Ethics came from the Greek word “ethika” that means character and nature. According to Encarta dictionary, ethics is the study of moral standards and how they affect conduct. Another given meaning is that ethics is a system of moral principles governing the appropriate conduct for an individual or group. In simple form, ethics are standards.
In the broadcasting industry, where there are a lot of systems and structures, and where accurate information dissemination is important, there also exist different ethics. One is institutional ethics that exist in media institutions, professional ethics in different professions that can also exist in media institutions and personal ethics as the basis of institutional and professional ethics.
Moreover, in the broadcasting industry, ethics help and aid every individual in the industry to do their work properly and appropriately. Ethics are their guide with their labor. Some issues in relation to ethics include the accuracy of their news and bribery as one of the hindrances, privacy of certain people they work with like witnesses and other interviewees to protect their personalities, and some “under-the-table” issues.
The industry created its own Code of Broadcasting which consisted of eight "rules." Four had to do with advertising and concern over "over-commercialization." The other rules dealt with general operations and responsible programming: no "fraudulent, deceptive or obscene" material. [1]
Issues or information that should be distributed to the public should first undergo in the 5 levels of control in the broadcast media standards. Such standards include individuals and personnel, next is the institution, then industry councils, government and lastly, the public.
The focus of this paper is on ethical issues that were disregarded by some of the broadcast institutions here in the Philippines. Ethical issues such as proper censorship/protection of interviewees who refused to be exposed and repetitive airing of news stories and sensationalizing of those news stories on the process were somehow side-tracked in the development of their news.
It has been observed from some news-oriented shows like TV Patrol of ABS-CBN and Imbestigador and i-WITNESS of GMA had, at some point, incurred violations on the Broadcasting Code of Ethics. These shows have violated the code to the extent of affecting its viewers in such a way that aimed to trigger emotions of its audience instead of just presenting the news as it is.
For TV Patrol, in one of their episodes, where they featured a news story about a boy who climbed an electrical tower in an attempt to catch the attention of the people around, they’ve repeatedly aired the story for duration of one week, changing only the presentation and focus of the news story in each presentation. What’s critical about that certain news was the repetitive showing of sensitive footages of the incident. The reporters even interviewed the boy’s parents right after the incident and asked how they felt about the incident. The reporters let the parents see the footage and asked for their reaction on it. What the reporters did was unethical and it was an indication that their news report was sensationalized. Sensationalizing a news story lessened objectivity. Letting the parents see the incident over again only increased the emotion they felt which made it harder on their part when it comes to accepting what happened.
The same case happened on an episode of i-WITNESS, a show which features documentaries or investigative reports. On their episode entitled “Basura”, which was hosted then by Jay Taruc, the story was about the lifestyle of people living by the Payatas Dumpsite. Its focus should’ve been just on the depiction of the people’s lifestyles but as the story progressed, the host infused issues about the incident that happened in the area years ago, the Payatas Tragedy wherein a lot of people from the area died and properties were damaged. The catch is that at first, they were showing people living their normal lives and they also seemed to depict people who have moved on but then, in one of the interviews, they asked their interviewees to refresh their memories of the incident and relate it to the public over again. It raised emotion on the interviewees’ parts and that act was somehow unethical as explained in the previous discussion.
In an episode of Imbestigador, hosted by Mike Enriquez, where they featured two boys who were allegedly possessed by Japanese soldiers buried near their homes, which made them able to speak the Japanese language, Imbestigador was supposed to hide the identities of the boys. They actually hid the boys’ identities by silhouetting their appearance yet, other interviewees, who were very much related to the boys in focus, were showed blatantly, unprotected, and deprived of their right to privacy/secrecy. That was unethical for witnesses and people who were highly concerned on an issue needs protection especially when it’s a sensitive issue. It showed the management’s irresponsibility and minimal concern for the people affected.
It seemed like the issues tackled and the people involved were not conscious of the ethics whether they’re following it or not. The ethics that operated on the above issues was the Situational Ethics. This is the type where it’s on a case-to-case basis. The shows were aimed to meet a goal but their method was considered unethical and it did not appeal to the public they were serving. The five levels of control of broadcast media then were not satisfied and so it made the programs inefficient and it did not serve its purpose well--the purpose to inform.
