Marites Danguilan Vitug is the Editor-in-Chief of Newsbreak, [1] a Philippine investigative magazine. She previously wrote for the Manila Chronicle. While there, her exclusive articles on the plunder of the Philippines' last tropical rainforest by a greedy businessman and a corrupt politician earned her awards - and threats of death and imprisonment. Vitug founded the Phillipine Center for Investigative Journalism. The following is an excerpt from her upcoming book on the Muslim rebellion in the Philippines.
III. The Muslim Rebellion and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front
IV. Key Issues in Reporting on the Conflict
Some years ago, in one of my trips to Cotabato, a predominantly Muslim city in Mindanao, I interviewed a young man who had just returned from a university in the Middle East. I was interested in what he thought about the Muslim separatist rebellion. Mindanao in the southern Philippines is host to the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF). It is also the birthplace of the first Muslim secessionist group, the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF), organized in the early 1970s. The MNLF made peace with the government in 1996 and many of the ex-rebels have since been integrated into the Philippine military. The MILF, which broke away from the MNLF, continues to wage its rebellion to this day. But it is currently engaged in peace talks with the government.
The young man spoke intensely about the injustice that had been committed by the Philippine government against the Muslim minority and delved into history, saying they weren’t really part of the country. They had their separate history, when their Sultanate was a thriving center of commerce, trading with China and other parts of the world, way ahead of Manila. What he was telling me was something I’ve heard from other Muslims. But what struck me was when he said that he isn’t Filipino. The resentment ran so deep that it surprised me. It was the first time that a Muslim, a Filipino, told me this. Somehow, I took offense.
In my early years as a reporter, I made a few visits to MNLF camps, but the guns overwhelmed me more than their rhetoric. Perhaps, I romanticized the rebels, especially at that time, in the early 1980s, when the Philippines was under an ailing dictator. I empathized with them and dutifully filed reports.
So, more than 10 years later, under a functioning democracy, I met up with this radical Muslim youth—and it jolted me. As a journalist who lives and works out of Manila, and occasionally visits Mindanao, I realized that the change of government (from dictatorship to democracy) and distance had made me sanguine about the rebellion in the south. The fact is: the decades-old rebellion is alive and well, and deeply rooted.
Mindanao, the second largest island in the country, is amazing in its diversity. It is rich and poor, tranquil and violent. Parts of it have grown up with twin insurgencies—Communist and Muslim. Its history is separate and areas of Mindanao were the last to be colonized. When Manila was grassland, Sulu, part of the sultanate, was cosmopolitan. They had a frontier ethos and nurtured a strong identity.
After 9/11, the Muslim rebellion gained wider importance in the context of terrorism in Southeast Asia. Radical Islam in Mindanao has an impact on neighboring countries with Muslim populations and vice versa. It is a challenge to cover the conflict in Mindanao. The issues can be complex and, as a Filipino, I write about the conflict with the hope that it will be resolved. This, therefore, doesn’t limit my reporting to what happens but searches for alternatives and ideas that can work to bring peace.
This is a cliché but it is an inescapable fact: the Philippines has the freest and most rambunctious press in Southeast Asia. A visitor is welcomed by a cacophony of voices: broadsheets, tabloids, TV networks, radio stations. All of these, except for some radio stations, are based in Metro Manila. This explains the Manila-centric view of the Philippine media.
The combined circulation of Manila-based broadsheets and tabloids, 1.5 million, is relatively small, for a population of 80 million. This can be attributed to poverty and lack of education. Average government spending on education per student is $170 compared to Thailand’s $550 and Malaysia’s $930. Seven percent of school entrants finish college, out of which 25 percent of the richest kids graduate, but only one percent of the poor do.
In terms of ownership structure, newspapers and TV networks, except for those owned by the government, are owned by big businesses which are not solely into publishing. They operate in a society where vested interests—the business and political elite—are strong; thus the concept of an independent media has not taken root. Corruption in the media remains a problem. While the media demand accountability from government officials and institutions, as well as from those of the private sector, they hardly are made accountable to the public they serve.
Why? Blame editors and publishers who do not adhere to journalistic standards of integrity, accuracy, and fairness. They see journalism more as commerce and media as vehicles for self-promotion (personal and business-wise) rather than public service. One should not be exclusive of the other. Media can blend commerce and public service: it is a tricky mix but leaders of the industry ought to make that commitment. Responsibility, fairness, and accuracy are hallmarks of the profession that should not be taken lightly.
