Matter of responsibilities

As an alter-ego of the President, Sec. Edwin Lacierda should put in his mind that the words he utters everyday are not his anymore but of the president. It’s not a matter of depriving him from his rights; it’s a matter of fulfilling his responsibilities.

The Media asked Sec. Lacierda what is the stance of P-NOY towards the rejected appeals by a group of employees of the ABS-CBN for complaints of unfair labor practices by management. The only answer he gave is that the ABS-CBN is a publicly listed company and it has its own management, thus P-NOY doesn’t need to step into these since there are appropriate agencies that could address such issue.

Given that Sec. Lacierda is correct upon pointing out that there are appropriate agencies that are more equipped and knowledgeable in addressing the employees’ appeal, can’t he not, as part of the new administration, look into to these complaints?

If Sec. Lacierda’s excuse is ignorance on these matters then why not consult the government’s Labor Secretary to forward these appeals?

His statement saying that “P-NOY doesn’t need to” involve himself to the issues is a horrifying statement that would threaten the 80 percent trust rate of Filipino People have for the new president. These words are words that could eventually slap Pres. Aquino’s credibility and even his capacity to provide a justful governance at the end of the day.

Assuming but not conceding that Sec. Lacierda is still “learning the ropes” within the government, still the excuse isn’t valid to simply reject complaints from laborers who allegedly suffered injustices from a Kapamilya network.

We should not forget that once you step into the doors of Malacanang and seat on one of its chairs, you should be ready to face and respond the various problems that are nation has.

Again, “the president doesn’t need to do anything”. But as long as P-NOY would favor justice and affirm protection of Filipino laborers’ rights, he must and he will do something. Whether the problem is small or big, private or public –the president must have something to say.

“We will learn from the mistakes of the past administration” If this is what P-NOY wants to happen in his regime, he should listen to the voice of the minorities; the voices that were neglected by the previous administration. He should let his allies learned the sense of sensitivity and sympathy.

We know that Sec. Lacierda is part of the civil society groups who opposed the past regime. But now, Heis part of the new regime, the Palace Spokesperson, the voice of the president

These are lessons that should be learned. Again, it won’t deprive the spokesperson; it would only correct his duties and responsibilities.

inspired by Ma’am Susan Ople’s advocacy

Pointing fingers

In the recent hostage-taking incident in the country, media played a big role in disseminating information to the public –not only locally but also internationally. Broadcast media used its very power to cover every single drama and action found in the said incident. Through media’s blow-by-blow coverage, the world has witnessed the hostage’s bloody ending.

Despite of the media’s boldness to air the scenario, many fingers are now pointing them as one of the factors why the police’s action has been jeopardized; blaming them as the reason why the hostage-taker became more agitated at the end of the day.

In this moment, media faces the question whether or not they have covered the incident just for the sake of ratings and profit. Whether or not they have forgotten the ethical guidelines in airing news. Whether or not they have contributed something in the crime.

In times when national security is at stake, there should be measures for coverage that must be followed. These measures must be set not to impede the rights of media to practice their duty rather to pacify a crucial scenario. It’s a matter of limiting possible intrusiveness, disclosing vital information and protecting the lives involved. With these, the duty of media in keeping us updated with the stories that concerns us wouldn’t be hampered. Hence, it would create an avenue where media could establish a character that knows how to cope with the authorities.

However, the government has failed to provide such measures. They even missed to coordinate properly with the media to make their operation smoother and to put things in order.

We couldn’t simply point our fingers to an institution that caters our thirst for information. Blaming the media for a police operation flaw is an act of immaturity. Since its very nature is to expose things and give us the necessary details. We cannot simply halt them. The more we put broadcast media out of the scene, the more harmful would it be. How could we determine truth then when there’s no watchdog present? How could we know that there’s a hostage-taking incident near Luneta if they were not there?

Let us not forget that it is media’s right to inform and it’s the people’s right to be informed. Media in general protects the best interest of the majority. It’s for the sake of service. It’s for the country.

But if indeed the media has done something wrong, let the institution correct itself. If the government will identity what kind of flaw the media has done, let the government do something about it.

The Monday’s crisis must be a lesson learned to our country. We could never resurrect the lives of the victims by pointing fingers whom to blame, let us try to evaluate and plan for better actions instead. With that, we could move on.