Name: Venus Rovie C.

Laque Subject: Purposive Communication

Course: BSHM1

Module 1 and Topic 3: COMMUNICATION PROCESSES, PRINCIPLES AND ETHICS

LEARNING ACTIVITIES

Task 1. COMREHENSION QUESTION. Instruction. Check your understanding of the input by

answering the following questions:

1. What are communication models? Why do you think they were introduced?
ANS: A model is often abstract. It is a representation of real word phenomenon applied to
different forms. The interplay of variables in the model is represented graphically. Try to
assess later what comprises the communication models in what variables are common to
each of them.
2. How does one model differ from the other/s?
ANS: In the earlier discussion, you learned about the types of communication mode,
context, and purpose and style. In this lesson, you will review the nature of the
communication process and some important communication models.
3. If you were to choose a conceptual model for communication, what would you prefer
and why? How can you be guided by any of these models when you communicate?
ANS: The source being the originator of the message acts as the encoder. As such, the
encoder should practice communication skills such as listening, speaker, reading, and
writing. His/her attitude towards the audience or the subjects as well as his/her knowledge
about the topic on hand likewise counts along with the social system that he/she in which
includes values, beliefs and practices, and culture.
4. How do the principles of effective oral communication differ from those of effective
written communication? Do they have similarities at all?
ANS: Adjust your speech or writing to the context of the situation. The environment in
which your speech or writing is to be delivered determines the kind of language you will
use.
5. How can one observe ethics in communication?
ANS: Observing a code of ethics is essential as it determines the kind of behaviour that is
proper and desirable over one that is displeasing and offensive. A code of ethics sets the
standards to be observed by a person or a company that will create a good reputation or a
positive image not only for an individual but also for the organization, it will, therefore, pave
the way for the attainment of the desired results leading to the success of an individual or
the entire company. Success in decision-making will likewise impact the company’s
reputation.
6. Why is it important to have a code of conduct or a code of ethics?
ANS: Provide complete and accurate information. Whether it is needed or not, the data
you provide should always be contextualize and correct.

Task 2: Instruction. Recall the first time you engaged in a public oral presentation. What were
the different factors that you considered at that time? Relate how challenging it was for you
especially when viewed by different kinds of audiences. Share your experience with your
seatmate.
Of course I consider my grades I want to have a higher grade so I performed it well and of
course the comments of other people I don’t want to hear negative comments from them for my
audiences. It is very challenging knowing that your audiences are Professionals and are
intelligent people.

Task 3: Effective Oral Communication. Instruction. View on Youtube the speech of President
Rodrigo Duterte at Philippine China Trade and Investments Forum Beijing, China on October
20, 2016.

Guide Questions:

1. Do you think the five principles of effective oral communication were followed? Which
ones were followed? Which ones were not? Why or why not?

ANS: No, First of all, he spoke in English, which a huge majority of his audience do not
understand. Secondly, he did not wear his Barong Tagalog with dignity. He rolled it up like a
common t shirt and had its buttons open from neck to chest. Third, as a head of the country, he
was expected to talk to Chinese Xi Jinping as an equal. But no, he spoke as a personal dog.
He apologized to China and kissed Xi Jinping's ass. He even said that the result of Hague
arbitration on West Philippine Sea is useless and just a piece of paper. In this regard alone, he
failed as a speaker, as a representative of the Philippines. He gave up on our claim to Spratly
Islands.

2. What advice would you give to make the speaker more effective? Write your thoughts
on the space below.
ANS: Though Duterte is already an effective speaker my advice to make him more
effective is he needs to adjust himself in using Filipino Language if he was on an
International speech. Thus, it became a barrier towards his audience in understanding
what he was saying.

Task 4: Effective Written Communication. Instruction. Read the translated English version in
2015 President Noynoy Aquino’s speech on the Mamasapano incident below then write your
reaction to it. Do you think speech followed the principles of effective written communication?
Why or why not? What advice can you suggest? Write your answer on the space provided after
the speech.

President Noynoy Quino’s Speech

National Address
of
His Excellency Benigno S. Aquino III
President of the Philippines
On the incident at Mamasapano, Maguindanao
 I stand before you today to report on what we know about the incident in Mamasapano,
Maguindanao, last Saturday and Sunday. I do this not because I wish to preempt the board of
inquiry tasked to uncover the entire truth, but because you have a right to know what we know
at this point.

On Saturday, January 24, a group composed of members of our Philippine National Police’s
Special Action Force headed to Barangay Tukanalipao, Mamasapano, Maguindanao. Their
mission was to serve outstanding arrest warrants to two notorious terrorists who have long
been pursued by authorities, namely Abdulbasit Usman and Zulkipli Bin Hir, alias Abu Marwan.
According to the most recent report of the NDRRMC, 44 of our policemen died in the process
of fulfilling their duties, while 16 others were injured, including 3 civilians.