It is the nature of Philippine society, coupled by corruption in the press, which stymies the flourishing of an independent media. When a publication writes a story critical of the powers that be, however well researched and accurate it is, some think that someone put up the reporter/editor to it. Who paid them? Who’s behind the publication? What’s the agenda? The idea of the media as independent and fearless, not indebted to anyone except public interest, has yet to gather widespread acceptance. The market is the worst censor—thus advertisers go for fluff, sensational reporting, and public relations because they sell.
One leading TV journalist said that whenever they do stories on the conflict in Mindanao, their ratings drop. This discourages them from pursuing more stories on Mindanao. The ratings game for TV is such a tyrant that it narrows down the field for reporting.
Questions: Is the public really not interested? Or are they tired of reports on a seemingly never ending war? Have the TV reporters tried other approaches in reporting on the conflict, like say, telling the stories of peace?
Do ratings tell the full story? Or is there a new way of measuring attention to TV news?
In the Philippines, and perhaps in other countries, TV has become the most widespread medium. Its power was obvious in the last two national elections (1998 and 2004) but more so in the 2004 presidential elections. Two TV anchors from the largest network in the country bested traditional politicians in the 1998 and 2001 senatorial elections. They topped the races. One of them is now vice president.
Media is now a route to politics and election victory. TV has overtaken radio and newspapers as the medium of choice in the last elections. A nationwide survey in March-April 2004 showed TV as the most credible source of information and news about candidates and the campaign: 67 percent rating compared to radio’s 20 percent, and newspapers’ 5 percent. In 1999, the same polling outfit, Pulse Asia, found in their media credibility survey that TV rated 53 percent, followed by 35 percent for radio, and 27 percent for newspapers. TV’s stock rose while radio and newspapers declined.
As much as 60 percent of households in rural areas own TV sets and 91 percent in the urban areas.
While the influence of print seems to be declining, as the numbers show, it isn’t entirely true. TV and radio news rely primarily on what’s written in the newspapers. Print still sets the agenda. TV and radio are a reactive media. In the case of radio, only the big radio stations field reporters—but only to limited beats. While TV deploys its reporters to various beats, the subjects it covers are constrained by the demands of the medium: spot news, short, breezy, and highly visual.
It is not common in TV to see solidly researched stories. Top stories in prime-time news consist usually of police stories—blood and gore—a bit of politics, human interest stuff that make for good drama, and entertainment. There is a need for more strategic thinking in TV news (realize importance of research), reorientation of news values (from police blotter and show business to issues that have wider implications for the country), and for the medium to be less driven by ratings. The same is needed for newspapers, to veer away from cockfight reporting (opposing parties in he-said-she-said stories) one-source stories, speculative headlines, etc. There is also a need for better, more thoughtful people who call the shots: editors and producers who will distinguish noise from the real sound and sift through the clutter. The reforms should begin with the leaders. No amount of training of reporters will make a difference if their editors and producers are off-course.
The Philippine Constitution provides for freedom of religion—and this is practiced to a great extent. The Philippines is a predominantly Catholic country. There is no state religion, and under the Constitution, church and state are separate.
The Muslims are the largest minority religious group in the country. Estimates of the Muslim population range from 4 million to 7 million, or 5 to 9 percent of the population. Muslims reside principally in Mindanao but there are Muslim communities in various parts of the country. But discrimination against Muslims persists. There is a lack of sensitivity to Muslims and their faith. Many non-Muslims hold certain stereotypes of Muslims. An August 2004 poll in the Philippines shows that 52 percent have a favorable view of Islam while 41 percent have an unfavorable opinion. This shows a decline: in June 2003, those with favorable opinion of Islam reached 58 percent. Those who view Islam unfavorably was the same, 41 percent.
Muslim provinces are among the poorest in the country. World Bank studies show that poverty incidence (63 percent) is twice that for the whole country. Men and women have lower life expectancy in these Muslim provinces belonging to the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao: 55.5 years for men, 59.3 for women—more than 10 years below the national rates. More babies and mothers die in the region than in other regions of the country. Primary and secondary school enrollments are lower than national rates. These provinces have been suffering from the effects of the war since the 1970s and, for many years, government neglect. Many of them feel they have been excluded from development.
The rebellion is rooted in economic reasons as well as in assertion of identity. Historically, the Muslims resisted colonization both by the Spaniards and the U.S.
