GOSSIP WRITERS!

Too much “partying” is never an excuse. PDI’s gossip writer Ces Rodriguez should learn a thing or two with this NUJ code of ethics...

“It would help the cause of truth in media if editors and reporters followed the National Union of Journalists’ Code of Ethics (NUJ), particularly Rules I and VIII. The first says: “I shall scrupulously report and interpret the news, taking care not to suppress essential facts nor to distort the truth by omission or improper emphasis. I recognize the duty to air the other side and the duty to correct substantive errors promptly.””

GOSSIP WRITERS

By: Ric Saludo

Today, the media’s penchant to report first and verify later (or never) continues. Last Thursday a leading daily headlined: “P-Noy bares anomalies in importation of rice.” Not claimed, alleged, or asserted, but bared, meaning that there were clear and verified irregularities being exposed, if one goes by plain English.

No prizes for guessing that the latest presidential claim was yet again anything but clear and verified.

The story’s very first sentence read: “President Aquino bared yesterday ‘one person or group’ could have benefited from the importation of rice and its overpricing during the Arroyo administration.” So it seemed he wasn’t even sure who might have benefited or if anyone did benefit.

PNoy also claimed that 1.3 million metric tons was the estimated rice importation needs last year, while 2.5 million MT was imported. Yet former Agriculture Secretary Arthur Yap, now a Bohol representative in Congress, countered the next day that 3.2 million tons was the ceiling recommended for 2010 by the inter-agency committee made up of DA, DOF and DOST.

There’s more. Last Friday the same paper ran a follow-up story titled: Gov’t gathering proof on rice scam.

The report recounted the press briefing of Deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte: “She said President Aquino’s expose of the supposed irregularities in rice importations during the Liberal Party’s 65th founding anniversary last Wednesday was not done prematurely because even if the full audit is not yet finished, an informal audit was already conducted.”

So here’s the Palace line (so far): There’s a rice import scam which could have benefited one person or a group, but no proof or final audit yet to know for sure. Well, at least the papers and the airwaves had some spicy news to grab readers and viewers.

By the way, the more PR-savvy among us may wonder what else is going on at the National Food Authority (NFA) that is now pushed off the headlines by the rice importation claims. Hmm, this month it raised its prices by P2 or 8 percent to P27 a kilo, adding to the fuel, fare, toll and power hikes burdening consumers, especially the poor, and contributing to the rise in hunger incidence. NFA Administrator Lito Banayo is not a top media and political strategist for nothing.

It would help the cause of truth in media if editors and reporters followed the National Union of Journalists’ Code of Ethics (NUJ), particularly Rules I and VIII. The first says: “I shall scrupulously report and interpret the news, taking care not to suppress essential facts nor to distort the truth by omission or improper emphasis. I recognize the duty to air the other side and the duty to correct substantive errors promptly.” Rule No. 8 adds: “I shall presume persons accused of crime of being innocent until proven otherwise.”

However, given the pressure to win readers, listeners and viewers, the media are likely to keep headlining accusations without verification. (Anyone who doubts that bad news sells should ask five people which newspaper they would buy: the one headlined ECONOMIC RECOVERY, or the other bannered ECONOMIC CRISIS.) Hence, it behooves those of us who care about the truth in what we read or hear to have an oversupply of imported salt when appreciating local news and commentary.

If no basis or proof is cited in a report, then there was almost certainly none provided or even demanded.

Make the extra effort to pore through the inside pages, where corrections and qualifications of past articles are often buried. And always ask if the accuser may have an ulterior motive for making his claims.

Politicians usually do, especially those keen to keep their names widely and constantly reported and recalled.

Former Sen. Aquilino Pimentel, a lifetime advocate of liberty and human rights, filed a bill requiring media to give the subjects of their stories a right of reply with equal time, space and prominence as the original reports being answered. The media and their Congress allies succeeded in killing the measure.

In Singapore, on the other hand, the government demands that its replies be published in full and without any changes on pain of a publication being banned. While the Philippines should not adopt such media strictures, there is certainly room for efforts toward greater responsibility to go with press freedom.

In Hong Kong, where this writer was an editor with Asiaweek magazine for 17 years, failing to do basic verification could severely weaken a media outfit’s defense in libel cases. Thus, reporters and editors there make sure to ask for proof before rushing to print or air. But in the Philippines it is almost impossible to find libel cases that result in substantial penalties, while the Supreme Court has ordered that offenders should not be meted jail sentences. There have also been moves to decriminalize libel.

With few effective ways to redress salacious reports, it is not inconceivable that some victims may resort to violence. Such acts are totally immoral, unjustified and unlawful, whatever may have been the wrong done by a mistaken or malicious report. At the same time, more responsible, less sensationalist, and truly truth-seeking media may just help reduce provocations which lead to violence against journalists.

Equally important, closer adherence to the lofty professional standards of the NUJ Code of Ethics would elevate the quality and veracity of our news and commentary. Yes, checking claims and accusations may spare some hoods the headline exposes they deserve, but that same argument was never any reason to water down the rights of the accused in court, so why do so in media?

Still, one should not hold one’s breath for reporters and editors to be more circumspect about headlining accusations anytime soon, especially if the great majority of their readers, listeners and viewers do not care either to let the facts get in the way of a sensational story. So buyer beware will just have to be the rule in appreciating local news, especially exposes by politicians. Even the one with an 80-percent trust rating.