As President and as father of this country, I am greatly saddened that our policemen had to lay
down their lives for this mission. Without question, these people are heroes; they who willingly
put themselves in danger to address threats to our security; they who were wounded; they who
gave their lives in the name of peace. To honor those who perished, I am declaring a  National
Day of Mourning to symbolize the sorrow and empathy of our entire country.

Marwan and Usman are not common criminals. There is a long string of outstanding warrants
for their arrest. There are no less than 8 outstanding warrants against Usman alone, while
there are no less than 2 for Marwan. One of the earliest warrants was issued in 2002, which
means that they were already being pursued when I was a member of Congress. Allow me to
clarify: When a warrant is issued against an individual, all officers of the law are obligated to
serve it. This is precisely why, since long ago, our security sector, including the AFP, PNP, and
NBI, has undertaken multiple operations to capture Marwan, Usman, and other terrorists.

These agencies are not always required to obtain my approval for each and every one of their
operations, because it would be impractical for them to wait for my clearance before
proceeding. My duty: to make certain that they are carrying out their responsibilities. There are
times when certain matters are elevated to my desk so that I may give guidance, give a more
holistic view of the situation, or explain its wider implications.

A few examples of this are: our response to rogue MNLF elements in Zamboanga, the capture
of individuals high on our list of Most Wanted Persons, and the assault on our peacekeepers in
Golan Heights. In the Golan Heights case, the decision of whether or not to depart could not
simply be left to our battalion commander there. As the person primarily responsible for foreign
relations, I had to be consulted to make certain that we are likewise upholding our obligations
to the United Nations.

Marwan is part of the Central Committee of the Jemaah Islamiya, which was responsible for the
Bali bombing in Indonesia. In this incident, two consecutive blasts occurred, which meant that
first responders and individuals who had not left the area were also affected. 202 people died,
and Marwan was a suspect in this case. In Cagayan de Oro in 2012, Marwan attempted to
replicate this modus; the second bomb did not explode, as it was discovered ahead of time, yet
2 people still died as a result of this incident. There are allegations that, in 2006, Marwan, along
with Umbra Kato, led a plot to plant a bomb to assassinate then-Governor of Maguindanao,
Andal Ampatuan. Marwan’s membership in international terrorist networks means that he has
the capacity to acquire the knowledge, the equipment, the funding, and the necessary safe
havens for his fellow terrorists. This is why he was considered the primary target of the
operation. Usman, on the other hand, is connected to nine bombing incidents in Mindanao. He
is the primary accused in the bombing in General Santos City in 2002, in which 15 people died,
and 60 were injured.

Together with another terrorist named Mawiyah, Marwan and Usman committed several acts of
terrorism in various parts of Mindanao. They are also both known bomb-making trainers. There
are reports that they run factories of improvised explosive devices, which they sell to fellow
terrorists. They have injured and killed many people, and they continue to threaten the safety of
our citizens as long as they roam free.

I emphasize: It is stated in Article II, Section 4 of our Constitution that “The primary duty of
government is to serve and protect the people.” This is why, when our police force uncovered
the precise location of Marwan and Usman, they decided to take action and serve the warrants
of the two individuals. Our authorities gathered actionable intelligence. They found not just the
region, the province, or the municipality, but the very house in which the two were hiding. Not
acting on this knowledge would make it possible for Marwan and Usman to escape, which
would mean that the long process of gathering information would have to start all over again.

It was past 4 in the morning when the SAF reached the stronghold in which Marwan and
Usman were hiding. In the encounter that followed, the primary target, Marwan, was allegedly
killed. Upon hearing the gunshots, Usman and his cohorts fought back. There were also non-
combatants spotted in the houses in which Marwan and Usman were located; it was necessary
for our forces to close the distance to avoid involving the innocent. Marwan’s house was the
first attacked; Usman responded, and the element of surprise, which was necessary to avoid
detection, was lost. This is why the SAF decided to withdraw and rendezvous with their
companions, who were securing their exit route from the area where the encounter occurred. It
appears that it was during this withdrawal when the bloodiest part of the clash happened.

Like so many others, I have many questions surrounding the incident, and I expect the board of
inquiry to uncover the truth behind this incident. In the briefings the PNP gave me about the
continuing operations against Marwan and Usman, I repeated countless times the need for
proper, sufficient, and timely coordination. The terrain covered by this operation is complicated:
muddy, with swampland, and there is even the need for our SAF to cross a river to reach their
destination. There are also many other forces scattered in the area: the BIFF, MILF, and even
a Private Armed Group. Even if the MILF and BIFF now constitute two different groups, many
of them are related by blood or by affinity. Strangers cannot just enter their territory. Our troops
needed to enter quietly and carefully; otherwise, their targets may have been alerted.