In the early 70s, the first Muslim revolutionary group, the MNLF was born. Before this, in the 60s, Christians trekked to Mindanao and took away land from the Muslims. After martial law was declared in 1971, violent encounters took place between Christian paramilitary groups and Muslim rebels as well as militias. Hundreds of thousands of lives were lost during the Muslim rebellion in the 70s and 80s: more were displaced, many of whom have sought refuge in Sabah, Malaysia.
The end to the war waged by the MNLF came in 1996 when President Fidel Ramos and the MNLF forged a peace agreement. But the MILF continued to fight the government.
The MILF was officially born in 1984 when a breakaway group from the MNLF adopted a new name. However, it had begun taking shape many years earlier, in 1977, when disenchantment with then MNLF chairman Nur Misuari over ideology, leadership style, personality, ethnic antagonisms, and even money reached its peak. The breakaway group, led by Salamat Hashim, blamed Misuari for steering the MNLF away from the Islamic path. Essentially, the split was both ideological and personal. At first, they demanded autonomy. As they grew, they changed their position in the 1990s to independence. Their size—they’re estimated to be about 10,000—and their apparent hard-line stance have made them a force to reckon with.
President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s policy is to seek a political settlement with the MILF. She is backed by Malaysia, which is brokering talks between the government and the MILF, thus playing a crucial role. In addition, the U.S. government has committed a substantial amount for post-conflict assistance and a Washington-based NGO (non-government organization)—the U.S. Institute of Peace—is expected to assist in the talks, using their track record in conflict mediation. The immediate sticky issue is the connection of some MILF members to the Jemaah Islamiyah or JI, a Southeast Asia-based extremist group. The MILF has always denied any links to the JI—but testimonies of some captured JI members say they trained in MILF camps. Philippine intelligence officials say that the link is not institutional—not as an organization to another organization—but rather individual.
Many MILF members were on the battlefields of Afghanistan in the 1980s, in the war against the Russians. It was there where they met up with other revolutionaries from various parts of the Muslim world. They have kept contact—just like a fraternity or a university alumni association. Thus these ties continue to this day.
Some analysts say that the MILF is no longer as cohesive as it used to be. When they lost their main base to the military in 2000, MILF guerillas spread out in small groups in various places and communication became difficult. Funds may have declined because some MILF members have been reported to be involved in kidnap-for-ransom activities. But MILF leaders have denounced kidnapping.
When Hashim died in 2003, the former military chief, Murad, took over. It is said that he had a tough time fully consolidating his hold over the entire MILF. Murad is seen to be more pragmatic than Hashim and is not schooled in the Middle East. (Hashim went to Al Ashar University in Egypt and lived in the Middle East and Pakistan for many years.) Murad, for his part, went to a Catholic university in Mindanao.
Now, there are hopeful signs of a reachable peace on the ground.
Take these three men. Abas Candao, Danda Juanday, and Saffrullah Dipatuan are the most unlikely people you’ll associate with the MILF. They’re medical doctors from Muslim Mindanao, each with a lucrative private practice—an anesthesiologist, an obstetrician-gynecologist, and a family physician. They’re dapper in their suits and are comfortable outside their clinics meeting with government officials as well as representatives of multilateral agencies like the World Bank.
The MILF chose to work with these three gentlemen to hasten the peace process. Candao, Juanday, and Dipatuan are leaders of the Bangsamoro Development Agency (BDA), an NGO born out of an agreement between the MILF and the government. Their task: to implement rehabilitation and development projects in impoverished and conflict areas—while the peace talks are going on and even after a settlement is in place.
Why them? The MILF decided to link up with these professionals because, for these doctors, development work is not new. Before the BDA, they were involved with livelihood cooperatives, medical missions, and putting together of local development plans. In the process, they earned the trust of the community as well as the MILF.
Today, their role in settling a decades-old rebellion is crucial. The BDA represents a new approach the government is taking to arrive at a political settlement with the MILF. Negotiations are accompanied by show of action. Manila has learned its lesson. After a peace agreement was signed with the MNLF in 1996, it took more than a year before development aid came in. Without jobs, many former rebels started to lose their faith in government.
This time, peace talks are proceeding on two tracks: formal negotiations and a rehabilitation and development program. Silvestre Afable, head of the government negotiating panel, describes this as a “holistic approach.” Comparing the two processes, the agenda with the MNLF was very secular. They were focused on political power-sharing. With the MILF, it’s more the preservation of the Islamic community and heritage.
