While President-elect Duterte and his team are busy with forging a peace agreement with the communist party of the Philippines and ending a decades-long insurgency that has claimed thousands of Filipino lives, the team of in coming Vice President Leni Robredo and their allies in the media are preoccupied with making a fuss over the separate inauguration ceremonies for the two newly elected officials.
In trying to make a mountain out of this molehill – or more appropriately a shit pile – Robredo and her cohorts are showing just how petty and small-minded they are in the face of the greater socio-economic challenges facing the nation. It is no wonder then that her running mate was soundly trounced, and she herself barely scraping enough votes from vote-buying to get a win in the recently held elections.
And while the media wants to paint the decision of Duterte in political colors, the fact of the matter is really much more mundane – there just aren’t enough seats in Malacanang to hold all the guests if both the President and Vice President are inaugurated at the same time.
This information was already conveyed to Mindavote a few days before the formal announcement of the inaugural arrangements. According to our source the President-elect stuck to his original pronouncement of wanting to hold the event in Malacanang. This of course posed several logistical problems, not the least of which was the limited – only 500 seats – capacity of the venue. This meant that after all the mandatory invitations have been sent out – to the diplomatic core, the senate president and speaker of the house, cabinet secretaries, etc – there were only a little more than 100 invitations left for the President and Vice President, and their families and personal guests.
This is why it was decided to hold the event separately, to allow each of them to celebrate it in a way that was both significant and meaningful to them. But of course, this kind of simple and sincere reasoning does not fit the narrative that the media wants to portray – that of a divisive and dictatorial President Duterte.
Then again, this isn’t like the old days when all the news and information had to pass, and was controlled by the traditional media. People can now get the truth from other sources and make their own informed opinion.
That was how Abraham Lincoln was called by The New York Herald in one of their articles that lampooned him. They couldn’t believe the Republicans favoured Lincoln over candidates who looked and sounded more like a respectable statesman, such as Seward and Chase. On May 19, 1860, a writer called Lincoln a “third-rate Western lawyer..who cannot speak good grammar.” On May 20, another writer limned Lincoln as someone who represented “all that is brutal and bloody in Seward’s political programme.”
The Atlas and Argus was equally disgusted by Lincoln. On May 21, 1860, they described him as a “slang-whanging stump speaker, of a class with which every party teems, and of which all parties are ashamed.” On the same day, the Boston Post predicted that Lincoln would only serve as “the tool of the fanatical host he will lead on.”
On May 24, The Philadelphia Evening Journal asked why should Lincoln become President? His language was “coarse,” they said. His style, “illiterate.” And Lincoln’s “vulgar and vituperative” character couldn’t hold a candle to the refine and eminent personality of his opponent.
When Lincoln became president, a newspaper in Illinois said this about him: “His weak, wishy-washy, namby-pamby efforts, imbecile in matter, disgusting in manner, have made us the laughing stock of the whole world. The European powers will despise us because we have no better material out of which to make a President.”
In Unpopular Mr Lincoln, Larry Tagg shared what a “Carolinian correspondent” told his friend about Lincoln:
“Did you think the people of the South, the Lords Proprietors of the Land, would let this low fellow rule for them? No. His vulgar facetiousness may suit the race of clock makers and wooden nutmeg venders — even Wall Street brokers may accept him, since they do not protest — but never will he receive the homage of southern gentlemen..[because they would never submit to rule by a president who] exhibits himself at railway depots, bandies jokes with the populace, kisses bold women from promiscuous crowds.”
In their 2012 Civil War issue, the Atlantic republished the 1904 article of Henry Villard, the journalist who covered the Lincoln-Douglas debates.
Lincoln, Villard said, was fond of “low talk” and liked telling “coarse or even outright nasty” stories and dirty jokes. “The coarser the joke, the lower the anecdote, and the more risky the story, the more he enjoyed them,” Villard explained.
Villard found Lincoln revolting. “Again and again,” he said, “I felt disgust and humiliation that such a person should have been called upon to direct the destinies of a great nation in the direst period of its history… I could not have persuaded myself that the man might possibly possess true greatness of mind and nobility of heart..”
