Monday, December 03, 2007 Nalzaro: Media’s role during crisis By Bobby Nalzaro Saksi
WHILE I strongly suggest that the media and our authorities should come up with proper guidelines on media coverages in crisis situations like what happened at the Manila Peninsula Hotel recently, I suspect there was a political undertone in the authorities’ action of forcing the media to get out from the hotel and even having them arrested.
We cannot blame the media for forcing themselves into a crucial and critical situation that sometimes jeopardizes our safety. We have our role to play by informing the public of what is happening around us. Yes, I admit that sometimes media men are hardheaded. In our desire to provide the public with a detailed and comprehensive report, we tend to ignore warnings from our authorities. That is why we heard reports of media men being abducted and killed while covering a high risk crisis and in critical areas.
Some of our colleagues got killed while covering encounters between government forces and rebels. Some of them were kidnapped. Remember those television reporters abducted by the Abu Sayyaf bandits in Sulu? Several foreign journalists were killed while covering the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In last’s week crisis at the Manila Peninsula Hotel, journalists were holed up inside the hotel with the group of Sen. Antonio Trillanes and Brig. Gen. Danny Lim to get a complete detail of what was happening inside. When the Government initially planned to launch an attack if Trillanes’ group would not surrender, our authorities ordered the hotel staff and guests including journalists to get out from the place. The ultimatum was set at 3 p.m.
According to the authorities, the planned attack did not push through because of the presence of media men inside. Though, the stand off was resolved peacefully after Trillanes and company decided to give up. But aside from the planned attack, I suspect that one of the reasons why government authorities insisted to pull out the media covering inside the hotel is the political implication of Trillanes action.
Why? Because if they allowed Trillanes, Lim and former Vice Pres. Teofisto Guingona to have access to the media, the support from anti-government forces including those disgruntled military men might snowball. If that happened, it could be difficult for the Government to contain the situation. In the past two Edsas, the media played vital and crucial roles that led to their success.
In the 1986 Edsa Revolution, the late Manila Archbishop Jaime Cardinal Sin used the media to appeal for support for the military’s breakaway group led by Juan Ponce Enrile and Gen. Fidel Ramos. The same situation happened in the 2001 Edsa 2 that toppled down the Estrada administration. Though, there were already the cellular phone and text messaging at the time, which were also instrumental in drumming up support from the public.
The Arroyo Government has already learned a lesson from the two Edsas on media’s role during attempts to grab power. That is why they wanted to ban media from further covering the Manila Peninsula Hotel crisis. They even ordered the arrest of those inside the hotel. Trillanes and company might have failed on their military adventurism because of the lack of support from the civilian and military sectors but they succeeded as far as propaganda aspect is concerned. At least, they were able to deliver their piece and place the country again into few hours of turmoil.
But it was not only the Magdalo Group that exploited the media but the Government as well. Pres. Arroyo also used the media to crush that short-lived rebellion by appealing to the people and the military not to support Trillanes.