Malaysia plays a big role in the two tracks. It has offered to help BDA in providing skills training for Filipino Muslims, including MILF members. The plan is to send them to Kuala Lumpur where they can be trained in areas like managing projects, preparing budgets and feasibility studies, and running an office—to hone them for work once a peace agreement is reached. In the case of the MNLF, the rebels turned government officials ran the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao miserably. They missed opportunities to seize investments and aid because they lacked the necessary skills. They took over the reins of government without administrative experience, without knowing how to run a project, not even clerical skills. The MILF has an edge because they can rely on professionals.
Malaysia’s help is timely. As head of the Organization of Islamic Conference, it has new clout in the Islamic world. It can be more persuasive in asking other Muslim countries to assist in the talks. Malaysia has offered to train madrasah teachers in Mindanao as well to avoid the propagation of militant Islam. Malaysia plans to ask countries like Turkey and Morocco to be involved in the training of madrasah teachers. Brunei has already started training our madrasah teachers. Candao, Juanday, and Dipatuan are also working on a skills training program for young Muslims. They want to come up with a critical mass of trained Muslims to start the development engine growing. Muslim Mindanao provinces are among the poorest in the country and illiteracy rates are high. In this setting, Candao, Juanday, and Dipatuan serve as role models. They’re new task is to heal communities wounded by war.
On a parallel track, a move has raised hopes among the MILF officials and the government. In 2004, a group of international observers, led by Malaysian officials, arrived in Mindanao. Their task is to monitor the implementation of the ceasefire. The group has met with the rebels and government officials and has visited the military camps of both sides.
The international team includes members from Islamic countries and is based in parts of Mindanao. They are expected to see to it that the ceasefire, which has been violated many times in the past, will hold. It is also possible that part of their work will be to check if foreign militants are training in MILF camps. This is a breakthrough in the three-year on-again, off-again talks that have been disrupted by skirmishes. The mood in the MILF is one of “guarded optimism,” says Mohaqher Iqbal, the head of their negotiating panel. In fact, he says, their problem is managing raised expectations among their members.
The talks have come a long way from the lowest point in 2004 when the military bombed their base on the day the Hajj ended, one of the biggest celebrations in Islam. This was followed by a series of rebel bombings and an almost daily violent incident.
Both sides have been able to avert conflicts because of the fast reporting system. The visit of the advance ceasefire monitoring team is a boost, a signal that the talks are on track. Many see this as a “new momentum, a sign of hope.” This is the first time that Malaysia is directly involved in brokering peace talks. This is the “strongest role” they are playing as a peacemaker.
Since President Gloria Arroyo came to power in 2000, Malaysia has been mediating and hosting the talks, usually held in Kuala Lumpur. Philippine officials say that Malaysia’s “Prosper Thy Neighbor” policy is key in all this. Malaysia believes that if peace comes to Mindanao, Malaysian businessmen can invest, especially in palm oil plantations.
Likewise, Filipino Muslims will no longer seek refuge in Sabah. There, thousands of Filipinos have migrated illegally to avoid the war and find jobs. Malaysia has been cracking down on illegal migrants and has deported thousands of Filipinos who worked in their construction industry and agricultural plantations.
Then Prime Minister Mahathir took an active role in getting the talks off the ground. Immediately after President Arroyo assumed office, she wrote Mahathir requesting his help in resolving the conflict. Mahathir responded by sending his staff to Mindanao to meet with the MILF rebels and pave the way for the negotiations. Three years ago, MILF leaders trekked to Kuala Lumpur to meet with Mahathir. It was unusual for guerrillas to be given an audience by Malaysia’s leader—but he had a message for them. In the 40-minute meeting, he practically lectured the Muslim rebels about giving up their secessionist dream. Under Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, the commitment remains.
Relations between Manila and Kuala Lumpur have not always been this rosy. In the 1970s, Malaysia provided safe haven for Muslim rebels. They trained in the jungles of Sabah. During the term of President Joseph Estrada, relations turned icy after Estrada publicly sided with Mahathir’s enemy, Anwar Ibrahim. Today, the government and the MILF have yet to talk about the most difficult issue—the alternative to secession. It is not clear what form of autonomy Manila will offer but President Arroyo has said that she is open to a federal system of government as a way to ease the conflict in Mindanao. This will mean amending the Philippine Constitution. That could be a long-term solution.