As he got to know more the man, Villard saw something more in Lincoln: “…in spite of his frequent outbreaks of low humor, his was really a very sober and serious nature, and even inclined to gloominess to such an extent that all his biographers have attributed a strongly melancholic disposition to him.”
And as the presidency of Lincoln unfolded, Villard witnessed how the vulgar village politician “proved [himself] to be one of the great leaders of mankind in adversity, in whom low leanings only set off more strikingly his better qualities.”
In Lincoln: The Biography of a Writer, Fred Kaplan offered this reflection regarding Lincoln’s nasty and dirty jokes:
“More genteel than Lincoln, [Henry Whitney, friend and colleague of Lincoln,] struggled to explain the president’s ‘filth,’ and to be sparing with his examples. ‘The great majority of [his] stories were very nasty indeed. I remember many of them but they do us no good.’ Apparently they did Lincoln good. They helped him politically and professionally. And rather than displacing his “ideality,” they expressed an element of his personality and experience inseparable from his moral idealism. Like Mark Twain, he had a genius for pithy narrative, and a sense that his stories and obscenities expressed something crucial about the underlying flaws in the universe and the inexplicable darkness of the human situation. And often the darkness found its best expression in humor.”
Will Duterte become a Lincoln or a Qaddafi? Only time will tell.
Duterte, who won by more than six million votes over his nearest rival (with allegations that it was actually much higher if not for the vote-shaving done by the administration party), was elected to implement a wide variety of changes starting with a crackdown on criminality and corruption in government. In her article, Ms. De Guzman echoes the feeling of many observers that there are those who are afraid of Duterte, seeing in him an end to their lording over the Philippines.
“There is a very strong crusade to stop president elect Rody Duterte from becoming the President of the Republic. Many sectors of society are out there for the kill. They continue to lambast him and threaten him for one reason or another. If you carefully study the background of these groups or individuals, you will clearly see a connection to the so-called “yellow mafia.”
Why is there a conspiracy to destabilize the new government? In the past, new presidents are welcomed. I have not heard nor read of a president elect being excoriated this way. We usually wait and see and give that leader a chance to prove himself or herself for the first 100 days. What is strangely happening now?
This is also the first time we see a president elect working right after the pronouncement of his winning the election. He started telling the public what he wants to happen as if making those in government hear his message in a subtle way. This is the first time I see police manning the streets, drug busters out for the kill, government working heeding the calls of the president elect unaffected by the presence of the former who still maintains his seat of power until June 30.
Amidst his roughness and nonchalant ways, president elect Duterte is giving us a head start of his presidency. He is a no nonsense guy. He is tough and rough and whether conservative citizens disdain him, the majority is looking forward to the “change” he will bring in.
If you watch the news on major networks, you will sense a strong campaign against Duterte. If you read the news, you will observe several newspaper journalists and social network sites taking a turn against him. Many in media have joined the bandwagon especially after Duterte called their bluff on boycotting him: Go ahead, boycott me. I’m urging you. Make this trip your last to Davao City. I do not care if no one is covering me. By the way, many politicians (mayors, congressmen and senators) have jumped off ship and are now swimming to Davao. Some are even riding a “yellow” submarine. Susmariosep!
Many of the top corporations and networks in this country are run or have been affiliated with the ‘yellow race.’ Believe it or not, they are anxious of what might be. This is precisely why they are all out there to destroy the “terminator.” Yes, Duterte if clear with his decrees will swipe all of them to do what is right thus, leaving a small chance for any hunky punky which many are used to in running conglomerates. Enough is enough and come July 1 all hell will break lose as we watch Duterte walk his talk.”
Now that President-elect Rody Duterte has let the cat out of the bag and called out the Philippine media for the rampant corruption that is happening within their ranks, we need to look further into this practice – not because we want to take sides in this debate – rather, as the guardians of our civil liberties, the media must be held to a standard higher than the one we hold all the other institutions of society by.
The Truth About Media Corruption in the Philippines
The irony of the Philippine media is that it is one of the free-est in the world in being able to express its opinions, and at the same time it also has among the highest number of media practitioners killed while supposedly pursuing their job.
These conflicting realities – a free and independent media able to talk about any matter under the sun and a culture of violence that has resulted in hundreds of their number killed – is almost impossible to understand using western models of the role of media in society.
