Role of Media in Philippine Society - Essay Example

Introduction The Philippines is the first democratic country in Asia. As such, every citizen of the Philippines values freedom and liberty. More importantly, the Philippine government is set-up in such a way that such rights are protected. Philippine society has greatly evolved since the 1970s. Such period saw the Filipinos lose their liberty due to the imposition of martial law by then President Marcos. The country was suppressed for more than ten years. However, the democracy that the people valued could not be held down. Filipinos fought to bring down the Marcos regime and win back the way of life that they had so carefully built. (Santos, 2005) Now, Philippine democracy is safe guarded by the country’s laws and other institutions which ensure that the freedom and liberty of Filipinos will be well protected. One of such institutions that serve to protect democracy in the Philippines is the Philippine media. Mass Media in the Philippines plays serves several roles. All of such roles are aimed at ensuring the continuance of a democratic society in the country. The value of media in the Philippines is very significant. The country’s history serves as a testament to the important role of media in the country specifically in the manner by which it helps uphold democracy in the Philippines. This paper aims to analyze the role of Philippine media in the country’s democratic society. Specifically, this paper aims to determine the ways by which media helps protect the rights and liberties of the Filipino people. Also, this paper will look back on the influence of media in the way by which Philippine democracy and government has evolved particularly in the last 30 years. Development communication theories will be utilized for the analysis. Such theories will be supplemented by various published literature that tackle the subject matter. Lastly, this paper will attempt to discuss the role of Philippine media in the eradication of corruption that has long impeded the country’s democratic way of life. Literature Review The role that media plays in Asian countries is not as valuable as compared to Western countries. (Laird, 1999, p. 63) Moreover, media in Asia is more regulated than media in European and American countries. This is due to the fact that democracy is not as prevalent and wide spread in Asia as it is in other continents. However, globalization has slowly contributed to the evolution of media in Asia. In today’s time and age, Asian media has taken up a more valuable role. Western thought has slowly been integrated in Asian societies. However, certain countries are more westernized than others. The Philippines is one of such countries. Philippine media is an evidence of the westernized society in the said country. Due to the country’s long history of colonization by Western powers, the Philippines has adapted western thought and way of life more than any other country. Philippine media has long been considered as the one with the most freedom among all media institutions in Asia. This is a testament to the westernized way of living in the country. More importantly, Philippine media is more democratic than media on other Asian countries. According to Sean Siochru (1996, p. 45), media can be considered as a force to support democracy and development in a country. Philippine media, in most cases, is a force that supplements the society’s efforts to promulgate democratic thought in the country. However, in the same way that Philippine media has helped promote the causes of democracy, it has likewise fallen to the same problems mentioned by Siochru in his article. He stated that today, many mass media outlets have concentrated on the commercialization, privatization, and commodification of media. This is quite evident in Philippine society wherein media outlets are owned and controlled by prominent families who consider media as a profit-making institution. To truly forward a democratic society, media must democratic and not commercial. However, as Siochru (1996, p. 46) points out, transforming media to become more democratic is not easy. For one, he points out several weaknesses of democratic media which hinders it from expanding on a scale similar to that of commercial mass media. He pointed out that there is a great need for media to address the following factors. First, the need for global dimension must be acknowledged and acted upon. Commercial media has long understood the need to expand in such a dimension while democratic media has yet to do the same. Democratic media has continued to focus on local matters and has failed to recognize the need to address global issues. Secondly, democratic media must utilize cross-fertilization. This means that proponents of democratic media must tap all forms of media in order to reach a wider audience. Also, Siochru (1996, p. 52) pointed out the need to clarify the aims and objectives of democratic media as a whole. Effort must come from all members of democratic media. They must share the same goals and objectives so as to ensure that they all move in the same direction. The author likewise pointed out the need to create an identity for democratic media as well as for democratic media to find ways by which the real needs of the public can be addressed. In this light, he noted, “Commercial media appeal to atomized people, fragmented from each other, and seeking some respite from daily struggles… The appeal of democratic media is fundamentally different. There are no easy solutions, no quick fixes…” (Siochru, 1996, p. 54) This would mean that democratic media must find a way to make people understand