the presumption of innocence; etc.
Discover more from marichulambino.com
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Ethics mustn’t be lost in the land of the obvious
by Hannah Carmela B. Quinco (2009-56956)
Comm110
It seems that the public enjoys seeing politicians squabble at the senate that is why the media is trying to dig up and frame the most controversial fights of them all. As I was reading the news, it seems that the websites of the three most popular newspapers in the Philippines had placed the news about senator Enrile lashing back at a ‘certain’ hater on headlines and as “Breaking News”. I decided to compare how they framed the news and if there were any distortions and improper emphasis.
The first website’s headline ran, “Enrile breaks silence, slams Defensor-Santiago”
the second website’s headline on the otherhand stated, “ Enrile answers Santiago’s allegations “
the third one phrased it as, “Enrile: Miriam an ‘obsessive hater’ “
I noticed differences in some of the details that was presented in the articles of the first and third website.
It was stated in the first website that:
“Enrile did not name Santiago, but said this “obsessive hater” had accused him as “murderous” and mastermind or brains of the P10-billion “pork barrel” scam. He said he did not know why this unnamed senator was “obsessive and bitter” against him…xxx”
However, the third website stated it as:
“In a televised privilege speech, Enrile described Santiago as an “obsessive hater” and said the allegation that he masterminded the pork barrel scam is an “outright lie” and a “baseless fabrication.”
It was indeed obvious that the squabble was between senator Enrile and senator Defensor-Santiago given all the direct attacks that the latter had stated against senator Enrile. This minute error in phrasing or delivering the news might simply be overlooked by most readers however, it is very important to clarify all the details in an article no matter how obvious something may be.
In the first website, the writer had been very cautious and paid enough attention. Though they did say that Enrile was now retaliating from senator Santiago’s accusations, they did clarify that senator Enrile DID NOT name Santiago. On the other hand, on the third website, the reporter might had been too caught up with the heat of the squabble. Even the headline was a bit too direct, “Enrile: Miriam an ‘obsessive hater.’ No matter how obvious, huge or small a news may be, writing must always be taken with precaution. Reporting must be short and concise however, omitting certain facts must not be done just to sensationalize the article up a notch.
LikeLike
http://aimeegalangc110.blogspot.com/2013/12/medyogoodboy-media-monitor-2.html
LikeLike
To : Prof. Marichu Lambino
Re : Comm110 2nd media monitor
Date submitted: December 2, 2013
Link:
Reaction:
Recently, Saranggani Congressman also a world renowned boxer, Manny “Pacman” Pacquiao garnered 8 world titles after defeating Brandon Rios in Macau, China last November 23, 2013. However, the happiness and excitement was cut when the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) made a “bank freeze” on the two bank accounts of the said boxer because according to the BIR Manny Pacquiao failed to show proper documentation of his tax payments. The link above shows Anthnoy Taberna of ABS-CBN‘s “Umagang Kay Ganda (UKG)” interviewing Nanay Dionesia regarding that matter. It can be observed that the video is around 4 minutes. With that, I could say that there has been a sort of “improper emphasis”. Why? Here are my reasons. First, it is clear that the program really intended to interview Nanay Dionesia , on the video we can hear Mr. Taberna saying “wag ho muna kayong aalis sa aming studio at kakausapin pa namain kayo“ ( don’t leave our studio yet , we would still talk to you) . Second, Why would the mother be interviewed? If first and foremost the directly accused (his son) has already been interviewed. Third, Manny Pacquiao is of course at legal age to handle such issues. It is without a doubt that the interview could gain sympathy and could perhaps be the reason behind the poll survey of UKG resulting to 60+% of netizens are not in favor of BIR and 30+% are in favor.