Conventional wisdom says that media is the fourth estate, the guardian of the people’s welfare against the abuses of those in power, an incorruptible pillar of truth, justice, and integrity. Under this ideal concept, the tools of repression (i.e. the rampant media killings) cannot co-exist with the almost limitless freedom of expression enjoyed by the Philippine media. Either one is free or not.
In order to better understand this phenomenon, one has to look deeper into the roots and role of the Philippine media in the society. In many cases, media companies are run as a business first and an advocate of truth a far second. In these instances, bottom lines carry more weight in the boardroom than by-lines and the policy of “bank balance news, pay-first views” becomes the norm more than the exception.
From top to bottom corruption is rampant in the media industry, but none more so than in the unregulated community radio stations that proliferate throughout the Philippine countryside. In many of these outfits, any person can walk in, buy airtime for a few thousand pesos a month, and basically broadcast whatever they want.
While on the surface this may appear to be the very model of democracy and freedom of expression, the lack of regulation and even the most rudimentary training on journalistic ethics has turned these radio stations from a platform to expose wrongdoing into a tool for blackmail and extortion.
The way these “block-time” broadcasters practice “journalism” resembles a mafia shakedown more than anything else. Typically they would start by picking a target – a local government official or a businessman – and launch an attack against some alleged wrongdoing (real or otherwise) that they have committed. This continues for a time until either the victim sends an emissary to the broadcaster or the broadcaster himself visits the victim with a proposal to air his side of the issue. This method of double-dealing is what is colloquially known as ACDC or Attack-and-Collect, Defend-and-Collect journalism.
Sadly, this is also the root cause of many of the the killings of media practitioners in the Philippines. In a country were pride and social standing is paramount, an attack on a person’s integrity – particularly on such a public scale – often constitutes a killing offense. While this can never justify a murder, it does go a long way in explaining how these crimes come to be.
From this perspective, much of the blame should be placed squarely on the media industry itself for failing to clean up its own ranks of scalawags and crooks. By insisting on painting all media killings as an attack on press freedom, they are failing to address the real and rampant illegal activities of those criminals who are hiding under the convenient mantle of “media.” Not only does this oversight protect the guilty, it also demonizes the victims, and endangers the legitimate journalists.
Much as I try to focus only on those topics that have a direct impact on the lives of Mindanaoans, I just cant resist commenting on the recent full-page advertisement taken out by DMCI regarding their controversial Torre de Manila project. It offers a wonderful opportunity to talk about ways of communicating with an angry public that might help other companies, some of them in Mindanao, that are facing similarly sticky situations.
For those unfamiliar with the issue, the controversy stems from DMCI’s decision to build a 49-storey condominium directly behind the Rizal Monument in Luneta. According to some very vocal sectors the building sacrilegiously obstructs the otherwise pristine skyline that has framed the historic landmark for more than a hundred years. But which, as far as DMCI is concerned after having jumped through all the legal hoops, they are well within their rights to construct.
From a communication stand point, what we have here is a classic example of the disconnect that happens between the logical and emotional levels of discourse. On the logical sphere, where what one says is received by the audience exactly as it was transmitted, there is very little ambiguity in the project, especially from the point of view of the sender. In this case, DMCI.
Reading from their own official statement, they clearly see Torre De Manila as nothing more tan a straightforward “urban solution” designed “to help address the need for mid-income housing and urban renewal… (and to provide their customers) the convenience, security and quality of life they deserve.” In seeking to strengthen their logical legal basis for Torre De Manila, DMCI also cites its compliance with all the rules and relevant laws, their clearance from the National Historical Commission, urban development issues in the City of Manila, and international precedence in the preservation of national heritage sites.
Before commenting on some of the deficiencies of DMCI’s statement as a communications tool and a way to bridge the gap between them and their detractors, let me just say that from a purely legal perspective, I have no doubt that it stands on very solid footing. That said, I also believe that this is one of those cases where one can be legally correct, but ethically wrong. And trying to argue one over the other will not get you anywhere in the eyes of an already outraged public.