On a larger scale, the challenge facing media organizations and practicing journalists in covering the Muslim rebellion in the Philippines centers on the ability to report a highly nuanced conflict in a terrorism-obsessed or terrorism-driven news world. Not only that. Add the 24/7 news ethos—and the tendency is to gloss over the real character of the conflict. The new technologies have helped make reporting less insightful and more sensationalist.
To view the MILF from the lens of terrorism is to misunderstand it. Social, economic, and cultural factors drive this rebellion and these get lost in the reporting because of the need to simplify issues. News, as we know, is a window on the world; the window frame excludes the rest from view.
The Muslim rebellion, like other conflicts, is partly what the media makes it. Media can shape military strategies and the intensity of fighting. Media have a critical role in shaping public debate. They set the agenda.
The dominant framework is to see conflict as a contest between two sides. Journalists therefore are like outsiders arriving at a sporting event.
For example, some photojournalists and TV journalists like to make soldiers and rebels pose for the cameras. One reporter witnessed this: a TV crew asked soldiers to fire away so that they could record the scene. This, even after the fighting had stopped. In journalists’ parlance, this is called “drawing,” meaning a set-up.
In a way, reporting can impede peace. A media NGO, the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR), concludes that “shallow coverage with little background information leads to superficial understanding of the conflict…The disturbing paucity of background material raises the question of how well the press made this crisis comprehensible to the public, since events reported out of context are usually open to misunderstanding…”
A Mindanao-based priest, Roberto Layson, who has been involved in inter-faith programs, wrote an essay on how he views coverage of the conflict. Overall, he sees much of the reporting to be unhelpful and, instead, promotes war.
“I consider journalists as my allies and also my foes…It was the media that prepared the minds of people into supporting the war (in 2000). TV screens were filled with footage of war materiel, soldiers firing machine guns and artillery mortars, simba tanks masterfully maneuvering mountainous terrains, assault helicopters firing rockets on rebel positions and OV10 bomber planes dropping deadly bombs on enemy lines…War was sensationalized and glamorized on the front pages of the national dailies and local newspapers. Broadcast media practically reduced the war to a war movie between heroes and villains.”
Layson continues: “ News reporting has become an exercise in mathematics, namely, reporting the number of casualties between the warring parties.”
“I was watching TV news one night on their coverage of the situation in Pikit (where evacuees were). First, they showed the reporter with his microphone standing at the plaza, with the town hall on the background. The Manila reporter was narrating a war that was taking place in another area. Then it showed footage of soldiers in full battle gear advancing towards enemy lines. After the long footage, the reporter was back on the screen. The camera slowly moved to the left and caught one evacuee sitting near a makeshift tent. The footage of the woman did not last three seconds.”
“I was disappointed because there was actually a sea of tents in that plaza and inside those makeshift tents were about 5,000 evacuees—mostly children, women, elderly, and babies.”
Eliseo Mercado, a priest who has closely watched the conflict, said: “There is a preponderance of coverage on the combatants of both sides. While the combatants are both heroes and villains in war, there are actors and principals in war. The important connection between the combatants and the people are often lost when attention is focused on the actual battles.”
Layson and Mercado’s views are not isolated. Media professionals and other sectors (government, NGOs, among others) have pointed to poor media coverage of Mindanao as a problem. These groups focused on three criticisms: “lack of context, indiscriminate use of language and labels, and sensationalistic coverage.” This is caused by the structure of media, including low pay, competition driven by ratings and sales, and lack of education among reporters and editors about the conflict.
Thus, some constraints to free and fair functioning of media in conflict coverage include ignorance; lack of familiarity with issues not only on the part of reporters, but more importantly on the part of editors; urgency of deadlines; a tendency to quote military sources more than rebel sources or neutral sources (as shown by a local study); and limited resources for coverage.
The CMFR, in a content analysis of major newspapers in March-June 2000, found out that of the 1,633 articles covering the conflict between the military and the MILF, only 22—just over one percent—attempted to “put events in Mindanao in a socio-historical context so as to broaden public understanding of the crisis.” The same study showed that “the overwhelming source of information as far as the news stories and some of the opinion pieces were concerned—a total of 1,428—was government, which was the source for 1,055 of the above articles.”