On the other hand, I believe that Mr. Anthony Taberna and the whole program has done their best to get both sides. First, Mr. Taberna had already interview BIR Commissioner Henares. He has also got the side of Manny Pacquiao . Second, Mr. Taberna has also interview a reputable sports analyst in the name of Atty. Ed Tolentino. Third, the program also shows the Facebook comments and opinions of the netizens regarding this matter. I appreciate all of those efforts done by the program and by Mr. Taberna. Therefore, I think the 4-minute interview is not that relevant, hence it can actually turn into some sort of “bias” later on. However, IF its really a must to air the statement of “Nanay Dionesia”, the program should have made an interview with Manny Pacquiao and Nanay Dionesia together instead of having it on a specific/solo phase.
From: Charmaine Ycasas 2013-78428
Comm110 TYZ
LikeLike
Anne Curtis Turns Rowdy In A Bar; Slaps John Lloyd Cruz And Three Others
http://www.pinoystop.com/news/celebrity/2795/anne-curtis-turns-rowdy-in-a-bar-slaps-john-lloyd-cruz-and-three-others
The article gives a biased look into an unfortunate mishap involving several high-profile celebrities at Privé on the 1st of December, 2013. The recounting of events is leading, and there isn’t enough evidence to support certain claims such as “The moment they entered the CR, Anne was immediately agitated…”, “Anne looked like she was drunk but she seemed not drunk enough to be that rowdy.”, and “Anne, who has always been projecting the nice and wholesome image to the public, is very unlikely to conduct herself like that… Anne looked like she was the most horrible villainess they have ever seen.”. The article fails to give any real, tangible recounting of the story, with only vague comments and observations that seem unanimous in nature made by “To some who witnessed,” all of whom seem to have chosen not to identify themselves.
This story made the rounds on the internet like wildfire only a few hours after it had actually been reported on a website by a source who was actually part of the scuffle. In no way was Anne Curtis described in the way she was in the article quoted above. The article seemed to draw out the night’s shameful events while ensuring that the reparations and good will presented by Anne in the light of the repercussions of her allegedly drunk actions were mentioned only fleetingly and in passing. The actress was obviously not in the right state of mind, as she honestly admits on her public profiles, but she accepted the gravity of her actions and took steps towards making amens and moving on from the situation gracefully, which is more than I can say for whoever wrote this article.
The piece ends with more speculation and presumptuous character judgement:
“Will the public be that forgiving towards her? Now, we know, we should not immediately think that nice people are really nice from within. Good people would never turn bad even if they are under the influence of alcohol. Or could it be that Anne took another substance that made her lose control of her temper that night? Just asking.” Has there been any evidence of Anne previously using any consciousness altering substances aside from alcohol? How did the author come to the conclusion that the public has a problem with her in the first place? How was it deduced that people who are inherently good would remain so despite intoxication? Who is the author to say that the kindness, generosity and good will expressed by the actress isn’t worth the time of day, while her inebriated actions carry their weight in gold?
[ I shall scrupulously report and interpret the news, taking care not to suppress essential facts nor to distort the truth by omission or improper emphasis. I recognize the duty to air the other side and the duty to correct substantive errors promptly. I shall not, in any manner, ridicule, cast aspersions on, or degrade any person by reason of sex, creed, religious belief, political conviction, cultural and ethnic origin. – PHILIPPINE PRESS INSTITUTE. The Philippine Journalist’s Code of Ethics. ]
LikeLike
http://wp.me/p47KER-Q
LikeLike
COMM 110 TYZ
Rica Angela Aquino (201179130)
Link to the article:
“Lani Mercado, fellow solons get tested for HIV/AIDS”
The article began with a very dramatic intro, “MANILA, Philippines – There’s no shame in getting tested.” At first, you’d think that this is a campaign towards HIV testing. Well it is actually, but from the title of the article itself and the second paragraph where it mentioned the 3 members of the house of representatives who came to initiate the test, we can say that the writer had written the article in favor of the HIV initiation. Why?
It provided UNAIDS statistics on the cases of HIV infections as well as from the DOH. It further appealed to readers to participate in HIV testing and then went back again to the members of the house of representatives whom started to promote to the audience the value of the HIV test. The construction of the details of the article isn’t presented well and smooth. It moved from the concern of HIV per se and then highlighted on what the representatives have to give for the Filipinos.
To simply put, it gave emphasis on the concern of these 3 members of the house of representatives regarding HIV testing for the Filipino people. I’m not saying that they shouldn’t be praised or be put into a good light, but the writer should have just provided details about the report and not add any other information such as statistics that may affect the details of the report itself and more so, people’s perception regarding the matter on hand.But we could also say that the writer is an advocate of battling HIV, hence, her stand might have affected the whole tone of her article. This written in the Code of Ethics by the Philippine Press Institute states: “V. I shall not let personal motives or interests influence me in the performance of my duties, nor shall I accept or offer any present, gift or other consideration of a nature that may cast doubt on my professional integrity.”
Towards the end of the article, the writer, after promoting the HIV test and the legislators behind it, she asked, “Will other congressmen and congresswomen also take the test?” and then added, “Well, it’s not compulsory.” First, why ask that question? There is no need to ask this question because it isn’t necessary, all the more answering it because as a reader I thought the whole point was to promote HIV testing and not focus on the legislators. Second, it seemed as if the writer implied that the other congressmen and congresswomen do not support it and that only those who took the HIV test are the only ones concerned. It actually sheds a bad light to the other legislators. Lastly, if she were to write that question, she should ask the opinion of other legislators to gain transparency and balance in her report. As it is written in the code of ethics: “I. I shall scrupulously report and interpret the news, taking care not to suppress essential facts nor to distort the truth by omission or improper emphasis. I recognize the duty to air the other side and the duty to correct substantive errors promptly.”
source: “The Journalist’s Code of Ethics.” Date Accessed: December 3, 2013.
LikeLike
http://ph.news.yahoo.com/philippines-embattled-taxman-takes-aim-famous-051228525–finance.html
Dear Ma’am,
I was pleased with the manner this article was written because it gave balanced treatment to both sides of the issue: namely, the government and Manny Pacquiao. Not only did it weigh in on the famous boxer, but it also mentioned names of other wealthy individuals, thus stressing the fact that he is not the only person to have been embroiled in such a case (as other articles might make it appear by deliberately or non-deliberately omitting this fact). I believe it is important because doing otherwise would place improper emphasis on Pacquiao and highlight his misdeed when in fact he is not the only person involved in such behavior. I liked how the author took the trouble to elaborate the situation within the Philippine government structure by mentioning that criminal cases often take 6 years to complete on average, all the more that an exact value was provided, rather than simply stating “slow” as some other authors would have done. There was no direct mention of a “right” or a “wrong” side; it merely presented facts from which readers could derive their own interpretation of the issue. It did not, however, pass judgment onto Pacquiao, nor did it make unfounded accusations, allowing room for error.
The only thing I was not particularly agreeable to was how the author would at times place literary emphasis on certain words by the use of descriptive qualifiers which run the risk of driving the point to exaggeration. One such example lies in the utilization of “overwhelmed” to describe Philippine courts. Although this is quite observably correct, the use of the word may imply that it such is always the case without exceptions. In my opinion, the use of descriptive terms should be limited to avoid giving readers the impression of subjectivity and ambiguity within the text. While it is acceptable for an author to inject his or her own point of view into an opinion column, a news article ought to be straightforward, presenting only the bare facts.
Alliah Czarielle R. Guerra
2011-18140
Comm110 2nd media monitor
LikeLike
Media Monitor 2: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/539201/aquino-lets-go-of-biazon
Aquino Lets Go of Biazon
In this article, the two sides of both parties were presented–the Presiden’t and Biazon’s. It talked about how Biazon filed for his resignation and how the President accepted this gesture. And this is an example of a good practice of reporting because it aired both sides of the story. It was also structured in such a way that the two parties would react simultaneously so as to make it clear that both sides are reported. If I were a consumer or reader who just accepts and absorbs everything that I see in the news, I would have believed this structure of a report without question.