Sensationalism is unethical and it does not comply with the main function of broadcast media that is to be of service to the public in a way of giving off information objectively and at most accuracy. It is the responsibility of the media to disseminate accurate and factual information to the public and at the same time, it has the power to affect the public. The television, for example, had the ability to penetrate the private home and its potential obtrusiveness was the subject of concern. It was, after all, a "guest" in the home and in that capacity it was able to serve the public interest--informing, instructing and enlightening.[2]
In the broadcasting industry, where there are a lot of systems and structures, and where accurate information dissemination is important, there also exist different ethics. One is institutional ethics that exist in media institutions, professional ethics in different professions that can also exist in media institutions and personal ethics as the basis of institutional and professional ethics.
Moreover, in the broadcasting industry, ethics help and aid every individual in the industry to do their work properly and appropriately. Ethics are their guide with their labor. Some issues in relation to ethics include the accuracy of their news and bribery as one of the hindrances, privacy of certain people they work with like witnesses and other interviewees to protect their personalities, and some “under-the-table” issues.
The industry created its own Code of Broadcasting which consisted of eight "rules." Four had to do with advertising and concern over "over-commercialization." The other rules dealt with general operations and responsible programming: no "fraudulent, deceptive or obscene" material. [1]
Issues or information that should be distributed to the public should first undergo in the 5 levels of control in the broadcast media standards. Such standards include individuals and personnel, next is the institution, then industry councils, government and lastly, the public.
The focus of this paper is on ethical issues that were disregarded by some of the broadcast institutions here in the Philippines. Ethical issues such as proper censorship/protection of interviewees who refused to be exposed and repetitive airing of news stories and sensationalizing of those news stories on the process were somehow side-tracked in the development of their news.
It has been observed from some news-oriented shows like TV Patrol of ABS-CBN and Imbestigador and i-WITNESS of GMA had, at some point, incurred violations on the Broadcasting Code of Ethics. These shows have violated the code to the extent of affecting its viewers in such a way that aimed to trigger emotions of its audience instead of just presenting the news as it is.
For TV Patrol, in one of their episodes, where they featured a news story about a boy who climbed an electrical tower in an attempt to catch the attention of the people around, they’ve repeatedly aired the story for duration of one week, changing only the presentation and focus of the news story in each presentation. What’s critical about that certain news was the repetitive showing of sensitive footages of the incident. The reporters even interviewed the boy’s parents right after the incident and asked how they felt about the incident. The reporters let the parents see the footage and asked for their reaction on it. What the reporters did was unethical and it was an indication that their news report was sensationalized. Sensationalizing a news story lessened objectivity. Letting the parents see the incident over again only increased the emotion they felt which made it harder on their part when it comes to accepting what happened.
The same case happened on an episode of i-WITNESS, a show which features documentaries or investigative reports. On their episode entitled “Basura”, which was hosted then by Jay Taruc, the story was about the lifestyle of people living by the Payatas Dumpsite. Its focus should’ve been just on the depiction of the people’s lifestyles but as the story progressed, the host infused issues about the incident that happened in the area years ago, the Payatas Tragedy wherein a lot of people from the area died and properties were damaged. The catch is that at first, they were showing people living their normal lives and they also seemed to depict people who have moved on but then, in one of the interviews, they asked their interviewees to refresh their memories of the incident and relate it to the public over again. It raised emotion on the interviewees’ parts and that act was somehow unethical as explained in the previous discussion.
In an episode of Imbestigador, hosted by Mike Enriquez, where they featured two boys who were allegedly possessed by Japanese soldiers buried near their homes, which made them able to speak the Japanese language, Imbestigador was supposed to hide the identities of the boys. They actually hid the boys’ identities by silhouetting their appearance yet, other interviewees, who were very much related to the boys in focus, were showed blatantly, unprotected, and deprived of their right to privacy/secrecy. That was unethical for witnesses and people who were highly concerned on an issue needs protection especially when it’s a sensitive issue. It showed the management’s irresponsibility and minimal concern for the people affected.
It seemed like the issues tackled and the people involved were not conscious of the ethics whether they’re following it or not. The ethics that operated on the above issues was the Situational Ethics. This is the type where it’s on a case-to-case basis. The shows were aimed to meet a goal but their method was considered unethical and it did not appeal to the public they were serving. The five levels of control of broadcast media then were not satisfied and so it made the programs inefficient and it did not serve its purpose well--the purpose to inform.
Sensationalism is unethical and it does not comply with the main function of broadcast media that is to be of service to the public in a way of giving off information objectively and at most accuracy. It is the responsibility of the media to disseminate accurate and factual information to the public and at the same time, it has the power to affect the public. The television, for example, had the ability to penetrate the private home and its potential obtrusiveness was the subject of concern. It was, after all, a "guest" in the home and in that capacity it was able to serve the public interest--informing, instructing and enlightening.[2]
No comments:
Post a Comment