fullman*

Should media enter politics? Beyond its role of delivering information and facilitating public discourse on almost anything, what happens when a media company fields its own candidates and use its resources to engage in what could be construed as partisan activities?

These are some of the questions that I hope media institutions like PCIJ and Newsbreak and independently-minded media practitioners like Manolo Quezon or Ricky Carandang should look into. I am particularly disturbed with the way Manila Times seems to be campaigning for Ahon Pinoy, a party-list group that purportedly represents Overseas Filipino Workers. Today, this article came out in Manila Times’ Sunday edition, and what surprises me is that it is clearly meant to boost Ahon Pinoy. Manila Times, in fact, already reported the results of the SWS-Philippine Daily Inquirer survey early this week, thus a malicious mind would wonder why it felt it had to recycle the same story.

I could be wrong, and as an individual actively campaigning for another party-list, I do not wish – and I am certainly not in any position – to dictate on Manila Times what it may or may not report. That’s why I am calling on other journalists to perhaps initiate an honest discussion on the case of Manila Times and Ahon Pinoy.

Ahon Pinoy is one of the parties that AKBAYAN Rep. Etta Rosales identified as a possible administration front. The reason is that it’s number one nominee is Dante ‘Klink’ Ang II, the son of Commission for Filipinos Overseas Chair Dante Ang. At the very least, the participation of Ahon Pinoy in the party-list race should be questioned because conflict of interest is obvious: he represents a party-list of OFWs and his father is the chair of a government agency that has access to Philippine embassies all over the world and to various OFW organizations. In a country where nepotism is blatantly practiced, there is no guarantee that the father wouldn’t use his access to government machinery to support his son’s candidacy. (In fact, an item from a personal blog once reported that Dante Ang is the campaign manager of Ahon Pinoy. The item was removed immediately after Rep. Rosales’ expose.).

The other conflict of interest raises questions on media ethics and responsibility. Klink Ang II is the CEO of Manila Times, a fact that may damage the capacity of Manila Times, as a media institution, to be distant and non-partisan. Surely, as a citizen, Klink Ang has the right to run for public office. But what should be done when this compromises the integrity and independence of Manila Times? Assuming that Ahon Pinoy wins and gets a seat in Congress, would Manila Times be able to guarantee that it can be critical of positions taken by Ahon Pinoy in Congress? Furthermore, how can Manila Times claim that it is merely reporting on Ahon Pinoy, and not campaigning for the party-list group? Perhaps a more disturbing fact is that Manila Times owns a school for journalism and I wonder how it explains this clear link between Manila Times and Ahon Pinoy to budding journalists.

The party-list system is a democratic innovation in the 1987 Constitution. It was not established simply to provide representation to ‘marginalized’ and ‘under-represented’ sectors, it was conceptualized as a way to democratize access to power. In short, beyond its sectoral orientation, it seeks to re-allocate and re-distribute power. This, and not only mere economic deprivation, defines marginalization – those who face restrictions in terms of influencing policies or political participation are, in a broad sense, marginalized. A gay professional may have more income than the average Filipino, but stigma and discrimination on the basis of sexuality makes him or her marginalized.

In the case of Manila Times and Ahon Pinoy, media, as a powerful institution, should reflect on its role in politics. Making information accessible and influencing public opinion are political acts and they give citizens the chance to make informed decisions. But literally entering politics is entirely a different matter altogether. The party-list system is already under threat from groups that are clearly fronting for the administration. What would happen if broadsheets and TV outfits start mobilizing their resources to support party-lists that have been created by media practitioners or owners of media companies?

If we let this issue pass sans any discussion on its impact on media ethics and responsibility, are we going to see ‘media fronts’ in the 2010 party-list race?