However, basing from the facts presented in this report, I categorized this under unethical journalism because of the “improper emphasis” that it has reported. It is true that we were able to find out that Biazon was just trying to protect his family or their privacy through this resignation. But that’s all that there is to squeeze out of this article and we were all left wondering what really is going on in that side of the government. After reading the article, I was left with unanswered questions. My curiosity burned as to the specific reason why Biazon impulsively decided to file his resignation. Could there have been someone who pressured him to do so? Did he really do this solely to protect his family or was this an attempt to runaway from being involved in the PDAF scandal? These questions should have been brought up instead of feasting over the limited statement of Biazon and his father. I think the media reported only what Biazon wanted the people to see and didn’t bother digging through these facts.
LikeLike
– 2012-79263
LikeLike
http://mixtura927.wordpress.com/2013/12/03/media-and-advertising-the-connection-and-the-conflict/
LikeLike
Fair, Foolish, in an Ethical Fix
I found a news articles on Philippine Daily Inquirer December 3, 2013 issue that I think was written well.
‘Overzealous’ traffic enforces hit
Manila jeepney drivers stage strike; Moreno: ‘Write down grievances’
By Maricar B. Brizuela
(page A17)
The long title has served its purpose well. It is explanatory of the situation, immediately revealing to us the conflict.
In stating the conflict, the writer made an effort to avoid improper emphasis by using the grave accent. “Overzealous” was not her opinion of the story, but the opinion of the jeepney drivers. In the same way, “write down grievances” was not the solution she thought of, but the solution of the police officers.
Moreover, she was able to show two sides of the story by quoting representatives from both FejoDap and MTPB. She was able to reveal corruption that is on-going (not distorting reality) without name-dropping accused officers (presumption of innocence).
LikeLike
Media Monitor 2:
Topic: John King’s Cover on the Boston Bombing Incident
Patricia Ann Concepcion
201035451
The issue may be several months old but it clearly illustrates how media professionals should NOT describe potential suspects. While John King may have physically described the Boston attack suspect as a “dark-skinned male individual”, it reflects the common perception of society that those who have darker toned skin are assumed to be violent and are primary suspects in acts of terrorism. In the United States, I’d like to assume that this perspective is an unconscious side-effect of the aftermath of 9/11 Twin Tower Collapse.
I believe that John King, being a veteran in the field of broadcast, should have at least described the suspect better, to avoid degrading the concept of people who have darker-toned skin as potential terrorists or bomber. To further worsen the coverage of the story, a day after his report was aired, it was discovered that the information was false – wherein he omitted facts by not verifying his sources and placing improper emphasis on the racial description of the suspect. If he had to get the information from a law-enforcement official, he could’ve at least verified it considering the nature of the information was second-hand.
In the blur of the moment, while CNN was trying its best to cover the Boston bombing attack as soon as it happened, it could’ve improved in terms of quality when delivering news to the public. The accuracy of the facts and the unbiasedness of the comments should not be compensation for being the first news company to cover the incident – CNN owes its audience that brand of professionalism.
LikeLike
Bianca S. Concepcion
2012-56296
“It’s fantastic, it sounds like a great story.”
This was actor Ryan Reynold’s reply when asked by New York Magazine about the false story published by Radar Online, an entertainment news website more famously known for covering Hollywood stories. They say that a passenger puked on Ryan Reynolds, and he therefore had to remove his shirt in order to clean up – in front of all the other passengers.
I unfortunately don’t share the same sentiments as Ryan – the author, Melissa Cronin, should have relied on more than two anonymous “eyewitnesses” before publishing this story, which she cunningly called “Fasten your Seatblets! Hollywood Hunk Ryan Reynold’s Stuns Passengers During Recent Flight – Strips Down SEMI-NAKED”. I appreciate the emphasis on “Semi-naked”. Techniques like these are more often than not, used to reel in viewers and readers. Because the sad truth is, readers mean that a site is popular — and popular sites bag the advertisements that gain them profit.
