Community Journalism in the Philippines

Emerging Trends in Community Journalism

Public journalism is also called in many other names - such as, public agenda, civic journalism, public service journalism and community assisted reporting. Poynter Institute for Media Studies simply calls it community journalism. Public Journalism is a trend that emerged in the late 1980’s in the United States and continues to achieve widespread effects. It is a movement that aims for reforms in the practice of journalism.

A better understanding of public journalism is given by Natasha Hunter in her article on the subject (2001). Quoting Michael Schudson in his critique Public Journalism and Its Problems, she describes three models of journalism which is at work in a democracy: the market model, the advocacy model, and the trustee model. In the market model, “the journalist serves the public whatever it likes, whatever sells.” Journalists make editorial choices depending on what they think the audience would want to read or hear. This can be said what characterizes the kind of reporting the media engage in at present. The advocacy model is still practiced in many parts of Europe and Latin America and even in the Philippines. In this model, “journalists play the role of what America would be called ‘public relations experts’, placing the desired spin and slant on the news for their cause and party.” In the trustee model, “journalists strive to inform the public of what they need to know to remain active citizens.” According to Hunter, civic or public journalism becomes an extension of the trustee model, “with journalists calling upon themselves to take a more active role in informing the citizenry. (Hunter, 2001)

The first signs of the emergence of public journalism in the United States happened during the 1988 presidential campaign where media had been held hostage by the negative campaign tactics of opposing parties and did not pay attention “about issues that mattered to the voters like health care, education, race relations and economy.” (Hippocrates, 1998)

Even before the 1988 US presidential election, which many claimed was the turning point for journalism to look introspectively and examine itself, others were saying that the realization something was wrong in the media was already happening.

A feeling of malaise was slowly creeping in the consciousness of journalists committed in the practice of their craft. The public seems not interested in participating in the political discourse. They feel alienated and don’t trust the media that much. The media, on its end began to question “long-held assumptions about what a media in a healthy democracy look like.” (Hunter, 2001)

Jay Rosen, an active advocate of public journalism believes that a concerned press is the antidote to a wayward American media that was unabashedly interested in the cult of personality and not of substance that matters in the life of citizens. Rosen believes that the press can help revitalize democratic processes and public dialogue between citizens and government by involving itself in the ongoing discourse. (Hippocrates, 1998)

Proponents of public journalism are convinced that journalists ought to practice their profession as a participant and not merely a spectator of public life. Journalists, on the other hand, are reluctant to practice this kind of journalism because of fear that it would distort their sense of objectivity and put their independence into question. Critics also argue that public journalism is tantamount into creating a fourth model, wherein authority is vested not on the market, or the journalist, but in the public. (Hunter, 2001)

Studies on Public Journalism

Several news organizations in the United States have embraced this new paradigm of journalism although critics continue to raise questions concerning loss of objectivity and credibility. “When the press starts to take an active role in civic life, advocating rather than informing, mediating rather than observing, it may be sacrificing its own credibility.” (Hunter, 2001) But despite criticisms, civic journalism projects abound and advocates continue to support the movement.

In her dissertation on the development of public journalism, Sandra Nichols of University of Wisconsin claimed that although the practice of public journalism seemed to have achieved widespread effects with several US news organizations engaged in doing it, still the movement has not achieved full institutionalization. Nichols’ study provided a comprehensive analysis of the news organizations engaged in public journalism. Her study also revealed the development of community issues that have been tackled, and how journalists tapped into communities to make them participate in various events and activities where problems needed to be solved. (Nichols, 2003)

Another study on public journalism was done by Barbara Zang in 1997, in which she discussed the participatory nature of public journalism. In her case study of The Sun, a daily paper in Washington, DC that practices public journalism, Zang discusses the relationship of the newspaper to the community it serves. Her interviews and other documentary data revealed mixed reactions and attitudes between journalists and citizens on the practice of public journalism. Citizens appreciate The Sun’s participation in community life which made citizens viewed them as credible. But journalists think participation made them less credible because it questions their sense of objectivity. Readers also appreciate the newspaper for opening more space for readers to write in their views. The study concludes that “community building is a vital possible role for the press.” It is inevitable that journalists will not find it easy to participate given their professional training. However, Zang suggested that maybe it is time these journalism standards and values be questioned in the background of a democratic community life. (Zang, 1997)

