Boob Tube Boo-boos

Who controls the past, controls the future: who controls the present, controls the past
- George Orwell

While the two Philippine television network giants (ABS-CBN and GMA) extensively broadcasted live telecasts of the funeral cortege of former President Corazon C. Aquino traveling from my beloved alma mater, LSGH, to Manila Cathedral last Monday, the country’s only government network (NBN-4) aired “Concert at the Park” and other public affairs programs that showcased our present President. Not spared, the Necrological Mass for Tita Cory at the Manila Cathedral was given minimal television exposure.

Perplexed and in search for the truth, I was able to found enlightenment and solace in Alcuin Papa’s article in Inquirer (published on August 5, 2009). Possessing the same observations (as mine), the said author relayed “information” that “miscommunication/misunderstanding” transpired between the Aquino family and the network’s officers; details of which were not divulged. Perhaps, the so-called “misunderstanding” may allude to the late President’s keen involvement in protest rallies against the present administration. Perhaps, the network would like to avert the Filipino populace from inevitably making an assessment between the Aquino and Arroyo administrations. Perhaps, this selective coverage is simply a case of mass mind control by the government through national television. Perhaps, this is a new and subdued form of “news blackout”.

Whatever the genuine reason for such perturbing occurrence, it is certain that such reason is contrary to the policies laid down in the very Statute that created the Network (which ironically, was signed by President Aquino on March 26, 1992). The policy to “develop the broadcasting industry as a medium for the development, promotion and advancement of Filipino nationalism, culture and values that serve as an instrument in the struggle for Filipino sovereignty, identity, national unity and integration” has been overshadowed by partisan politics.

Indeed, the disconcerting fate of our government network is not a new realization to me. I have witnessed how such network violates other State policies day in, day out. During the day, the very State policy to “detach government television from advertising and commercial interest as far as practicable so as not to unduly compete with the private television sector and ensure that government television shall provide quality alternative programs for the benefit and moral upliftment of the citizenry” has continually been violated by the airing of home television shopping programs. In the wee hours, the very constitutional principles of separation of church and State and non-promotion of religion are patently violated as religious programs have occupied the airtime slots.

True, television has pushed the boundaries of societal values over the last thirty years, leading to changes in norms and tolerance for different behaviors (as claimed by Suzanne Pitner). Definitely, the Government is not oblivious to such phenomenon.