CHAPTER 1 THE PHENOMENON

This chapter serves as an overview of the present study Blindfolds on Democracy: A Case Study on Media Repression during Arroyo and Aquino Administrations. The chapter includes the introduction, problem, objective, research postulates and its theoretical, conceptual and operational framework.

The Introduction

For every attack against a journalist is an attempt to mute the peoples voice, and a blow to their right to know. NUJP (National Union of Journalists of the Philippines)

The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines states in its Article 3, Sec. 4 and 7 that, the government will protect the freedom of speech, of expression, of the press, and of public assemblies through prohibition of any enabling restricting such, and that the mass has every right for access to official records and documents for public concerns with restrictions in accordance to the law, respectively. Such parts in the constitution play a big role on how journalists do their vocation duly and rightfully for the country. These make up as guidelines to pattern their collection of whos, whats, whens, wheres, whys and hows, serving as weapons against schemes in the restriction of their prerogatives as a journalist and as a citizen. As gatekeepers of the society, the freedom of the press is highly essential in the role of media. But since the 18th century, press freedom has been a huge problem among watchdogs. It has been stated in the history of journalism that as early as that time, repression in press was

highly visible (Zenger libel case trial). Even American journalist A.J. Liebling, one of the most influential journalists of all time, stressed that, Freedom of the Press is guaranteed only to those who own one. In the case of the Philippines, scandalous records of atrocities in the supposed democratic society are difficult to downplay. According to CPJ (Committee to Protect Journalist), even before the Maguindanao Massacre, the country was labeled as second most dangerous country for journalists. This status has been gained by the Philippines since 2003. During that of Arroyos administration, the record of impunity in the murder of journalists and media people was also unprecedented. Since her settlement into office in 2001 to 2007, 60 journalists had been killed. Also, the cases of about 70 out of 82 journalists who were killed since 1986 perished in the early years of Arroyos rule. The most unabashed among these cases of media repression is the Maguindanao massacre that killed 32 journalists on Nov. 23, 2009 wherein justice is still locked in a limbo of motions and bail hearings. (PJR Reports) After the 2010 Presidential Elections which hailed Benigno Aquino IIIs victory, his prevailing years had already documented 23 journalists who faced murder, four more than the 11 cases in the first three years of his late mother, Corazon Aquino. Of the cases where the alleged masterminds have actually been identified and charged, not a single one has been arrested yet. (PCIJ, 2013) Contrary to the rights indicated in the constitution, the press nowadays is experiencing opposite to what is supposed to be their emancipation in line with their jobs. They are the people behind newspaper bylines and reports from morning until dawn, in television, radio, print and even in the internet. They are everywhere, bringing knowledge and information, exposing news, and helping people to be cognizant and curious about their environment.

According to Davenport (2007), repression in a democratic system has two types: (a) violent repression which violates personal integrity such as torture, disappearances, mass killings, among others; and (b) non-violent repression which violates civil liberty or suppression with regards to the law such as libel and sedation. Thus, aside from media killings, this study will compare varying forms of media repression on print, broadcast (TV and radio) and online platforms. This study will also show the extent in which media repression affect news dissemination through narrative experiences of journalists practicing from Arroyo to Aquinos regime. The students of mass communication, especially journalism students, will determine this study very useful in studying the former and current situation of Philippine press and the obstacles that the media had gone into. As an addition, future media practitioners could possibly provide the tools on how to prevent or handle media repression. Readers may find the results beneficial in knowing the role of media in the society and being aware of why the press should not be repressed. The coverage of the study is narrowed down to the first three years of the present and its preceding administration, so as to cover a certain timeframe this study had to comprise. This study is important because it tackles the administration where the country has been dubbed as the second (Arroyo) and third (Aquino) most dangerous places for journalists to practice their profession. The researchers settled for this timeframe for the following reasons: 1. To balance the scope of the study since Aquinos administration is current;

2. Since this study includes the online platform as one medium, the first three years of Arroyo opened for the emergence of the internet craze in the country while Aquinos time instigated the popularity of social media; 3. It is during both administrations first half terms that the country has been labeled as the second and third most dangerous place for journalists around the world and; 4. With such reputation, both regimes still have not passed a law regarding repression on media, considering that the "frightful and ugly" trend should be curbed by the government, according to Alyansa ng Filipinong Mamamahayag (Afima) President Benny Antiporda. (http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/246568/news/media-groupsmore-journalists-killed-in-aquino-s-first-years-than-arroyo-s)