Continue Reyes Investigation: media should practice restraint

“In an article titled “Media coverage of the Reyes suicide: Breaking all the rules,” posted Monday on the Philippine Journalism Review (PJR) website, CMFR observed that “the press went out of its way to cover practically everything that had to do with Reyes and the controversy he had been involved in. In the process, they broke almost every rule ever devised in the coverage of suicide…The media watchdog said: “Journalism ethics discourages this practice because detailed reporting could encourage vulnerable individuals to imitate the behavior—also known as ‘suicide contagion’ or the ‘copy-cat’ effect… But, finding the truth behind the allegedly systemic and systematic corruption in the AFP and the government as a whole SHOULD NOT die with him. If in fact what they say is true, that Reyes was indeed innocent, it would be wise for the family to cooperate with the authorities. “

Continue Reyes Investigation: Media Should Practice Restraint

By Dan Mariano

Going by the comments posted on Facebook, Twitter and other social media, not a few Filipinos found the coverage of the February 8 suicide of Angelo Reyes by Manila dailies and networks far from appropriate. A large number of complaints focused on the apparent “glorification” of the retired general’s decision to end his life.

Objections to the traditional media’s reports on the Reyes suicide were not limited to news consumers, however. At least one media watchdog shares the public’s disappointment. The independent Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR) has actually detailed the lapses and excesses committed by the dailies and networks.
In an article titled “Media coverage of the Reyes suicide: Breaking all the rules,” posted Monday on the Philippine Journalism Review (PJR) website, CMFR observed that “the press went out of its way to cover practically everything that had to do with Reyes and the controversy he had been involved in. In the process, they broke almost every rule ever devised in the coverage of suicide.”

Some journalists were careful not to immediately report the incident as a suicide, as CMFR acknowledged. “At press time, most news organizations were referring to Reyes as an ‘apparent suicide.’” But that seems to be the only positive aspect of the coverage.

According to CMFR, it monitored nine Manila-based newspapers, the newscasts of three networks and their online news sites.

“Given that Reyes was a government official implicated in a military fund scandal, and his death happened at the height of the congressional hearings, the incident was without doubt newsworthy,” CMFR noted. “However, the press could have been more restrained in its coverage. The reports were instead sensationalized in many cases and extremely detailed.”

On the day Reyes shot himself the top stories on the network news were all about him. The following day the majority of the dailies—with the exception of one newspaper—bannered the story on the front-page.

“Not only did the media highlight the cause and method of death, more disturbingly, morbid and dramatic photographs, video footage, and interviews (the tools used, blood, venue of the suicide, the wake, crying relatives and friends, etc.) were displayed,” CMFR said. In a couple of newscasts, one network “even illustrated the suicide method in a graphic presentation.”

The media watchdog said: “Journalism ethics discourages this practice because detailed reporting could encourage vulnerable individuals to imitate the behavior—also known as ‘suicide contagion’ or the ‘copy-cat’ effect.”

Moreover, CMFR said that the prominent, repetitive and continuous news coverage of Reyes’ death was unnecessary, and at worst irresponsible.

It said news organizations did little to explore the series of events that led to his death while discussions on how situations like this can be avoided were limited.
Quoting professional guidelines as articulated in Suicide Sensitive Journalism Handbook, CMFR pointed out that “suicide is rarely the result of a single factor or event, but rather results from a complex interaction of many factors and usually involves a history of psycho-social problems, particularly depression. Public officials and the media should explain carefully that the final precipitating event was not the only cause.”

If many social media subscribers found incongruous—to put it mildly—the mainstream media’s portrayal of Reyes as a hero, so did CMFR, which observed: “There was a surfeit of reports on community expressions of grief (public eulogies, flying flags at half-mast, military honors, rescheduling of congressional hearings, etc.).”

The media watchdog added: “Some reports focused on positive characteristics and achievements in life have the tendency to venerate the deceased. This aspect of Reyes’ life should be acknowledged, but balanced by recalling the controversies surrounding his government service.”

CMFR cautioned: “Without proper context, such reporting may suggest—especially to those at-risk and/or facing similar dilemmas—that killing one’s self is an appropriate or acceptable way to solve personal problems.”

It cited a monograph, titled “Preventing Suicide: A Resource for Media Professionals,” issued by the World Health Organization (WHO): “Glorifying suicide victims as martyrs and objects of public adulation may suggest to susceptible persons that their society [honors] suicidal behavior. Instead, the emphasis should be on mourning the person’s death.”

There were also efforts in the media to pin the blame for Reyes’ suicide on his detractors, including two senators and a former military subordinate-turned-whistle blower.

“Reports on [who is] to blame are hardly of value, being merely speculative,” CMFR noted. “But the media immediately ran stories on the reactions of the senators, particularly Jinggoy Estrada and Antonio Trillanes IV, who had grilled Reyes during the [Senate] hearings. The press also went after the statements of [former military budget officer George] Rabusa.”

CMFR also advised the media “to respect the privacy” of grieving family members. “But the papers and TV news nevertheless published photos and ran video footage of the place where Reyes died, the hospital where he was taken, crying relatives and friends, and the wake.”

Such intrusive coverage “largely ignored established guidelines on interviewing relatives and friends.”

Guidelines, such as the University of Hong Kong’s “Suicide and the Media: Recommendations on Suicide Reporting for Media Professionals,” offer the following advice:

•“The surviving relatives and friends usually cannot accept the fact right after the incident. Therefore the media should be considerate and must avoid disturbing them;

• “The grieving survivors may have emotional fluctuation or even have suicidal thoughts. Media professionals should refer the case to social workers, psychiatrists or healthcare professionals; and

• “The journalists should bear in mind that the accounts based on the initial reaction of surviving relatives and friends are often unreliable.”

As if the incident were not unsettling enough, the dailies and networks’ decision to dramatize Reyes’s death did not help the public grasp the complexities of suicide. “Rather, this kind of reporting has the potential to do more harm,” CMFR said. “News organizations should promote suicide prevention through sensitive coverage of incidents such as this.”

In conclusion, the media watchdog said: “Reyes made a choice to end his life. But, finding the truth behind the allegedly systemic and systematic corruption in the AFP and the government as a whole should not die with him. If in fact what they say is true, that Reyes was indeed innocent, it would be wise for the family to cooperate with the authorities. The public and especially the press should not forget that they supposedly got millions as well.”