What DMCI doesn’t seem to understand, and what it’s statement fails to address, is the anger felt by those opposing their project. And while they took time to outline why they are “right” and their opponents are “wrong,” this logical presentation will not have any impact on the raw emotion that drives those on the other side. It is like talking about one coin but coming from different sides, you will never be able to come to an agreement without taking a leap of faith and accepting that the other side may just have as much “right” as you do. That their perceptions, while based on nothing more concrete than a hunch, still has the force of reality behind it. And attacking people’s beliefs by calling them irrational guarantees that they will only resist harder than ever before.
In order to find a common ground, DMCI should first identify the source of the anger. Is it because of the structure or is it because of the process that went into the building of the condominium? Most often than not, the public’s anger comes from a feeling of being ignored. Of being marginalized from the decisions that affect their lives. And compliance with laws and regulations, especially in the Philippines where confidence in the government is not very high, does not ensure public acceptance.
Once the source of the negative emotions has been identified, DMCI should determine who or what is driving the anger. While there will always be those who are using the issue for their own agenda, there are also legitimate groups who have real grievances. These are the people DMCI should reach out too. Maybe even form a community organization that would work towards finding an acceptable solution. These should be sincere efforts to bridge the gap and not just public relations damage control.
Lastly, DMCI should look for ways to widen the discussions with the public. The unknown is also a potent force in creating anger and anxiety, particularly in issues that are emotionally charged. By engaging the public in dialogues across all platforms of media, traditional and social, they will be able to reassure the people that, at the very least, they are listening to their concerns. This way also, by their reasonableness, they will be able to expose the extremists and the crazies whose anarchic views leave no room for compromise. DMCI should not be afraid to talk to the community, even when they may not always agree, these can be a rich source for demonstrating that they can do better.
So, Grace Poe wants to be President. And if the surveys are right, majority of Filipinos want her to be the President too. But from what we’ve been hearing through the political grapevines, the decision of whether or not the first term lady senator would actually take the plunge rests entirely on her good friend, advisor, and constant companion, Chiz “The Whiz” Escudero. After orchestrating the ascension of Jojo Binay to the office of the Vice President, he has somehow maneuvered himself to be in the perfect position to ride the coattails of Poe towards the same seat in 2016.
If Chiz manages to pull this off, it would cap off a wild series of horse trading and back channel negotiations that has seen the political fortunes of these would-be Presidents rise and fall in dizzying fashion. Whether it is Binay, Poe, Roxas, or Duterte, the one thing that is clear is that people are having a hell of a time keeping up with all the issues being brought out about each candidate. And with the expansion of media platforms into the real of the social networks, the slightest rumor can disrupt even the best laid communications plan.
In the wings of all these political maneuverings, President Aquino went about with the regular business of government by signing RA 10668, or the Liberalized Cabotage Law, which would now allow for much, much cheaper shipment rates of foreign goods all over the Philippines. Prior to this law it was cheaper to send goods to and from abroad than it was to send them from Manila to Davao.
As an example of the impact that this new law would have on Mindanao development, the President cited the case of a cargo container from Cagayon de Oro going to Hong Kong. He explained that in the past it would have cost US$ 1,264, of which eighty-eight percent or US$ 1,120 to ship it from Cagayan de Oro to Manila, and only US$ 144 from Manila to Hong Kong. “Because of the amended Cabotage Law, shippers from Cagayan de Oro can go straight to Hong Kong. They will pay only US$ 500. They will be able to save US$ 746 per container,” this the President says, would end the absurdity of the situation where the Philippines has one of the world’s most expensive shipping costs despite having some of the largest shipyards, and being home to one-fourth of the world’s seafarers. This development is a clear victory for the people in Mindanao. Finally the stranglehold on shipping, which has favored the interests of Metro Manila over the rest of the country has been broken.
You meet the most interesting creatures underwater. LIke this flamboyant cuttlefish. Normally this guy crawls along the bottom, dressed all in black and dark greys. But when it gets excited, loke it is in these pictures, you can see how the colors come out.
I took these photos somewhere in the Davao Gulf, at one of those beaches that you wouldn’t expect see anything so beautiful. Guess that goes to show you can never judge a book by its cover, or the ocean by the garbage stacked on the beach.
It’s been a while since I took to the road. Work, that dreaded four-letter, has had me tied down with deadlines for months – with the end still no where in sight. In times like these, I usually occupy myself by revisiting old photos taken during previous travels.