By Gel Santos Relos
Pumalpak nga ba ang media sa pamamaraan ng coverage ng hostage crisis kung kaya't nauwi ito sa madugong patayan? Narito po ang mga alituntunin sa coverage ng sensitibong pangyayari katulad ng hostage taking crises, prison uprisings, terrorist actions, atbp. na dapat ay muling aralin ng mga tagapaghatid ng balita. How do we learn from these blunders moving forward?
After the tragic hostage drama in Manila last August 23 that left nine people dead, including the gunman/hostage taker former police officer Rolando Mendoza, Department of Interior and Local Government partly blamed the media in the handling and coverage of the 12-hour hostage crisis.
Government officials said it was a major mistake of the media (both foreign and local) to give blow-by-blow account of the hostage crisis. It was reported that Mendoza reportedly became agitated after seeing on TV how his brother was being arrested for allegedly meddling with the negotiations which was monitored by the hostage taker through a TV and AM/FM radio inside the hijacked bus.
While I agree that media should have adhered to strict sense of responsibility and common sense, the reality remains ---we live in a capitalist society where market forces dictate profit, and profit seems to be the prime motivating force and rationale for the existence of all corporations. So if at least one network is to be left covering the high drama news event, do you really think the other networks would just step out of the scene in the name of social responsibility and let that one single network get all the ratings/audience share?
This reality, of course, does not justify media’s action. This is where, in my opinion, government should exercise its authority as this situation is a serious security issue. It should have been the call of the police officers to restrict media up to a certain critical area so that the newsmen would not end up being the newsmakers in the way they could adversely affect the way operations are executed.
Media, both foreign and local, will always be voracious hunters for hot scoops and headlines, and therefore, people in authority should have strategically determined what is be made accessible to media during such critical hours of negotiation. Safety and security especially in sensitive operations such as a hostage crisis take precedence over the public’s right to blow-by-blow information. The media may be the watchdog but it is the responsibility of the government to govern! And the public has to understand and accept this basic truth and principle.
President Benigno Aquino III said the government will meet with various media groups to set up guidelines on the coverage of crisis situations following Monday’s deadly hostage-taking. President Aquino said while he understands that the media was only doing its job, there has to be a way to reconcile the public’s right to know and the duty of the State to protect civilians. Aquino likewise defended the police for its alleged failure to control the media during Monday’s hostage crisis, saying they “had already so much on their plate" during the incident.
Moving forward, maybe Secretary Ricky Carandang, head of the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning, can review with the media the “Guidelines for Covering Hostage-Taking Crises, Prison Uprisings, Terrorist Actions” By Bob Steele, Nelson Poynter Scholar for Journalism Values.
In covering an ongoing crisis situation, journalists are advised to:
Looks like media may have failed to put into practice many of aspects of of this "protocol". But then again, this problem is systemic. This is just the media blunder part of the equation. Now the government has a lot of serious work to do in training the SWAT and all other units of the law enforcement arm of the government on how to effectively and strategically handle and resolve crisis situation such as this hostage taking. And how about us, the consumers of the media and the citizens of our country---what do we need to work on from our end?
Pumalpak nga ba ang media sa pamamaraan ng coverage ng hostage crisis kung kaya't nauwi ito sa madugong patayan? Narito po ang mga alituntunin sa coverage ng sensitibong pangyayari katulad ng hostage taking crises, prison uprisings, terrorist actions, atbp. na dapat ay muling aralin ng mga tagapaghatid ng balita. How do we learn from these blunders moving forward?
After the tragic hostage drama in Manila last August 23 that left nine people dead, including the gunman/hostage taker former police officer Rolando Mendoza, Department of Interior and Local Government partly blamed the media in the handling and coverage of the 12-hour hostage crisis.
Government officials said it was a major mistake of the media (both foreign and local) to give blow-by-blow account of the hostage crisis. It was reported that Mendoza reportedly became agitated after seeing on TV how his brother was being arrested for allegedly meddling with the negotiations which was monitored by the hostage taker through a TV and AM/FM radio inside the hijacked bus.
While I agree that media should have adhered to strict sense of responsibility and common sense, the reality remains ---we live in a capitalist society where market forces dictate profit, and profit seems to be the prime motivating force and rationale for the existence of all corporations. So if at least one network is to be left covering the high drama news event, do you really think the other networks would just step out of the scene in the name of social responsibility and let that one single network get all the ratings/audience share?
