So Valentine’s Day came a bit early for the voting public as senatorial candidates from two of the biggest political parties in the country wooed the people of Cebu and Manila during their individual proclamation rallies last Wednesday.
Based on the televised video footages, throngs of supporters inundated both rally venues. The historic Plaza Miranda in Manila became the springboard for Liberal Party’s nationwide campaign, while Cebu’s Plaza Independencia witnessed the official drive kick-off for the United Nationalist Alliance.
There could have been not much of a disparity between how the two parties held their respective campaign starters if not for how our national TV networks presented their news.
I was watching the news on TV last Wednesday night to follow on these proclamation rallies and I noticed that these networks placed Liberal Party’s proclamation rally on top of any news that night. Second was UNA’s proclamation rally in Cebu.
At that point, I just let the moment pass and considered it as a mere observation. After all, I know very well that the way news is delivered, regardless of form e.g. on TV, radio and print, is based on its degree of importance and prominence as opposed to the other stories. I thought the TV networks must have seen more weight on Liberal Party’s event considering that it had the most powerful man in the Philippines on the stage.
However, news on the following night and even news aired during the following day still had the campaign of the Liberal Party mentioned first before UNA’s. The reports went to broadcast LP’s sortie in Batangas first before UNA’s courting the Boholanos.
Okay, allow me to point out that I’m in no way connected to any of these parties nor am I campaigning for UNA, but I think the manner by which our national TV news networks have presented their stories is rather inequitable to UNA. Not in the sense that UNA is not being given the airtime, but in the sense that televiewers are perpetually made to realize that the Liberal Party is the more prominent party as against the other.
By making each and every move of Liberal Party the main story of the night and UNA’s goings on secondary only, you unknowingly introduce to the watchers a form of hierarchy. And I think this simply implants to the watcher’s subconscious a sense of “one is more popular than the other†kind of thing.
Now that gives Liberal Party an uncalled-for advantage, which by the same token, also hands to UNA an uncalled-for disadvantage. And that’s not just fair.
In these critical times of the election season, every politician is willing to risk it all in the name of exposure. One politician’s gain could mean the loss of the other. Therefore, it is imperative for our media to be keen in their delivery so that no one gets the unwarranted benefit.
Back at our student publication called The Carolinian, for example, we’re on our toes with updates from candidates running for our University’s Supreme Student Council elections this March. And for every post we make online, we make it certain that when names of the candidates are mentioned, we do not arrange them according to some definite order, not even alphabetical.
Editorially speaking, the randomness of the way the names are mentioned may be a little bit messy and disorderly, but in substance, that same way actually does not sacrifice the integrity of its delivery. In fact, it leaves no room for bias and does not engender a culture of hierarchy to the readers.
In order to bring about reliable results to national elections, a comprehensive collaboration must exist among the voters, the candidates, the overseeing agencies, and the media. A simple slip from any of these entities may put the whole process in peril. The result? Another sad election story for the Philippines.
Please, let’s all avoid that lonely road.