August 23, 2010, a hostage crisis occurred in Philippines. Authorities were there trying to control the situation while media men had there live coverage. Unfortunately the police operation failed after 11 hours of hostage crisis and 9 tourist were killed.The following day, Rep. Luis Quisimbing filed a House Bill No. 2737 proposing news blackout, saying that the media's live coverage during the incident may have jeopardized the police operation.
The media just covered the incident that day, they never try to interfere the police negotiation. It even turned out to be helpful for the government officials who decided not to go to the area wherein the hostage crisis occurred instead they chose a safe place and monitor the happenings by watching the live coverage of the different network. So it turned out to be helpful. So there is no way to restrain media from having such action.
A free mass Media serves as a marketplace for the government and its people wherein they can share opinions and ideas as well as theories regarding the different issue our country is facing.
The House Bill No. 2737 is no doubt a law trying to control the media. If government will force the press to restrain live coverage i the different kind of situation it is just an indication that they want to control the media. And controlling it is without doubt a distortion of truth. truth that Filipino people deserves to know.
So, am I agree with the news blackout? Absolutely not. The event may good or bad but it only shows that our country is facing a problem. Problem that cannot be solved by the government alone but with the help of its people.
Philippines is a democratic country meaning everyone including the media have equal rights. Rights that includes freedom but if the government would like to control the media, do you think their rights in a democratic country still exist? Bear in mind that the Philippines claims to have Press Freedom.
Media blackout, as i understand it, is the censorship of news regarding a particular issue in a given time and is imposed by the government. The government usually imposes this to ensure public safety. Some, however, regards this as a human rights violation since, they say, it denies the freedom of speech.
ReplyDeleteHistory tells us that there were many cases where media blackout has been really helpful to the government. One happened during the WWII. the US Censorship Office sent messages to the newspapers and radio stations asking them not to report any sightings of explosions of fire balloons so the Japaneses would not know about their balloons' effectiveness. after some time, the Japanese only learned the fate of one of their balloons that landed in Wyoming that failed to explode. after five months, the Japanese stooped their launches.
In the case of the Quirino Grandstand Hostage drama, I do believe that should a media blackout imposed, the hostage taker would have not gone hysterical. The arresting of his brother, which the hostage taker knew through the media( there was a TV monitor in the bus), worsened the situation.
Besides, the government officials concerned or responsible for this would and should know through the Police or other officials or intelligence unit.
I don't agree with the media news blackout because people deserve to know the truth and for them to be more aware on what is happening on our society especially the current issues.
ReplyDeleteIn the case of the hostage crisis last august 23, 2010, if there was a media blackout the suspect should have not been that violent. there could have been a possibility that the hostage crisis should have end peacefully.
News blackout during sensitive cases like that of the ever-controversial Quirino Grandstand Hostage crisis is practicable.However,this doesn't have to 'totally' impede the mass media freedom.Certain happenings on the crisis must still be aired, but only after a thorough analysis of the situation,i.e.if this won't cause any frantic reaction from anyone, that is.
ReplyDeleteOn the case of that bus-hostage crisis,Mendoza have gotten frenzied seeing his brother in a commotion outside with the police.In here, yes the news blackout must have been imposed.But to totally restrain media people from covering the incident could mean 'prejudice' in the sense that the people have been TOTALLY taken out from the informations they deserved to know.Like how certain officials assess the situation in order for them to formulate their own assessments as to who really are the ones responsible for blame.
the hostage crises in quirino grandstand was totally horrible. i cant afford to watch such incident like what happened last aug. 23 this year. media should have been more sensitive in covering the entire scene. it is very sad to say that the media spoils the hostage taking and worsen and complicates the entire scene!!!!...:'(
ReplyDeleteNews blackout during sensitive scenes, I believe should not be imposed.No matter how controversial it is, still the people has the right to know everything which concerns us . Government should not be blaming media for what had happened during the hostage crises in Quirino grandstand. The hostage scene was not on their control,
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI want to apply the "right to information" into this particular issue because media blackout is somewhat blacking once freedom to information. On the point of the government, they just want to secure the public and they don't want media intervention as in "live coverage" during hostage crisis or any complicated crisis state. Now my point is, how about the right of the media to cover a particular case? What's the matter if the media cover it on live? Well, as long as media men doesn't violate any laws while doing their coverage whether it is live or not, then I have nothing against with it. News blackout is nothing but an absence of actual happenings.
ReplyDeleteBeing on a legal part of this democratic country Philippines is not just so simple ....
ReplyDeleteBecause I believe that we as a part of this society we should be informed of what is happening around us and we should know not only those things that are presently happening or that we see but also those things which are unclosed and hidden beyond us. Those things which deals or involve us ....
Just like what happened months ago here in our counry at the Quirino Grandstand the Hostage Crisis.
That took the lives of 9 chinise nationals. By this outrage happened, we .. people living in this community we are the responsible on the circumstance though we all know that not all of us we're present during the crisis. But considering the fact that it happened here in our counrty we are still part.
Obviously i really dont agree on the media news black out. Because we as the concern of this issue we should be knowledgeable and responsible enough on the things roaming around us and not only for our own securance but for the Philippines as a whole.
I believe media doesn't have any mistake on its live coverage.They just show the problem that were facing.The mistake is in the people who can't handle the situation.They just don't accept their weaknesses when it comes to hostage taking.Media just do the best they can to inform the people and the entire world of the chaos that were facing for them to know that we need help.Their is no need for news blackout because media show us the reality.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMedia blockout can actually be helpful in some cases. . .the government impose it the ensure public safety.
ReplyDeleteI think its a case to case basis with regards to that hostage crisis that miss Boco mentioned, the mediamen crossed the borden line of informinfg people. ,yes we have the freedom to know but in that case the wasnt able to follow the code of ethics in reporting. It became a contest in different tv news station in whom it covers well.
Media news blackout should not be imposed simply because it is the duty of the media to show to the public what is happening to the society and for its people to be aware on their society..If ever media news blackout is been then freedom of speech would not also be visible and it will be totally impeded....it might be imposed to some cases but not all the time because it is cutting the right to information both to the people and to media...))))
ReplyDeleteIts the right of the people to know every event happenning in our society.Being a citizen of course we should be informed and and be updated with every issue and latest problem in our society
ReplyDeleteI dont really agree with the news blackout here in our country especially so that thier are some sinsitive issue that the public must know and we have to wiegh things first before doing any move so at the end it would be justifiable. In case of the bus-hostage crisis last August, we should never put all the blame to the media for such awful event in our history.
Media should always practice transparency, we all have the right to see and know the real drama behind a news story. We all have the right to information, the precise and exact information. We all deserve the truth. The media only wants us to witness the "news in action", no hidden agendas (walang kinikilingan, walang pinoprotektahan, serbisyong totoo lamang). So I say, NO TO NEWS BLACKOUT!
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the news blackout and it is not practical to do especially for such a sensitive issue like the hostage crisis occurred in our country last August 23, 2010. As a Media Practitioner we should deliver the accurate information since we serves as people’s instrument for them to know the real happening in their surroundings. Though we are part of a democratic country as for the sake of giving justice for the victims, that media should be visible and can be use as guide to know involve people. Matters most are the rights of media to have a live coverage to the issue that can awaken the people’s eyes lying on controversies in our country.
ReplyDelete