The Booth is a Marketplace

The power of the media is immense and vast, that is has also the capacity to take away from us proper sensibilities. This is the danger of public perception. When Joseph Estrada was ousted by the so-called second EDSA People Power, Joseph Spaeth of Time magazine predicted that ousting a leader would be a vice in the Philippines. Now it is indeed a vice, and the media is greatly involved in its success. You don't like the face of your principal, go to a radio station; you want to defend a parcel of land you don't really own, go to a radio station; there's a hostage-taking somewhere else, get a media celebrity. Of course, I may have exaggerated a bit, but that's only for literary purposes.

Media, as the fourth estate, is a participant in the check and balance between the executive, legislative, and judicial powers. In the Philippines, however, media almost fiscalizes-it had gone almost to the jurisdiction of police powers. Pag nadukutan ka, dai ka magkonsulta sa pulis, magreport ka sa radyo. Of course, there's validity to some extent of what others may retort that the government may have indeed reached a point when even the smallest units of it are no longer trusted by the people. But even this condition is partly created by public perceptions partly shaped by the media.

In my anti-dam advocacy works, I often work with media personnel for information dissemination as well as rebuttals of statements released by the dam proponents. I opt to go to them because we need to reach wider audience for our concerns. We need empathy and sympathy, not to mention various assistances, either tangible or intangible. Not a few times have I experienced having the anchor commentator place me in the awkward situation of having the 'other' party maligned, insulted, challenged, to a point of violations of broadcast ethics, while the interview was still on air. In my advocacy, I believe a branch of the state failed to deliver a good project for, with, and by the people, and the media could have actually done a great part in evaluating it, in a manner that is ethical and scientific.

In my plight as an advocate, my relationship with the media began a few months ago when we needed a shoulder to rely on in terms of information dissemination. In the movement, we believe that there was an information blackout-my townsfolk in Lupi having been suffering from poverty, and many have received little education. Government engineers gave them jokes for answers, ridiculed their questions, and mocked them, in supposedly consultation meetings. We needed a stronger and more powerful means of sharing information. We turned to the radio stations. Two stations eventually-seemingly-adopted us. They provided us with ease in expressing our concerns, gave us enough time on air, gave us opportunities for interviews. Both were obviously favoring one political figure over another, this was a few months ago.

One station began mentioning my name in a bad light, apparently announcing that I was wanted by a particular commentator to call the station for an interview because I am accountable for many things-including alternative projects in case we succeed in fighting against that gargantuan project of the Libmanan-Cabusao Dam. I succumbed to the call, I got upset one evening I called the station. On my first call, the lady on the phone asked me to call again after fifteen minutes because the commentator was still delivering the evening news. After that all the lines gave me busy tones until the time the program ended. The day after, the same thing happened. On the third day, I called again, this time, I told the lady on the phone I was willing to wait until the commentator was finished with whatever he was doing. I got a pass.