The problem exacerbates when 16 (yes, sixteen) other news-outlets published the very same story. To name a few, The London Evening Standard, Huffington Post, The Daily Mail and The UK Express. It makes me wonder if they used the same two witnesses or relied on the information they found online. It saddens me that none of the news-outlets had the right mind to cast doubt upon this story. The reliability of sources is something that is explicitly outlined in the journalist’s code of ethics. Sadly, it seems as if the standard for reliability is slowly but surely going lower. To many journalists nowadays, publishing a story must involve a compromise between either a story of fact, or a story of interest. Misleading titles and paraphrasing facts attained from other online news websites to publish your own article is becoming a norm, and to be ethical is associated with being either old-school or laborious.
Original Story:
Cronin, M. (2013, Oct. 28). Fasten your Seatblets! Hollywood Hunk Ryan Reynold’s Stuns Passengers During Recent Flight – Strips Down SEMI-NAKED. http://www.radaronline.com. Retrieved from: http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2013/10/ryan-reynolds-stripped-flight-blake-lively/
Critique of Original Story:
Smith, S. (2012, Nov. 21). Ryan Reynolds Says Plane Puke Story ‘Utterly Made-Up’, 16 News Outlets Punked? http://www.imediaethics.org. Retrieved from: http://www.imediaethics.org/News/4227/Ryan_reynolds_says_plane_puke_story_utterly_made-up__16_news_outlets_punked_.php
LikeLike
Bianca S. Concepcion
2012-56296
“It’s fantastic, it sounds like a great story.”
This was actor Ryan Reynold’s reply when asked by New York Magazine about the false story published by Radar Online, an entertainment news website more famously known for covering Hollywood stories. They say that a passenger puked on Ryan Reynolds, and he therefore had to remove his shirt in order to clean up – in front of all the other passengers.
I unfortunately don’t share the same sentiments as Ryan – the author, Melissa Cronin, should have relied on more than two anonymous “eyewitnesses” before publishing this story, which she cunningly called “Fasten your Seatblets! Hollywood Hunk Ryan Reynold’s Stuns Passengers During Recent Flight – Strips Down SEMI-NAKED”. I appreciate the emphasis on “Semi-naked”. Techniques like these are more often than not, used to reel in viewers and readers. Because the sad truth is, readers mean that a site is popular — and popular sites bag the advertisements that gain them profit.
The problem exacerbates when 16 (yes, sixteen) other news-outlets published the very same story. To name a few, The London Evening Standard, Huffington Post, The Daily Mail and The UK Express. It makes me wonder if they used the same two witnesses or relied on the information they found online. It saddens me that none of the news-outlets had the right mind to cast doubt upon this story. The reliability of sources is something that is explicitly outlined in the journalist’s code of ethics. Sadly, it seems as if the standard for reliability is slowly but surely going lower. To many journalists nowadays, publishing a story must involve a compromise between either a story of fact, or a story of interest. Misleading titles and paraphrasing facts attained from other online news websites to publish your own article is becoming a norm, and to be ethical is associated with being either old-school or laborious.
Original Story:
Cronin, M. (2013, Oct. 28). Fasten your Seatblets! Hollywood Hunk Ryan Reynold’s Stuns Passengers During Recent Flight – Strips Down SEMI-NAKED. http://www.radaronline.com. Retrieved from: http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2013/10/ryan-reynolds-stripped-flight-blake-lively/
Critique of Original Story:
Smith, S. (2012, Nov. 21). Ryan Reynolds Says Plane Puke Story ‘Utterly Made-Up’, 16 News Outlets Punked? http://www.imediaethics.org. Retrieved from: http://www.imediaethics.org/News/4227/Ryan_reynolds_says_plane_puke_story_utterly_made-up__16_news_outlets_punked_.php
LikeLike