Journalists failed to adequately distinguish between different parties to the conflict, the MNLF, MILF, and civilian Muslim groups. A TV journalist even said there was no difference between the MILF and the Abu Sayyaf, that they were all related, conspiring to overthrow the government. (Abu Sayyaf is an extremist group. The MILF has denounced the Abu Sayyaf.)
The use of Christian and Muslim labels, even if religion has nothing to do with stories, continues—i.e. Muslim kidnappers/bandits but never Christian kidnappers/bandits. With such kind of reporting, the roots of conflict are not illuminated. It does not throw light on the political and economic processes that generate conflict. It does not address the complex relationship between state and rebels, elites and rebels.
What is missing in this framework is a detailed analysis of the relationship between civilians and insurgents. Civilians often join an insurgent group or a paramilitary group for a variety of reasons. In the context of a weak state, where resources are scarce to allow for a large, salaried army, very often a combination of factors such as poverty and lack of opportunity prompt civilians to join militias. Moreover, journalists’ attempts to analyze the root causes of conflicts may be inhibited by a number of factors. One is the desire to get close to the action. On occasions, they are so close that they are unable to find out anything except that the situation is dangerous. Journalists may also depend on the military for access and information, something that may make it difficult to develop a perspective that is radically different from that of the military.
We saw the phenomenon of embedded journalism during the Iraq war. It has its merits—but it should not be the sole element in reporting. For TV, the anchorperson is vital in giving a big picture. In print, it is the editor. By the nature of embedded journalism, the scope is narrow but can be helpful. It shows one point of view but gives reporters wide access. The caveat is for reporters to be able to keep distance even while experiencing the same difficulties, lows and highs, of the units he/she is embedded with.
Another challenge is how to report dispassionately on the conflict—as against being biased for either party in conflict. Through the years, the Philippine media have contributed to the building of stereotypes of Muslims, thus adding to the prejudice against them. It is a tenet that the journalist has the responsibility not to be inflammatory. This acknowledges the power of media to provoke emotional, extreme and even violent actions from audiences through the use of certain words and images.
The processes and dilemmas of individuals who write/deliver the news—reporters, photographers, editors, and media corporation executives—are instructive. “You go after the truth, but you may never find it. Or you may find 10 or 20 truths,” a war correspondent once said. Recognizing the fallibility, if not the occasional deceit of sources, individual reporters and various news organizations develop standards for testing the truthfulness of a story. Are two or more independent sources providing the same information? Did the journalist see and hear the evidence himself or herself or get it secondhand? What are the credibility, reputation and motivation of the source?
In sum, the consequences of poor coverage of the conflict in Mindanao are: reinforced stereotypes, and, some analysts say, “a weakened democracy by depriving policymakers and the general public of accurate information they need to engage in informed debate over the future of the region.” Moreover, media analysts point out that this has “undermined the region’s economy by chasing off needed economic investment with exaggerated reports of instability and sensationalistic coverage of violence.”
One other area of concern is the relationship between media and government as well as other elites. A media organization, for example, should not be unduly influenced by government as well as vested interests. It should stay independent.
What are the key elements essential to create an adequate environment for competent reporting and analysis of conflict?
1. Resources, from competitive salaries to hazard pay and insurance.
2. Training of reporters in physical coverage (safety measures) and issue content. Also in fact-checking.
3. Training of editors in issue content. They should also be expected to gain more field exposure.
4. Regional sharing of experiences in covering conflict – sharing of experiences with other countries. This expands horizons and promises to be a good learning experience.
5. Media literacy. The aim is to make readers and viewers aware of how media organizations work and make decisions. This will help make media accountable. The public, ultimately, should be discerning and should learn to ask questions about conflict reporting. There are various ways of achieving this:
6. Strengthen ethical standards – including the nuances of “paying” for information. There are cases when rebels or members of extremist groups ask for some form of donation. When reporters covered the extremist group, Abu Sayyaf, during the period that they held hostages, it was rather common for the Abu Sayyaf or their aides to ask reporters for stuff such as rubber shoes, clothes, etc. Some gave in, others didn’t.
7. Support for independent and responsible media, both on the national and community levels.
Powered by: Phase2 TechnologyLinks:
[1] http://newsbreak.com.ph/newsbreak/home.asp
[2] http://www.concernedjournalists.org/philippines-payoffs-journalists-lets-publicly-acknowledge-practice-and-work-stop-it
[3] http://www.concernedjournalists.org/comment/reply/552#comment_form