Sensationalism in News Reporting

News as entertainment

News organizations are always under pressure to boost ratings or increase circulation in the delivery of news. Newspapers print attention grabbing headlines or photos that often times offends sensibilities. News is presented like a form of entertainment that distinction is blurred between what is truly significant or just plain sensationalism.

In an April 2002 issue of Philippine Journalism Review, an article written by Diane Mendoza mentioned how the media treated the issue of Mary Jane Salazar, a sex worker who died of AIDS in the latter half of the 1990’s. Mary Jane’s life story became, to the public, like the soap opera that we see on television everyday, courtesy of the media that lionized her. After Mary Jane’s death of complications from AIDS, the media, in an act of supreme insensitivity and lack of respect for their privacy, revealed her real name and those of her two children.

Another controversial issue, on which the Philippine Daily Inquirer was particularly criticized, was the newspaper’s graphic and sensational coverage of the Jalosjos rape case in 1996. The Philippine Daily Inquirer has conducted an interview in detailed form, which sparked criticisms. Other media outfits were also hit for their sensational coverage of the controversial issue, but severe criticisms focused more on the issue of consent and the excessively graphic nature of PDI interview.

Code of Ethics

Article IV of the Filipino Journalists Code of Ethics read thus: “ I shall refrain from writing reports which will adversely affect a private reputation unless the public interest justifies it. At the same time, I shall fight vigorously for access to information.”

The KBP is more explicit in its treatment of the issue of sensationalism. It says: “Sensationalism of any kind, whether related to crime, social unrest, group agitation, racial or religious discord, competitive sports, must be avoided with utmost care. In the reporting of sex crimes, distasteful or unkind details about the victims and offensive description of the act of crime should be avoided. Court cases should be reported with restraint.”

These ethical guidelines however, tend to blur sometimes as journalists scramble in their pursuit of news. They claim and the media in general, that news should be reported as it is in the interest of the public.

Oakwood Mutiny and Jose Pidal Case

The recent happenings in our country, such as bank robberies, crime, senate probe on money laundering, the Oakwood mutiny, have been fodder for the media. The media reports that we get paint for us a picture of a nation going to the drain. Critics, especially those in the government are blaming the media for resorting to sensationalism. Media defend itself by saying that the public has the right to know the truth and it is the role of the media to provide the information.

The press, however, seems to be engaged in a never-ending orgy of carnivalesque presentation of news. The two recent happenings, the Oakwood mutiny and Jose Pidal case, which actually saw print at the heel of each other have been given too much media mileage to the detriment of the economic situation of the country.

Let us take a closer look at two national broadsheets, the Philippine Daily Inquirer and Manila Bulletin, and see how they treated the said events in their news reportage.

The Philippine Daily Inquirer has been accused many times by concerned readers of resorting to sensationalism by publishing offending photos; not so recent examples of which were the ear-snipping photo done by the Abu Sayyaf and the mutilated bodies of those who have died in the LRT bombing.

Did the press’ coverage (PDI and Bulletin in particular) of the Oakwood mutiny and Jose Pidal case smack of sensationalism and lack of fair play? Amando Doronila, a highly respected journalist, wrote an interesting analysis on how the news coverage of the Oakwood mutiny and the Pidal case by the local press had put into question its credibility as an institution that depends democracy. Doronila mentioned that media had unwittingly supported the cause of the rebels by giving them excessive coverage. He said that the lopsided coverage of the event hardly qualify the press either as being objective and neutral, which the press likes the public to believe it practices. Indeed, the press had done wonderfully in their reporting of the news but they seemed to overlook the side of the government that represents the nation, at least in the early critical hours. The media feasted on the rebels and their demands, failing to subject their grievances to rigorous editorial skepticism, which according to Doronila is the hallmark of good journalism.

Certainly, little, if ever, were written about the government soldiers who have staked their lives in order to secure the country’s democratic institutions. In this case, it clearly was not a fair treatment of the issue. Although, both the Philippine Daily Inquirer and Manila Bulletin came out with news on the Oakwood mutiny in 26 issues between July 28 and August 28, the Philippine Daily Inquirer had consistently devoted more newspaper space for related news on the issue.

Another event that landed on the papers almost at the heel of Oakwood mutiny was the Jose Pidal case. The story was more sensational than the first one since it had a twist of a telenovela. The manner the case was treated in the news really leaves a bad taste in the mouth. The press has always invoked the right of the public to know but they seem to conveniently forget that a private individual has a right to protect his/her name especially if the accusation thrown at him/her is not yet proven. The way the allegations were presented looked like there was malicious intent on the part of the accuser. The Philippine Daily Inquirer, as well as the other media became an unwitting accomplice by lapping up every details of the story.

Did the Philippine Daily Inquirer and Manila Bulletin play it fair in their treatment of this particular issue?

In matter of news coverage of the issue, Philippine Daily Inquirer came out with news report in 29 issues of the newspaper from August 19 until September 16. Its September 3 issue had the topic of Jose Pidal all over the front page. The Manila Daily Bulletin on the other hand, had the news in 25 issues within the same length of time.

The issue of sensationalism brings into fore the question of objectivity and fairness that every journalist ought to practice in his/her profession. Quite a number of news reports came out about the accusation of Senator Lacson and a few denials from the other side of the camp but very few articles, if ever, were written to give the public an objective analysis of what has gone wrong.

The media, in this instance the Philippine Daily Inquirer, and to some extent the Manila Daily Bulletin seem to pander to some personalities’ thirst for publicity and love for sensationalism. Although in comparison with Philippine Daily Inquirer, the Manila Bulletin tends to be sober and staid in its treatment of news; maybe because it has always been identified as pro-government, pro-business and counts as its readers the A-crowd.

The fixation of media over this issue of Jose Pidal prompted a caustic remark from one columnist of the Philippine Daily Inquirer commenting that media’s obsession led it to overlook an important issue that should also be given prominence in the news - the passage of a Senate bill (SB 2553, also known as Farming as Collateral Bill) that could spell death on agrarian reform law if signed into law by the President.

With freedom goes responsibility

It is sad to note that the media sometimes give more prominence to news about scandals, crime and violence. Is this so because that is the news that sells? (The latest scandal featuring Kris and Joey certainly brought the money rolling in, as the publisher of a leading daily frankly admitted). One PDI reader observes that seemingly the print and broadcast media’s only guideline for news is what sells and what do not. Sensationalism, negativism and a distorted sense of propriety seem to guide media’s behavior.

It has been said many times over, the country’s media are free, but not so free as to over step the rights of others. Freedom ends where the rights of others begin. Exercise of media freedom also means being objective and fair in the presentation of news.

Despite criticisms of sensationalism and lack of objectivity being hurled to the press in general, still, journalism offers the challenge of public service and being on the cutting edge of what is happening in our society. It nourishes the hunger for learning. One reporter, one photographer, one artist, one editor, can still make a difference.