|
By Chay F. Hofileńa and Aries Rufo, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism
(Last of two parts)
CAN elections really be an even battleground?
That is a question that campaign strategists and
media organizations have to grapple with, given the caps on election
spending and the limits set by the Fair Elections Act on campaign
advertising and media exposure.
In this election, as in the 1998 presidential
and 2001 senatorial polls, radio networks are striking million-peso
deals with campaign managers that allow candidates and parties to
circumvent legal limits on advertising and media exposure. These
deals involve “commercial packages” offered to candidates that
include a guaranteed number of press releases, daily interviews and
rally coverage aired on the networks.
These packages cleverly fuse paid-for political
ads, which are allowed by election laws, with common newsgathering
methods that are not supposed to have a price. The problem is that
they deceive the audience, who are led to believe they are hearing
legitimate news, not paid-for press releases.
In the eighties the media—especially TV and
radio—became crucial ingredients in political campaigns. Political
analysts and campaign insiders say that at present, one-third of the
campaign budget goes to the media. As media costs rise, campaigns
have also become even more expensive and more innovative, prompting
candidates to seek ways that will give them more bang for their
buck.
These have included the “wholesale” deals
they strike with a few enterprising broadcast stations, even as
“retail” arrangements between some politicos and many individual
journalists persist. The result is not only the violation of the
Fair Elections Act, which limits election spending by candidates and
parties, but also the continued corruption of the media.
Yolanda Ong, a top advertising executive and
Raul Roco supporter, for instance, says that in 2001 the People
Power Coalition (PPC) spent about P87 million on TV ads alone. But,
she adds, the “unreceipted amounts were four to five times
more.”
That same year the PPC spent about P2 million to
P3 million a month on one radio station alone, recalls a campaign
insider. The amount covered the PPC’s entire senatorial slate and
included arrangements for radio spots and interviews for a set fee.
Insiders say the “commercial packages”
offered by some radio stations first evolved as a means to
circumvent the political ad ban, which was lifted only in 2001.
Originally designed as an option for candidates who wanted access to
the airwaves without resorting to direct advertising, such packages
have remained part of the menu offered to candidates even now that
the ban has been lifted.
In the beginning, the entry of political ads
resulted in roughly a 10-percent annual increase in billings,
according to Ruperto Nicdao Jr., president of the Manila
Broadcasting Co., which operates the radio giant DZRH. But, he adds,
“It’s picking up now because it’s a tight contest. In 2001
there was no mad scramble at the end of the campaign. Now there is
that mad scramble, especially for the “senatoriables,” because
the 8th to 16th slot are up for grabs. They are jockeying for
“top-of-mind awareness.”
Ricardo Puno, ABS-CBN vice president for news
and public affairs, says the TV stations got only insignificant
“incremental revenue” in the early part of the campaign. But TV
insiders say that the last-minute scramble for advertising is
evident in television as well.
The first time some radio stations tried to go
around the ad ban by offering candidates “commercial packages”
was in 1998. Despite the lifting of the ban, however, these radio
stations are offering the same packages they did in previous
elections.
Ong, group chair of the advertising agency
Campaigns and Grey, says that one radio station has offered some
candidates—among them her client, Raul Roco—P20-million packages
to cover the 90-day campaign. Ong was told similar offers were made
to at least two senatorial candidates and two other presidential
contenders.
The contract guaranteed three interviews a week,
call-ins that are favorable to the candidate, an “embedded”
reporter and a package of radio ad spots. Though supposedly a
contract, the offer did not come with an official receipt.
When Ong complained about what she thought was
an irregular deal to a columnist, the radio station brought the
price down to P11 million and offered to give her a receipt. Ong
refused to approve the deal.
Nicdao sees nothing wrong with such an
arrangement. He says that DZRH itself offers candidates a package of
discounted radio ad spots and a reporter to cover rallies,
particularly the miting de avance or proclamation rally.
He estimates that the station would need
P200,000 to cover production costs, airtime and a two-hour miting de
avance coverage.
“It’s an arms-length commercial
transaction,” says Nicdao, who is also president of the Kapisanan
ng mga Brodkaster sa Pilipinas. “We provide the facilities—I
don’t think this is unethical or violative of the ethics code.
This is equal opportunity for everybody. It serves a social purpose:
to inform the public about what candidates are espousing.”
Considering the cost of placing a political ad,
these packages are tempting to candidates. DZRH commands P20,000 for
every 30 seconds for political ads. A 30-seconder on prime-time TV,
meanwhile, can drain a candidate’s wallet of as much as P230,000.
A candidate running for national office would
need “at least P28 million” for national coverage in about five
key radio stations located in major vote-rich areas, according to
Nicdao’s estimates.
The Fair Elections Act allows candidates seeking
a national post 180 minutes for each radio station and 120 minutes
for each TV station, subject to the limitations on campaign expenses
set by the Omnibus Election Code. The Code says that a candidate may
spend no more than P1.50 for every registered voter within his or
her jurisdiction. The same cap is set for spending by political
parties.
The Act also mandates TV stations to offer
candidates a 30-percent discount and radio 20 percent over average
rates charged during the first three quarters of the year preceding
the elections.
