‘Press freedom not absolute’

THE live and detailed coverage by the broadcast networks was heavily criticized because the hostage-taker could monitor the media’s coverage of police operations through a TV set inside the bus.

All the networks investigated by the KBP said they were merely covering a legitimate breaking news story and fulfilling their obligations to inform the public.

But KBP Standards Authority chairperson Diana C. Gozum dismissed claims by the broadcast networks that they were merely exercising their duties as members of a free and democratic press.

“Press freedom is not absolute,” Gozum told the PCIJ.

“It is not a matter of getting a scoop when lives are involved. We cannot say we did this to have a scoop or to have an advantage over competitors.”

Gozum said that a careful viewing of the tapes submitted by the networks to the KBP and a careful reading of the transcripts of the radio broadcasts would show that the networks went out of bounds in their eagerness to beat the competition.

“We cannot sacrifice life for press freedom,” she said.

“In this situation the Standards Authority felt that our members went beyond their responsibilities as broadcasters and their responsibilities for getting a scoop for the network.”

“It pained us to make this decision because we are all broadcasters,” said Gozum, president and general manager of provincial radio broadcaster Filipinas Broadcasting Network.

“They are our members, and we know them, we have worked with them, and some of them are the owners, or their official representatives to the KBP are in the Board.”

The PCIJ exerted all effort to get the side of the four media agencies.

ABC-5 legal counsel Christina Ona and GMA-7 officer Butch Raquel separately said they would have to get clearance from their superiors to be able to respond.
RMN News’ officer in charge Buddy Oberas said the station could not issue a statement as of press time.

Ma. Regina “Ging” Reyes, ABS-CBN vice president for News, referred PCIJ’s request to the network’s legal department, which did not respond at all.

SILENT TREATMENT

Curiously, the KBP Standards Authority found ABS-CBN, ABC-5 and RMN liable for their coverage as early as Dec. 15, 2010, or four months after the hostage-taking incident.

Yet until now, neither the KBP nor any of the networks has announced the findings in any press release, statement or in a news story in any of the many media outlets of the three networks. In fact, the ruling may not have been brought up in public had PCIJ not asked KBP officials about the matter last week.

After pulling all stops in covering the Luneta hostage-taking incident and the government investigation that followed, the networks now appear uninterested in broadcasting the results of KBP’s own investigation into media’s culpability in the fiasco.

Instead, all three networks contested the findings by filing an appeal before the KBP Board of Trustees, which then convened a special appeals committee composed of four board members.

On Apr. 12, 2011, the appeals committee rejected the appeals of ABS-CBN, ABC-5 and RMN, and ordered all three to pay the fines within 10 working days or pay an additional penalty of 1.5 percent of the fine for every month past the deadline for the implementation of the order.

Under protest

On Apr. 29, 2011, ABC-5 sent a check for P30,000 from Banco de Oro to the KBP “as full payment and settlement of the fine imposed on respondents.”

ABS-CBN followed with a letter on May 2, 2011, from ABS-CBN legal counsel Cherrie Cruz stating that the network would abide by the order to pay the fine of P30,000. ABS-CBN insisted, though, that it was doing so under protest.

“The company wishes to make of record that it neither agrees with nor admits any liability in connection with the KBP Standards Authority’s decision dated Dec. 15 (2010) finding the company to have violated Article 6 of the KBP broadcast code for its coverage of the Aug. 23, 2010, Quirino Grandstand hostage-taking incident,” wrote Cruz. “The company also disagrees with the KBP Board of Trustees order dated April 12, 2011, denying its appeal from said decision.”

For its part, RMN legal counsel Jorge Sacdalan wrote the KBP on Apr. 28 asking the association to reconsider its order to reprimand RMN anchors Rogas and Tulfo. Sacdalan pledged that the network and its anchors “have learned their lessons from the tragic incident and have avowed to be more vigilant in performing their duties and responsibilities under the broadcast code.”

“Paying the fines will be enough penalty for whatever acts or omissions respondents RMN and Rogas have committed,” Sacdalan said in his letter to the KBP. (To be continued) Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism