Information today can be taken from various sources—social media, print media, public news broadcasts, thought leaders, friends. With the way media is structured today, each person can be his or her own journalist. And though it is encouraging to see active public participation especially in social media, it is unfortunate that a lot of shared information goes around sensationalized, unverified and baseless.
In a survey conducted by Young Public Servants, it turned out that 63 percent of the respondents, 1,800 youth from across the country, use Facebook as their primary source of news information. In a continuing roundtable discussion with the respondents, those who use Facebook as their primary source of news information, forward the information to friends and share this on their profile without checking the veracity of articles and the evidence on which they are based. In some cases, they don’t even finish reading the articles and just rely on the first few paragraphs. This, we believe, is true not only among the respondents; it is generally true among those who are heavily engaged in social media.
In light of the recent events and issues that have been hounding our government leadership and institutions, it is clearly important that information be processed, transmitted and shared to ensure that the public is kept well-informed so it can take an active part in pursuing specific and defined reform initiatives. Unfortunately this is not what is happening.
Last year’s gathering at the Luneta on the call to abolish the pork barrel showed us three things: one, how strong the influence of social media in calling for and gathering support for an advocacy; two, a more participative and growing middle class determined to hold public officials accountable; three, there was no organized flow of information even as there was a lack of real understanding of the complexity of the issues down to the very definition of pork barrel. And now these so-called “Napolists,” each of which unfailingly trailed by an avalanche of denials and views ranging from the well-thought-out to the silly, to the laughable and to the unbelievable. This is actually the best time for those with the least noble of intentions to further confuse and befuddle the public mind.
Yes, there will always be differences of opinion in a healthy democracy. Still, these differences should be built on a common understanding of evidence—without which confusion emerges and could lead to inaction, disinterest and, worse, a muddling of facts that can take us off the road to justice and accountability.
Admittedly, media, by its very nature and function, plays a major role in shaping public opinion and it is heartening to see certain media outfits trying to deliver information easily understandable to the public. But at critical times like these, when the country is going through one of the biggest corruption scandals in its history, media carries a greater responsibility to present the truth and the facts. This is to say that media must take into account solid evidence rather than what sells.
Responsible citizenship means more than just complying with the law or making a stand; each of us has a personal responsibility to seek validated information—information that can help us form sensible opinions and, more importantly,
also help others arrive at well-informed views. This process of discernment would be a difficult one; it would entail a proper appreciation of the right values and principles, sound judgment and a good deal of wisdom. We must not allow political groups or individuals to advance their personal interests through political noise, at the expense of truth.
In a closed-door small group discussion held between key stakeholders in the reform arena to discuss the readiness of our institutions to handle the PDAF (Priority Development Assistance Fund) cases, one need identified—aside from legislation—was for the public to persistently demand good governance and accountability. But without proper discernment of issues and the priorities needed to push the country in the right direction, the discussion could end nowhere—and, to be sure, this is not something that we want to happen. We want change, now! But to realize our objective and for justice to prevail, we need to strengthen and, at the same time, watch closely our institutions. And with the country struggling toward a regime of transparency with the freedom of information bill, it’s time to develop a culture of trust between and among government, media and the public.
At the World Economic Forum-Open Collaboration for East Asia New Champions, young leaders from East Asia and the Philippines gathered to collaborate in making change happen, truly a positive and encouraging development powered by youth. But with the issues challenging our institutions and the call for justice to be meted out to those who have corrupted our nation, how do we become champions for the other 90 percent of our population that needs the reforms the most? Discernment begins not in 2016, but today.
Ching Jorge (chingjorge@gmail.com) is chair and lead convenor of Young Public Servants, executive director of Bato Balani Foundation, trustee of the International Center for Innovation Transformation and Excellence in Governance, and an Asia21 fellow.