One of the arguments that public journalism spawned is its lack of clear definition that consequently create uncertainty and fear on those who questioned it. In an article entitled Public Journalism and the Problem of Objectivity, Meyer defined the elements of what public journalism should be. He said that more than anything else, public journalism is all about a desire to rebuild a community’s sense of itself. Public journalism should lead journalists to get the community’s attention on important issues and discuss with them issues that affect our lives deeply and extensively. Public journalism also gives more attention to what is essential than what is peripheral by providing substance especially in its coverage of political affairs. Another important element is fostering deliberation among citizens by listening to what they have to say. (Meyer, 1995)

Public Journalism in the Philippines

The concept of public journalism gained ground in the Philippines in late 1995. It was introduced to local communities to help them better understand their role on how best they can participate in the development of public agenda. Journalists, at first, were wary of the concept. But eventually, it caught on with community journalists. They thought it was worth experimenting. (Pabico, 2001)

The emergence of public journalism in the country paralleled that of the United States, where journalists began to reconsider their relationship with local communities which they observe to have become indifferent and less participative in local governance processes of which they are a part.

There have not been empirical studies done locally on this topic yet, although articles have been written especially by those who have participated in various workshops done in the country to promote public journalism among community journalists.

Public journalism is an ideal model especially in a country like the Philippines where a sense of community comes naturally and very much a component of the cultural consciousness of the people.

A close examination of community press revealed that the practice of public journalism is slowly taking root among community journalists.


“Public journalism is the animating spirit behind the initiatives done by print and broadcast journalists from Aklan, Iloilo, Negros Occidental, Palawan and Mindano who have ceased to regard their readers and viewers as victims and mere spectators. Instead they see them as real participants with vital roles to play in their localities.” (Pabico, 2001)

Studies on Community Journalism

Most of the studies done on community journalism seemed to follow the pattern that Maslog has traced in his study of community newspapers.

The scope of studies done on community journalism mostly dwelt on case and historical studies of a particular community newspaper. These studies usually determine the length of time the newspaper has been publishing, its impact on the community and its capability to stay in the business. Other studies tackled the role of particular newspapers in bringing public agenda into the consciousness of the public and determined whether the newspaper is faithful in living up its role as watchdog and advocates of truth.

One study investigated on the possible control politicians have on the newspaper that had impact on the newspaper’s sense of objectivity.

A study on the feasibility of putting up a newspaper in a certain city was also done. This study shows how communities see the importance of a local paper that would voice out their concerns on issues close to their hearts.

There is a case study on participatory journalism in the context of development. The perspective of this study is very specific since it deals particularly on the plight of farmers. This is one feature of community journalism and the participatory aspect is reflective of public journalism, although on closer inspection it would probably fall under advocacy journalism.

The community that was engaged in this study was a group of farmers who were struggling to make their voices heard. The cases that were included in the study showed how these farming communities did not trust the government and even the media because nobody among these so-called “experts” was concerned about their plight. Through the help of NGO’s and development scientists the farming communities found their voice and told their stories from own perspectives.

The study noted that much of the journalistic materials created for the farming communities were produced by city-based organizations, often adapting concepts that are foreign to rural community. The methods applied are top-down approach or western model of communication which seldom involved participation from people who are the recipients of information.

Reconnecting with Communities

The scenario presented in this case study is a reflection of the sense of alienation ordinary folks had to contend with especially with regards to dealing with the so-called experts on the field, media or otherwise.

Local journalists, on their part, try to reconnect with their communities, acknowledging the importance of working hand in hand to bring about changes in the community.

Whether public journalism will progress in the country, given the unruly nature of the Philippine press still remains to be seen. But one thing is certain, the press, whether national or local need to heed the call of the times. They have to reexamine their role in the communities they have acknowledged to serve. There is a need for media, as Red Batario puts it, “to not only engage citizens and communities directly to help them find solutions to their own problems but also for them to become part of the democratization process.” (Batario, 2000)