its nature and its causes. Entertainment and a diversion from life’s problems is not the main aim or appeal of democratic media. Instead, it is and must be focused on, “real needs and struggles that they can strike a chord with people.” (Siochru, 1996, p. 54) Lastly, democratic media must secure an economic base. Understandably, commercial media is able to reach out to more people owing to the fact that they have more resources to tap. Although democratic media may not have the same vast amount of resources, it must find a way to secure resources enough for its long-term growth and development. The inability to do may mean that democratic media will not be able to achieve its goals and objectives. Not only must media address the genuine needs of people, it do so in a way that it does not take advantage of the freedom of expression that it has been given. According to John Laird (1999, p. 64), “Freedom of media to report truthfully on events and to comment responsibly on them is a desirable thing. But a supposed ‘freedom’ to promote unhealthy and unsustainable lifestyles for commercial purposes certainly cannot be equated to journalistic freedom.” Being a valuable institution in a democratic society, media must not go beyond the boundaries of its rights and privileges that democracy itself has bestowed on it. Doing so will completely undermine democracy itself. It is for this reason, as Laird (1999, p. 64) points out, that, “Governments use their legal systems to exclude subjects which are perceived harmful to the population or to the state – hate material, material encouraging sedition, material encouraging criminal behavior, the sensationalism of violence, and pornography.” Freedom of expression or journalism should not be abused for whatever reason for media cannot expect change when they themselves go beyond the boundaries of law. Doing so may cause harm to the society that media is aiming to safeguard. The power of media is so great. It can influence the way that people think and act. According to Laird (1999, p. 64), “Media… is a powerful tool that can largely shape the consciousness of whole populations and be very influential defining people’s expectations in life. Thus, media can be used for great good or harm.” It is for this reason that media must ensure that it will only promote what is good for people and the society. It should never be used to in a way that is detrimental to society and to democracy in general. Case Study: Philippine Democracy As previously mentioned, media in the Philippines is very influential. According to Antonio Nieva, the media may be utilized as an agent of change that may lead to the good or harm depending on how it is employed and who uses it. Philippine media has exerted it greatest influence in changing the political scene in the country. According to Doronilla (1990, p. 97), media in the Philippines is more focused on political rights rather than on human rights for most of the problems that beset the Philippines during the post-Marcos years are political in nature. As earlier stated, the Philippines was placed under dictatorial rule during the Marcos regime. It was during this time that press freedom and most human rights were curtailed by the government. As such, media in the Philippines was controlled by the government. Thus, when constitutional democracy was restored, media in the Philippines was once again granted press freedom. However, some would argue that members if the media in the Philippines have abused their freedom to the detriment of Philippine society. On the other hand, there are those that say that the media has served as a strong safe guard of Philippine democracy. For instance, during the People Power Revolution of 1986, that forced then President Marcos to step down, media played a very important role. Messages by the revolution leaders were sent out through a radio station in order to encourage people to join in the protests. (Santos, 2005) From that point on, the press has served as the information provider of the people regarding the political affairs in the Philippines. Media was very significant during the impeachment case of former President Estrada (Coronel et al, 2000) and subsequently, the People Power Revolution that resulted from such case. Also, the press has continued to report various anomalies in the government particularly with regards to graft and corruption. Although Philippine media has served its function, various people have suggested that Philippine media has abused its freedom of expression. As cited by Doronilla (1990, p. 98), “The zeal to disclose or to ensure the public’s right to know has led to the proliferation of reporting political gossip as a staple in the press… Consequently, most columnists write about personalities and hardly about issues.” Also, the same author has characterized Philippine media as focusing too much on the drama of events. This according to him is used so as to grab the public’s attention. It must also be pointed out that although some consider Philippine media as one of those with the most freedom, there still exists a tendency to abuse such freedom. Many newspapers and other media outlets have focused on scandals and events that they tend to sensationalize. In this way, they are not serving as guardians of democracy. Instead, they have used such events as means to entertain the public and to keep them attentive. More importantly, as Doronilla (1990, p. 98) points out, “This method of presenting news… will continue to drive out of the front page news about more serious social and economic issues.” Media outlets in the Philippines are owned by some of the most influential families