Ang Mukha ng Maralita sa Midya: A symposium on the Portrayal of the Urban Poor in Philippine Media

Communications 110 (Media Ethics), UP CMC, 17 March 2009

by Raymund B Villanueva

Radio Cluster Coordinator, Kodao Productions

I wish to thank this class for inviting Kodao Productions to talk about the portrayal of the urban poor in Philippine Media.  The fact that the question is even posed suggests that media portrayal of urban poor communities is sometimes problematic.  We are happy to put in our two cents worth on this discussion, content with your implied acknowledgement that Kodao is one of the few media outfits that look at the plight of urban poor communities.

First, allow me to introduce Kodao.  We are a multi-media production house that produces videos and radio programs.  Kodao is also a prime mover for the creation of a national network of community radio stations and programs, as it is also actively involved in the establishment of community radio stations around the country.  Several of our video projects have received awards and citations from the Cultural Center of the Philippines and our radio program have received awards from the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster sa Pilipinas and the Catholic Mass Media Awards.

Kodao’s latest radio program is Kaya Natin ‘To, Kids on DWIZ, 882khz.  Our anchorpersons, radio drama talents, reporters, writers were urban poor kids, some of whom were out of school youths and victims of domestic violence, rape, incest, abuse and so on.  Sila ay taga-Vitas, Tatalon, Manresa, Olandes, Veterans, Matandang Balara.  Urban poor talaga.  Wala na kaming pera at ang aming huling episode ay noong Disyembre 27.

As an independent production outfit, Kodao was not spared from state persecution.  Kodao has been accused of being a Communist Party of the Philippines propaganda unit when the Arroyo regime declared a state of national emergency in February 20, 2006.  In July 2 of the same year, Radyo Cagayano, a community radio station Kodao helped establish in Baggao, Cagayan was blown up and burned down by suspected elements of the 5^th Infantry Division of the Philippine Army.

One accomplishment Kodao Productions is very proud of is the establishment of a Visayas-wide video production network last year.  This was done through trainings we provide non-government and sectoral organizations that wish to harness the persuasive, educational and informative powers of video in furtherance of their advocacies.  Kodao is an active member of a loose alliance of progressive production outfits like Tudla, Southern Tagalog Exposure, May Day Productions, Amado V. Hernandez Resource Center, CineKatipunan, Pokus-Gitnang Luson, and others.  Kodao is one of only two Philippine member-organizations of the Montreal, Canada-based World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters.

One compelling reason why independent multi-media production outfits come to be is the fact that we live in a class society where economically and politically-marginalized sectors are themselves underserved by the mass media.  One of the most marginalized, even maligned, sectors in Philippine society is the urban poor.  While we may be able to create a list of shows that have the urban poor communities as topics, issues and locations, these shows hardly portray them sympathetically.  Sure, shows like “Home Along the Riles” try to portray the humanity of urban poor residents but they hardly acknowledge their universal right to abode enshrined in our Constitution.  In fact, anti-urban poor institutions like the Metro Manila Development Authority have established their media outfits to specifically target what they call “eyesores” and “cause of traffic problems” who are, in most cases, urban poor communities and residents.

I am not here to debate whether the MMDA is legally and morally justified in its moves against urban poor communities.  What I am saying is that, like Nestle, Unilever, SM workers, urban poor communities are underserved by the more powerful and popular commercial media in presenting their plight, their struggles, hopes and dreams.  Because like the former, urban poor communities could not hope to bring in the advertisements their adversaries have at their ready disposal.

As independent media practitioners, we view our work not as employment but advocacies.  In other words, we are not swayed by the whims and demands of entities who buy lots of airtime or column inches.  We are in a position to choose which topics or issues to discuss in our productions independently.  We are also in a position to craft our productions in the way we see fit without fear that advertisers might get angry with us.

And so, independent media outfits like have come up with “Mula 3^rd Avenue Hanggang dulo” (Sipat), “Daang Bakal” (Tudla), and Paagi-A Ko [Excuse Me], Tapak [Patch], Malinghalong Kalambuan [ Deceptive Development], ‘Nay Victoria, and Na-uling nga Pangandoy [Charred Dreams] (all by Alternatibo Media Productions based in Visayas).

Now, do we think that commercial media outfits are unethical in their portrayal of urban poor communities in their reportage or production of shows?

This question is not an easy one to answer.  This is probably because I believe that majority of the local media practitioners try hard to be objective in their news reportage.  Of course there are lapses and there are lazy journalists who seem to equate some urban poor communities with one crime or nefarious deed—Maharlika Village in Taguig as a drug haven, Balut in Tondo as stabbing alley, Tatalon or Litex in Quezon City as snatching center, and others.  It sometimes feels like these are the only stories that could be expected from Maharlika Village, Balut in Tondo or Tatalon and Litex in Quezon City.  There are also newspaper columnists who seem to hate “squatters” so much they no longer see the violence and inhumanity these communities are being made to suffer either being demolished or left alone. Sige nga?  Subukan nilang tumira sa ganitong mga komunidad kahit isang linggo lang?

 

We must also guard ourselves from the danger of portraying urban poor communities as abjectly depressing areas devoid of a rose or two.  I noticed on the AVP as we were waiting for the forum to begin that all the pictures were grim, sad.  Instead, try to find a smile or two when filming the people there.  Then you’d be leaving the place with a gem of a shot or a story.  In all the films that were produced by the independent progressive multi-media groups, they all end with a positive note—that the urban poor communities struggle to make things better for themselves and the community in general.

But here is what I think the greater affront by the media on urban poor communities: While a great number of the commercial media’s viewers base are the urban poor communities in Metro Manila and in all the major cities in the Philippines, no corresponding airtime and column inches are devoted to discuss their issues and struggles.  In fact, I hazard to pose that most shows urban poor residents see on TV, hear on radio and read on newspapers are only meant to entertain them and make them forget that outside the edges of their 110-volt, reconditioned Japanese television sets are their inhumane squalor and poverty, on top of the daily threat by powerful landowners and the MMDA that their houses are to be demolished anytime.  Jackpot prizes on “Wowowee” or “Eat Bulaga” occasionally won by some urban poor residents are well and good, but how many families have these jackpot prizes gotten out of the “squatter areas?  ”Sa hindi matatawarang kapangyarihan at impluwensiya ng mas midya sa ating bansa, bakit hindi alayan ng mas malaking oras ang nakararami sa kanilang viewers na taga-urban poor upang tulungan sila sa kanilang pakikibaka para sa sariling bahay at lupa at makataong pamumuhay?  Hindi ba ito dapat ang ginagawa ng mga ka-pamilya at ka-puso, para maging tunay na maging iba tayo?

 

This is, I think, the biggest question on the Media Ethics on Urban Poor Portrayal. Ano po sa tingin niyo?

 

Maraming salamat po.