It is precisely because the forces of the SAF were much smaller than the surrounding numbers
who could intervene that it was important for the Armed Forces to be ready to position their
troops, resources, and equipment like cannons or artillery, should our police require support.
They needed sufficient notice to place their troops where they would be of greatest assistance.
In these kinds of encounters, had the assistance of the Armed Forces been necessary, they
would not have been able to mobilize and arrive at a moment’s notice, especially because the
members of the 6th Infantry Division, who were nearest to the action, have other duties.

To my repeated reminders about the necessity of coordination, the director of the SAF
answered, “Yes Sir.” All that he said was that operational security, or the restriction of
information only to those who needed to know, was likewise necessary. Even then, I
underscored the need to alert other branches, or their respective heads; the notification must
come at the appropriate time, with complete information, for them to make the necessary
preparations.

I wonder: how and why could it have happened that the notification of the AFP battalions close
to the operation only came close to the time of jump-off, or even after our forces had already
jumped-off? The problem there was that the soldiers who were members of the battalion
assigned to guard the main supply routes to this location were scattered in different areas. In
simple language, the notification to the AFP came too close to the time of the encounter, thus
making it difficult to determine if they were given enough time to prepare, had their assistance
been necessary. If my order to ensure sufficient coordination had been complied with, then
perhaps it was pushed to the limit, resulting in very minimum compliance. In fact, I was
surprised to learn that the heads of the Western Mindanao Command, or even of the
6th Infantry Division, had only been advised after the first encounter involving Marwan and
Usman; the SAF forces were already retreating, and the situation had already became
problematic.

Now, on the MILF: We have already made such great strides because we trusted one another.
We have already proven that we can work together: in 2014, a Japanese national was rescued
in Maguindanao; in that same year, we were able to prevent the explosion of a bomb in
Maguindanao. I have also read the statement of Chairman Al Haj Murad about the
Mamapasano incident; the MILF’s formation of a Special Investigative Commission in order to
determine the details of the incident constitutes a good first step. I am hopeful that the MILF will
show, in the soonest possible time, even more concrete evidence of their solidarity in the
pursuit of peace, towards the pursuit of truth, and the accountability of those responsible.

Let us also avoid spreading rumors and fueling speculation about the incident. The Bible itself
says: The truth shall set us free. There is already a board of inquiry assigned to uncover the
whole truth. Let us wait for the results of their findings.

We have already come such a long way in our quest to realize the peace that we have long
desired for Muslim Mindanao. All sides exhibited great trust to reach this point. The incident in
Mampasano has already given rise to those who want to take advantage of this tragedy to
undermine that trust; they wish to derail the peace process. There are even some already
calling for a halt to the passage of the Bangsamoro Basic Law in the House of Representatives
and the Senate.

This should not happen. The success of the entire peace process is contingent on this law. If
this law is kept from being passed at the soonest possible time, the peace process will be
derailed; the status quo will remain. If that happens, we cannot hope for anything but the same
results: Citizens who take to the mountains after losing hope; individuals kept from gaining
justice who instead choose to exact violence on their fellowmen. It would be as if we helped
Marwan and Usman to reach their goals. Do we want to return to the point when communities
are ready, at a moment’s notice, to flee to evacuation centers, because of the threat of an
encounter? If this were to happen, who would benefit? If the peace process were derailed, how
many more graves would we have to dig? How many more children will idolize Marwan; how
many will want to grow up to be Usman; how many engineers will choose to build bombs rather
than buildings?
Let us also remember: The members of the SAF lost their lives while fulfilling their duty to
maintain the peace. If the peace process fails, if we return to the status quo, or if the violence
were to worsen, is this not the exact opposite of the cause to which they gave their lives?

Is it not true: In facing this challenge, in order to realize peace, should we not link arms more
tightly, and pursue with greater determination the next steps in the process, like passing the
BBL; forming the Bangsamoro Transition Authority; widening opportunities for all; and
correcting a political system where a few benefit to the detriment of the majority of our
countrymen?

To the families of the SAF members who perished: I fully sympathize with your grief. I know
that this grief may be accompanied by worries about your future, especially if your loved ones
who sacrificed their lives were also your breadwinners. I guarantee: The state will give the
maximum assistance it can, within the limits of the laws and rules. On this occasion, I also take
the opportunity to appeal to the public: If possible let us extend our utmost support to the
bereaved, and maximize the help we can give to the families of those who fell, in recognition of
the valor of these heroes who gave their lives for the realization of the peace we have long
desired.

In the face of our grief, in the face of the desire of some to exact revenge, in the face of the
threats to destroy the trust we have forged over such a long period of time, today, our ability to
show compassion to our fellowmen faces a great test. This is why, to all of my countrymen who
desire peace, from lawmakers, to the members of the uniformed forces, to the leaders of the
MILF, to our countrymen in the Bangsamoro, and to every decent Filipino: Let us show what
heights a country united by a single aspiration can reach. Let us ensure that the ultimate
sacrifice made by some members of the SAF does not go to waste. We will gain justice, in
time, through the right processes, and without letting go of our dreams to realize a widespread
and lasting peace.

