Philippine Daily Inquirer First Posted 01:44:00 06/14/2008
MANILA, Philippines—Why would TV anchor-reporter Ces Drilon and her crew place themselves in harm’s way to interview the latest mutation of the Abu Sayyaf bandit group? This question, in various permutations, has been raised since the first rumors of a kidnapping circulated in late Sunday or early Monday.
One variation is rhetorical; it all but blames the victims for the crime, as though they had it coming. It may be difficult to separate this kind of thinking from the close association the Lopez-run ABS-CBN Broadcasting network has with Lopez-controlled Manila Electric Co. (Meralco), the country’s largest power distributor. Indeed, some of the first text jokes—ah, yes, the classic Filipino way of coping, updated for the SMS generation—made the connection explicit. The Lopez family had ransomed Drilon and company, the basic joke ran; now the amount will be added to Meralco’s billing statements as systems loss.
Unfair, of course, but the Lopezes, ABS-CBN and Meralco should know that it comes with the territory.
Other variations of the question are genuinely searching: They ask why journalists should place their life, or more, at risk, in pursuit of a story. Still others are driven by political concerns: Isn’t giving media access to terrorists and bandits against the best interests of the State?
Whichever way it is phrased, the question demands an answer, an explanation. Drilon and company will have their own answers; but all journalists should be ready to engage the question and offer an honest response.
Even if this newspaper passed on the chance to join the specially arranged interview that turned into or caused an abduction nightmare, we share the fundamental assumption behind the ABS-CBN decision: Some stories carry great risk. Deciding which risky stories to pursue is a judgment call.
Necessarily, any explanation we offer will seem to put the spotlight on the journalistic profession—as though the kidnapping were all about journalism as practiced in the Philippines. We do not hold that view. The essential truth is, the kidnapping of Drilon and company, which includes professor and peace advocate Octavio Dinampo, is part of the complicated history of Mindanao—and thus of the Philippines as a whole.
That a barbaric bandit group like the Abu Sayyaf emerged out of the almost-medieval poverty of the provinces of Basilan and Sulu, waving the colors of Islamic fundamentalism, wrapped in the mantle of Moro nationalism (and protected, in its early years, by the veil of collusion with military elements)—this is a “story” that goes beyond the mere storytellers.
But the question has, in fact, been raised: Why put journalists in harm’s way? It is our duty to respond to the question.
The short answer is: Sometimes there is no other way to get the story. We live by the basic rule that no story is worth a journalist’s life. But we also realize that the weighing of risks is not a scientific calculation but an act of judgment. Every journalistic decision, then, carries with it an appreciation of risk. Most of the time the risk is negligible or minimal; sometimes they are great indeed.
When the authorities ordered journalists covering the Peninsula Manila siege last year to vacate the hotel, some complied and others did not. The decisions were a compound of the experience of reporters in the field and the calculation of editors or news directors in the newsroom; each one was a judgment call.
The long answer depends on the Lockean ideal of a government by consent of the governed. In this view, information is a building block of democracy. Much of this information comes from government itself or from institutions in society with a quasi-governmental importance, like the business community and, in the Philippines, the Catholic Church. But other information comes from outside the usual channels, and is sometimes only accessible through the enterprise work of journalists. It is crucial that the public enjoys access to both kinds of information. Most journalists do not patrol their beat or go on special assignment with Enlightenment philosophers discoursing in their head. But sometimes their stories do help shape the informed consent of the governed. It is our daily prayer that these do not come at too great a price.
Copyright 2008 Philippine Daily Inquirer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
To
subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines,
call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.
Factual errors? Contact the
Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk.
Believe this article violates journalistic ethics?
Contact the
Inquirer's Reader's Advocate.
Or write The Readers' Advocate:
c/o
Philippine Daily Inquirer
Chino RocesAvenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets,
Makati City, Metro Manila, Philippines
Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94
![Zoom Image](javascript:popwin("http://images.inquirer.net/media/opinion/inquireropinion/editorial/images/pic-06140855310031.jpg", 640, 480))
Zoom