in the country. Moreover, owner of media outlets in the Philippines have both business and political interests. (Nieva, 1988 p. 19) As such, there is a tendency for the owners to consider their other interests before carrying out certain acts concerning the media outlet they own. For instance, the Lopez Family, which owns one of the largest media companies in the Philippines, is also the owner of Meralco, the leading distributor of electricity in the country. With such business interests, the media outlet may not be as objective in reporting certain news or events pertaining to the power industry as it has the same owner. Thus, one might say that such media outlet may not be serving the real interest of the public at all times. As Nieva states, “Some of the papers…are claimed to enjoy connections in varying degrees with government, business, or political interests, explaining their sometimes remote and isolated stances on vital national issues.” (Nieva, 1988 p. 20) Philippine media has long supported the development of democracy in the Philippines. However, there are still certain areas of Philippine media that may be detrimental to the protection of Philippine democracy. Owing to its rather commercial nature, Philippine media, on certain occasions, has failed to address certain issues that are vital to the needs of the Filipino people. Also, on certain occasions, Philippine media has abused the press freedom that Philippine democracy has given. Discussion and Conclusion In the case study above, it has been shown that Philippine media has indeed helped protect Philippine democracy. On certain occasions, it has been effective in letting the public know and understand the most pressing issues in the country. Also, it has helped facilitate the rebirth of constitutional democracy in the Philippines after the country went through a period of dictatorship. However, Philippine media is more commercial that democratic. This in a way is detrimental to democracy in the country. Media is supposed to identify and address the real needs of the country for it to be truly democratic. However, in the Philippine setting, media outlets are owned by people who have varied interests that may affect the objectivity of the media outlet. (Nieva). This also leads to the failure of Philippine media to identify and report on issues that need the most attention. Thus, as Siochru points out, when media fails to consider the real needs of the people, it is not democratic; rather, it is commercial in nature. Philippine media, as it was discussed, has sometimes abused its freedom to inform the public only to keep them glued. In other words, there is a tendency for Philippine media to sensationalize events. By doing so, they put focus on the wrong issues only for the benefit of great readership or a larger audience. This once again emphasizes the commercial nature of Philippine media. Indeed, Philippine media has helped develop and protect the democratic society in the Philippines. On more than one occasion, it has served as the only way by which the Filipino people get to understand the issues concerning their government and their country. Several anomalies regarding graft and corruption have been published and discuss in various forms of media that have changed the face of Philippine democracy. However, it cannot be said that Philippine media is purely democratic, for it is not. The role of media in Philippine democracy must be to serve as a safeguard to protect the interests of the public. Although it has achieved some success in doing so as evidenced by the fact that democracy continues to prevail in the Philippines, it has yet to fully live up to such role. In order to truly serve the real needs of the people and to truly protect democracy, Philippine media must transform to become more democratic. Profit making should be the least of its concerns. Instead, it should focus on addressing the issues that really matter to the public. Bibliography Coronel, Sheila, Chua, Yvonne, Rimban, Luz & Datinguinoo, Vina. “Estrada’s Fronts: Cronies and Attorneys”, in PCIJ iReports, 23 October 2000. Retrieved 12 Sep 2006 from: http://www.pcij.org/stories/2000/erapfronts.html. Coronel, Sheila, Chua, Yvonne, & Datinguinoo, Vina. “Can Estrada Explain his Wealth?”, ”, in PCIJ iReports, 24-25 July 2000. Retrieved 11 Sep 200 from: http://www.pcij.org/stories/2000/erapwealth.html. Dornila, Armando, in "Communication Development and human rights in Asia"; Hamelink, C.J., Mehra, A.; 1990, pp.93-103. Elumbre, Venus & Tuazon, Joanna. “Making Media more Responsive and Responsible,” in CJR Reports, Sepember- October 2005. Retrieved 11 Sep 2006 from: http://www.cmfr.com.ph/sept-CPC.pdf. Laird, John. “The Role of the Media in promoting Sustainable Consumption” in Media Asia, An Asian Mass Communication Quarterly, Vol. 26, No.2, 1999, pp.63-70. Nieva, Antonio Ma. (1988), in "Labor and Mass Media in the Philippines"; Teodosio V.A., Bandayrel P.B., Paredes J.C.; 1988; pp. 17-21. Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism. “Remembering Edsa: 20 People and their Lives 20 Years since People Power”, PCIJ Report, Special Issue, January-February 2006. Retrieved 10 Sep 2006 from: http://www.pcij.org/i-report/edsa20/edsa20-special-issue.html. Santos, Vergel. “Martial Law Revisted” in PJR Reports, November 2005. retrieved 10 Sep 2006 from: http://www.cmfr.com.ph/martial-law.pdf. Siochru, Sean O. “Opportunities and Strategies for Democratic Media” in The 8th MacBride Round Table on Communication Proceeding, Seoul, 1996, pp. 45 – 62. Smith, Desmond. “Democracy and the Philippine Media, 1983-1993”, Lewiston, N.Y.: Edwin Mellen Press, 2000. Read More