This reality, of course, does not justify media’s action. This is where, in my opinion, government should exercise its authority as this situation is a serious security issue. It should have been the call of the police officers to restrict media up to a certain critical area so that the newsmen would not end up being the newsmakers in the way they could adversely affect the way operations are executed.
Media, both foreign and local, will always be voracious hunters for hot scoops and headlines, and therefore, people in authority should have strategically determined what is be made accessible to media during such critical hours of negotiation. Safety and security especially in sensitive operations such as a hostage crisis take precedence over the public’s right to blow-by-blow information. The media may be the watchdog but it is the responsibility of the government to govern! And the public has to understand and accept this basic truth and principle.
President Benigno Aquino III said the government will meet with various media groups to set up guidelines on the coverage of crisis situations following Monday’s deadly hostage-taking. President Aquino said while he understands that the media was only doing its job, there has to be a way to reconcile the public’s right to know and the duty of the State to protect civilians. Aquino likewise defended the police for its alleged failure to control the media during Monday’s hostage crisis, saying they “had already so much on their plate" during the incident.
Moving forward, maybe Secretary Ricky Carandang, head of the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning, can review with the media the “Guidelines for Covering Hostage-Taking Crises, Prison Uprisings, Terrorist Actions” By Bob Steele, Nelson Poynter Scholar for Journalism Values.
In covering an ongoing crisis situation, journalists are advised to:
- Always assume that the hostage taker, gunman, or terrorist has access to the reporting.
- Avoid describing with words or showing with still photography and video any information that could divulge the tactics or positions of SWAT team members.
- Fight the urge to become a player in any standoff, hostage situation, or terrorist incident. Journalists should become personally involved only as a last resort and with the explicit approval of top news management and the consultation of trained hostage negotiators on the scene.
- Be forthright with viewers, listeners, or readers about why certain information is being withheld if security reasons are involved.
- Seriously weigh the benefits to the public of what information might be given out versus what potential harm that information might cause. This is especially important in live reporting of an ongoing situation.
- Strongly resist the temptation to telephone a gunman or hostage taker. Journalists generally are not trained in negotiation techniques, and one wrong question or inappropriate word could jeopardize someone's life. Furthermore, just calling in could tie up phone lines or otherwise complicate communication efforts of the negotiators.
- Notify authorities immediately if a hostage taker or terrorist calls the newsroom. Also, have a plan ready for how to respond.
- Challenge any gut reaction to "go live" from the scene of a hostage-taking crisis, unless there are strong journalistic reasons for a live, on-the-scene report. Things can go wrong very quickly in a live report, endangering lives or damaging negotiations. Furthermore, ask if the value of a live, on-the-scene report is really justifiable compared to the harm that could occur.
- Give no information, factual or speculative, about a hostage taker's mental condition, state of mind, or reasons for actions while a standoff is in progress. The value of such information to the audience is limited, and the possibility of such characterizations exacerbating an already dangerous situation are quite real.
- Give no analyses or comments on a hostage taker's or terrorist's demands. As bizarre or ridiculous (or even legitimate) as such demands may be, it is important that negotiators take all demands seriously.
- Keep news helicopters out of the area where the standoff is happening, as their noise can create communications problems for negotiators and their presence could scare a gunman to deadly action.
- Do not report information obtained from police scanners. If law enforcement personnel and negotiators are compromised in their communications, their attempts to resolve a crisis are greatly complicated.
- Be very cautious in any reporting on the medical condition of hostages until after a crisis is concluded. Also, be cautious when interviewing hostages or released hostages while a crisis continues.
- Exercise care when interviewing family members or friends of those involved in standoff situations. Make sure the interview legitimately advances the story for the public and is not simply conducted for the shock value of the emotions conveyed or as a conduit for the interviewee to transmit messages to specific individuals.
- Go beyond the basic story of the hostage taking or standoff to report on the larger issues behind the story, be it the how and why of what happened, reports on the preparation and execution of the SWAT team, or the issues related to the incident.
Looks like media may have failed to put into practice many of aspects of of this "protocol". But then again, this problem is systemic. This is just the media blunder part of the equation. Now the government has a lot of serious work to do in training the SWAT and all other units of the law enforcement arm of the government on how to effectively and strategically handle and resolve crisis situation such as this hostage taking. And how about us, the consumers of the media and the citizens of our country---what do we need to work on from our end?
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment