Was reminded recently of a debate regarding the way certain individuals are addressed in the news media. Given the local trend towards a more casual, tabloid-esque tone, where elected officials are referred to by acronyms, nicknames, and anything besides their actual name, upon entering the industry, believed a shift towards a more professional style was needed.
While politicians may want to appear friendly by using monikers, the news media is not in the business of catering to their preferences. To top it all off, there was the recent human rights report by the US State Department that found true journalism in the Philippine is almost nonexistent, with most media outlets acting in service to elected officials or framing news in a certain perspective as dictated by their investors and advertisers.
According to the Philippines 2016 Human Rights Report: “Media commentators criticized most media outlets for lacking rigorous journalistic standards and for reflecting the particular political or economic orientations of owners, publishers, or patrons, some of whom were close associates of present or past high-level officials.”
In this particular debate, the opponent argued last names could not be used because readers would be “confused” and unsure of which person bearing that last name it was referring to – an assumption that can only be arrived at if said person believes people do not actually read the stories and just browse headlines; an incredibly pompous view of the average reader. This would be akin to using the name “Trump” and saying readers would not know if the newspaper were referring to Donald, Melania, Ivanka, Don Jr., Eric, Tiffany, or anybody else with the same last name; or perhaps the name Obama and assuming there would be no way of determining if the story was about Barack, Michelle, Malia, Sasha, or Bo (the family dog).
However, what brought back the memory was the same person offering up a headline referring to a person as “Art.” If a last name is too ambiguous, how much more a first name – and not even a unique nickname, but a genuine abbreviation of a proper name.
Art Garfunkel, Art Linkletter, Art Carney, Art Buchwald, Art Spiegelman… there is an even wider array of names when it comes to using a basic first name than a last name.
The gross hypocrisy brought the memories of the said debate flowing back.
Not to mention, on a couple occasions, combining the preferred nickname, along with the wide array of acronyms popularly used in the country, headlines look a lot like text messages.
Personally, to see something that looks like a hastily-typed text message plastered as a “news headline,” it’s sloppy.
The issue was even brought before friends while on vacation in New York City recently. Asked them what they thought about the theory that readers would be “confused” if they only saw a last name published in a headline. It was a unanimous response – it’s a stupid theory.
It is understood readers will look at a story beyond the headline and, typically, the “mystery” of which person is being referred to in the headline is revealed within the first paragraph.
Additionally, this same person advocating for the casual use of language also sent an “advisory” saying it is required to refer to certain individuals because they have the authority to demand a name preference. In particular, with President Rodrigo Duterte, they claimed his middle name of “Roa” or the initial “R” must be used, however, when perusing news from ABS-CBN, GMA, The Philippine Daily Inquirer, and The Manila Bulletin, none of them use the middle name – how is it a requirement when some of the biggest names in the industry refrain from doing so? Are THEY all wrong?
In fact, the only media that seems to use the middle name and the initial is the People’s Television Network (PTV), a government-run media outlet. Considering their instruction is something only complied with by a government entity, was the suggestion an advocacy for media to be operated by the government?
Dismissing a more professional tone and going with a more perfunctory manner because that is just “how things are,” brings the industry down.
It’s come to a point where, with everybody doing the same thing, headlines come out identical (along with story content), resulting in media acting as an echo chamber, just regurgitating words delivered by elected officials, instead of bringing authentic news to the people.
If there was a way of standing out and making a name in local media, it would be breaking from the pack that is content with a relaxed way of reporting stories by being the one that brings a serious and competent brand of news.
The perceived laziness in the media is perhaps a result of a confusion in the role of the news reporter.
It would appear local reporters think the media is supposed to act as an extension of an elected official’s press office, just writing down what was picked up in their recordings and calling it news – it’s why the concept of “follow-up questions” seems like such a foreign idea. In reality, it is a matter of taking those words and disseminating what they mean, not just repeating them.
Many times, contradictions with past statements are often overlooked – a key in determining the authenticity of a politician’s words.
It is also why local politicians usually say what they want without repercussion because there is no responsible media calling them out – many reporters are too concerned with making friends with their subjects, believing it would earn them a scoop, but it only shifts their job from journalist to public relations associate.
Then again, perhaps this column has it all wrong and the end goal for journalists in the Philippines is to act as an arm of the government and not an independent voice./WDJ