The Makati Siege

This is a repost from Nikkolai, which is also a repost from a friend of his. i just really wanted to share this...

***********************
This is a repost from powee capino, a high school friend of mine and former media correspondent.

---

One of the highlights of the Makati siege was when actress Bibeth Orteza praised the media for staying inside the Manila Pen while the police were about to conduct operations and thwart the putschists from their plans.

ABS-CBN News anchor and reporter Ces Drilon then glanced at her left side and smiled while the civil society members who were 'encamped' with the rebels were clapping. Suddenly, it donned to me, "Were the journalists emphatizing with Sen. Trillanes and his group?"

I cannot conclude that they did but I have strong reasons that they were already doing so.

That smile of Ces Drilon was an ackowledgment that they were strong and would be beside Trillanes all the time. She nodded to compliments that the media people inside the room were already patriots after what happened.

Another incident was when the police were throwing tear gas inside the hotel. I forgot who the reporter was from ABS-CBN (either Pinky Webb or Drilon again), but this reporter wanted to interview Gen. Danilo Lim (or was it Trillanes?).

Anyway, the line of the reporter was "Sir, do you have a message for the people?" The people? Don't get me wrong but this line of questioning is usually used to influence the public on what they should do next. With all the drama, people who have sympathy for the group of Trillanes may flare up and actually march towards the hotel and show their support.

Was the reporter who asked this quesion provoking any sympathizer to protect the rebels?

These two reporters are very seasoned and their credibility cannot be questioned. But being holed up inside a 'fort' for a long time will obviously create a bond with anyone inside it. This is withstanding the fact that the rebel leader was a charismatic and good-looking individual.

I believe that an ethical line was crossed yesterday. Journalists, in their sworn duty to deliver the news, tagged along with Trillanes inside a room where they knew that police can storm at any second and kill everyone who was inside it.

Trillanes knew that these people (many of them I knew personally) would not escape so he invited them to join him and conduct a press conference. This reckless deed put their (journalists) lives in danger even if his statements were about protecting the civilians and the media people and all that obvious bullshit.

These journalists (for the sake of their duty) became 'willing hostages' to a man who was also willing to put their lives at risk at the last minute. He retreated and surrendered knowing that the government was dead serious in arresting him after an armored personnel carrier was inside the hotel already.

The press people were already warned several times that they should leave the premises so as not to be affected by the crossfire. Some chose to stay and they had to face the consequences.

What I don't understand is how come they are now complaining with how the police are treating the people who 'chose' to stay inside the hotel. Are they immuned from the system?

A journalist's job is to get both sides of the story, it is very true, but does this mean that they can dissuade orders from the police to leave the premises?

I agree that the handcuffs against the media people were too much and being dragged was an over reaction. But how can the police discriminate on who the suspects were if dozens of journalists kept running around?

Was it because Trillanes was successful in his plans to let journalists feel how the government is treating him or was it another case of the media wanting special treatment even in cases of crisis?

An empirical point here is when journalists were raising their hands while a nylon handcuff was tied to their hands. They felt they were also victims of a repressive government.

Trillanes was able to accomplish his mission and make the media an ally in his cause. Was this event another day for a journalist delivering the news or a case of the Stockholm Syndrome or a new paradigm altogether (Makati Syndrome) where reporters become propagandists and sympathizers? I just don't know.....

who the hell?

well, as that question is a question:

who the hell reads my blog anyway?

halloween party

he came home at 9 in the morning drunk and looking stupid. agh… i hate it when i can’t ride his mood. i think everyone is bound to be annoying and intolerable when they had so much to drink. is that right?

anyway, he attended their office Halloween party. i don’t know… i just sometimes wish i had parties to attend and appointments to meet. i hate having no social life at all… i mean, at all. but i am surviving, i think. i’m gonna enroll next week so i’m gonna be busy with school stuff again soon. which i hope would take me out of this “social-life” issue on myself. i am wondering now if i would be able to make real new friends again at school. or am i really too old for that kind of stuff. girls at school often talk about boys, if not always. which i can’t seem to have any opinion at all. waha, not that i am not interested or anything… but it just doesn’t appeal like it used to anymore. maybe i am a grown up after all. oh, i hate to be called a grown up. i hate the idea that i am old. i sometimes flinched at someone calling me “ate” at school. although i must admit it sometimes gave a warmth feeling when somebody looks up to me as an elder. hehe. but it often solicited a role model image from me. which i can’t be confident to give. but am willing you see…

anyway, happy halloween to all…