|
THERE was an awkward moment during the dialogue
between the government representatives and journalists at the Pen a
week after the Trillianes walkout. Ms. Jessica Soho, representing
GMA 7, opened her remarks with a disclaimer—that she was joining
the talks even if her station was not a member of the Kapisanan ng
mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas (KBP).
GMA officials say they withdrew
from the KBP in 2003 on the ground that the KBP was no longer
necessary in a democratic setting. Speaking through Mr. Felipe Gozon,
GMA said the KBP was a thing of the past and its present role would
only duplicate the regulatory functions of the National
Telecommunications Commission, the Movie and TV Review and
Classification Board and, on the matter of libel cases, the courts.
In the opinion of Gozon, a
voluntary organization like the KBP should work for the common
interest of the members, just like the chambers of commerce and the
trade organizations. It should not engage in the work of
arbitration. Nor should it engage in regulation.
As we remember, there were other
issues in the GMA withdrawal. For instance, GMA disagreed with the
decision by the KBP Standards Authority on the violations allegedly
committed by actress Rosanna Roces on the air and on overloading of
commercials in radio and TV programs. The issues were laid to rest
when GMA withdraw from the KBP even before it could decide on
GMA’s motion for reconsideration.
In both cases, GMA observed that
the other network—meaning ABS-CBN—seemed to have escaped the
regulatory eye of the KBP. Hindi raw patas ang KBP. GMA particularly
referred to a popular ABS-CBN host who was “habitually”
violating the television code of ethics. It also noted that the
other network was also doing “overloading.”
It is unfortunate that the KBP
cannot assert its clout now that GMA and ABS seem to be engaged in a
war of attrition over surveys. There is no mechanism now—whether
private or public—which can call the two television giants to a
dialogue to settle their conflict.
Perhaps, the KBP should repackage
itself to become a relevant institution for media. It should remove
from its charter the provision that allows it to act as the ethical
and moral guardian of the industry. Nobody has given it that power
to be the ombudsman of the stations! This is no longer martial law.
If it tries to continue that role, it will find itself with no
members in the not-so-distant future.
Once the KBP reestablishes itself
as the spokesman of the industry vis-à-vis the government and all
other constituencies, only then will it be able to act as the
arbiter of conflicts. KBP should also try to hold a dialogue with
the GMA people for a possible return to the organization. After all,
GMA -7 is a big organization. A KBP without GMA is like the United
Nations without China.
By the way, the new President of
the KBP is Ms. Maloli Espinosa, a former vice president of ABS-CBN.
She has a lot of problems in her hands, specially now that deep
divisions are happening within the industry. Whether she likes it or
not, she has to say something about the suit filed by ABS in the
Supreme Court, seeking a writ of amparo.
India, China and the future
We woke up yesterday to see the
headlines about the “meltdown,” “panic-selling,” and
“stocks savaged” all over the world. This came as the United
States was struck by fears of recession. It’s a common view here
that an economic fallout in the US affects the Philippines
immediately.
Unfortunately, we in the
Philippines are not prepared for this crisis. We are talking about
issues that have no bearing on strengthening the economy. This
cannot be said of our ASEAN brothers who seem to be more prepared
than us.
India and China are the new
players in the international scene. The British prime minister had
even proposed that India become part of the UN Security Council, as
a recognition of the new balance of power. Perhaps, it is time for
us to think of this new reality.
|