Even if a candidate were to follow the law’s
limits on spending, he or she would be spending at most P5.76
million per radio station if the ad were run for the entire duration
of the campaign. A TV ad campaign may mean up to P82 million per
station (180 minutes at P230,000 per 30 seconds).
Out-and-out ads, however, simply do not have the
same impact on listeners or viewers as a news piece that sings
praises of a candidate or an interview that allows a politico to go
on and on without much challenge from anyone.
It would therefore not be surprising if the
commercial packages offered by some stations have many takers.
Besides DZRH, Radio Mindanao Network, or RMN,
also offers package proposals that include a certain number of
interviews, radio spots, a number of press releases a month and
jingle playbacks.
A candidate can choose a nationwide, already
discounted P5-million package or a lower nationwide P2.5-million
package to cover a month’s campaign only.
The actual cost of the P5-million package is
more than P21 million, an RMN proposal says, accounting for a
76-percent saving. This includes four 30-second spots a day for one
month on the station’s satellite news program that is aired
simultaneously in 30 AM and FM stations.
In addition, a candidate is supposed to get two
interviews a month aired on the nationwide news program and eight
interviews a month on any provincial station of choice. He also gets
eight press releases a month on the nationwide news time
slots—“this is an opportunity to mention the candidate’s
accomplishments as a news item,” the pay-before-broadcast proposal
says.
A candidate is also entitled to 12 press
releases a month on Pila Balita, an hourly newsbreak of RMN Manila,
two features on the station’s Know Your Candidate segment that
will include a two- to three-minute interview, 80 jingle playbacks
for a month across all its 22 FM stations nationwide, “one liner
in a month in all FM stations,” and one interview in all its FM
stations.
RMN-Davao also sent several presidential
candidates a proposal itemizing a P30,000 “media-mileage”
package. It covered a 15-minute evening interview, two spots a day
for 15 days of “Araw ng Davao” greetings, and “air plugs
through ad lib from jocks” in the morning and afternoon or
evening.
Ely Saludar, RMN Manila’s OIC station manager,
says the network’s account managers package the deals so they
could offer something more attractive to their clients. But he
justifies the arrangements, saying, “We’re just doing what is
allowed by the [Commission on Elections].”
Less well-known networks have taken the cue from
the bigger stations. The ironically named Credible Media Network, or
CMN, for example, has a P3.78-million package that covers its 29
provincial stations.
The most expensive among the six deals it offers
candidates, the package includes 360 30-second radio spots per
station for the entire campaign period, press releases or at least
thrice-a-week regular interviews of the candidate or his spokesman
between Monday and Saturday at prime-time hours at a 24-hour notice,
response interview in case of negative issues, and live coverage by
a local CMN station in case of on-site campaigns.
The proposal specifies that a candidate provide
the newscast feeds, “call or arrange to be called during the
designated prime-time hour to avail himself of the interviews and
call-in reply to issues.”
Asked about what he thought of such
“wholesale” trading in airtime, Mike Enriquez, senior vice
president for radio operations and president and CEO of RGMA (which
manages GMA-7 stations in provincial areas), goes only as far as
commenting, “These packages are part of free enterprise. We could
do it if we wanted to, but we choose not to.”
“They’re not something we live or die
for,” he adds. “We have our own share of political business.”
Such a stance may perhaps be expected of a
network as huge and as profitable as GMA-7. Unfortunately, some
people with questionable media credentials now also want a share of
the wholesale trade.
Some supposed journalists, for example, have
been offering “trimedia” services—an approach also used in
previous elections and resurrected this year. Just this February a
group calling itself the Minsupala Integrated Journalists’
Association Inc. submitted a proposal to a presidential candidate.
Composed of newspaper publishers, columnists,
reporters, TV station managers, newscasters and radio broadcasters
from Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan, the group offered a package price
of P3.72 million. In exchange, the candidate would get radio
coverage up to election day, a maximum of three three-minute stories
a week for 12 weeks on local TV and special supplements about his or
her platform and accomplishments in the papers of the group’s
member-publishers.
The allotted take for the eight radio
broadcasters in the group was about P150,000 each; a local TV news
anchor was to get P360,000. The nine newspaper publishers who made
up the rest of the group, however, were to collect the remaining
P2.16 million.
All these, however, have not put a stop to the
retail side of the broadcast media’s shady dealings. Campaign
insiders say that retail media financing, particularly for radio,
remains heavy, especially for the Visayas and Mindanao. For
provincial sorties, say insiders, an hour’s airtime would cost
between P10,000 and P20,000, covered by a contract. For live
coverage the anchor gets P2,000; the reporter gets P500.
One political operator estimates that at the
local level, a high of P70,000 covers expenses for a rally, six
interviews at the rally, plus a press conference. The
press-conference facilitator—usually from the local media—gets
P5,000.
For simple rally coverage, some radio reporters
get P1,000, as do cameramen and their assistants. The rates triple
for out-of-town coverage.
To control coverage and keep it from going
negative, six-month to one-year retainer agreements are forged with
some broadcast people. Onboard radio commentators can get from
P10,000 to P20,000 a month, the operator says.
These are all part of the “goodwill”
political camps try to build and maintain all the way to election
day.
Part 1 |
|