Thank you, and good evening to us all.

I provide below an English translation of the now infamous speech of Philippine President
Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III delivered on the occasion of the First National Criminal Justice
Summit held at Centennial Hall, Manila Hotel. The speech was dominated by a personal tirade
against Philippine Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona who sat just a couple of metres
from the podium where the President delivered it. The following are what I believe to be the key
features of the content of the speech:(1) It harks back to the regime of former President
Ferdinand Marcos who, under Martial Law, committed atrocities against his father, national
hero Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino Jr; then, (2) Uses this context to “remind” all that evil is just
around the corner and that we should all be vigilant and stand ready to “fight” against the forces
of oppression and tyranny. (3) It highlights Noynoy’s duty to “protect” the Constitution and
“serve” the “people”. (4) Emphasises repeatedly that political power ultimately resides in and
originates from “the people”. (5) It enumerates various instances that the Supreme Court
supposedly thwarts attempts of his administration to take steps towards rectifying the
wrongdoings of the previous administration of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo; and,
(6) Cites perceived instances where the Supreme Court behaved in a way inconsistent with the
very Laws it is supposedly tasked to interpret and implement; which he then uses to segue into,
(7) One instance when he, as then chairman of the Senate Committee on Local Government,
had to grapple with what he implies is a bizarre lack of bases for defining what constitutes a
Congress district; after which he takes the opportunity to wish his successor as chairman of
that committee, Sen Fedindand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr, good luck in leading future efforts to
resolve that “problem”. So without much further ado… [The following is my translation into
English of Philippine President Benigno S. Aquino III’s speech during the First National
Criminal Justice Summit held at Centennial Hall, Manila Hotel on Monday 5th December 2011.
[After formal greetings…]
Our gathering today presents an opportunity for us to better evaluate the strengths and
weaknesses of our current criminal justice system and to propose new and just initiatives to
address these. We can attest to the timeliness of such initiatives because through day-to-day
headline news on print and television, the public can witness the work of our court clerks,
attorneys, and justices. The value of your work [addressing said clerks, attorneys, and justices]
cannot be doubted, as the decisions and the steps that you implement have relevant
implications on our democracy.
As such, it is important that we examine what is written on Article 2, Section 1
of our Constitution: that power resides in and originates from the people. I thought it would be
good to remind you of this as there are instances our history where we have forgotten this.

During the time of military rule [referring to the Martial Law in effect during the latter
days of the regime of former PresFerdinand Marcos], justice did not serve the welfare of the
general public. Instead, it was geared to serve the interests of a single person only — former
President Ferdinand Marcos. My own family was a victim: My father was tried before a Court
Martial but, in reality, the verdict had already been pre-determined. Before a court of
magistrates, attorneys, judges, and witnesses appointed and provided by the very person who
laid the charges — Marcos himself — the Dictator did all he could to bend justice and violate
every human right of my father. Though he was innocent, [my father] was made to suffer for
seven years and seven months while those in power feasted on the national treasury. They
deprived us of justice and tipped the scales of justice over to their favour. Now as your
president, I have sworn to protect and uphold the Constitution, implement and abide by its
laws, be just to every person, and apply my very person to the service of the country. And key
to my mandate is to ensure that the darkness of Martial Law will never happen again and that
those who perpetrated the crimes of the past be made accountable.
That is why from the very start [of my administration in 2010], we had taken steps to
clarify the allegations of corruption during the previous administration [of former President
Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo]: from the “fertilizer scam” which rather than fattened crops, instead,
[allegedly] fattened the pockets of a number of officials; up to the “ZTE deal” [which, in the
course of inquiries around it] resulted in the [alleged] kidnap of [supposed] witness Jun Lozada;
including too allegations of cheating during the 2004 and 2007 elections; as well as many other
wrongdoings we wish to expose. We started with the forming of the Truth Commission which
was going to take stock of and investigate any wrongdoings that transpired during the previous
administration and call on the perpetrators to account for these. The envisioned Truth
Commission would have had no other agenda other than to make right all the wrongs as soon
as possible. Unfortunately we all know what happened: the initiative was ruled unconstitutional
by the Supreme Court. What was just a first step was immediately quashed.
It is the duty of the [Commission on Elections (COMELEC)] to ensure that [Philippine]
elections yield clean and credible results. So it is only natural that the COMELEC would seek
the assistance of the [Department of Justice (DOJ)] in the investigation of allegations of
cheating in 2007. It is normal to form such panels, yet this is now being questioned by the
Supreme Court. They are also questioning the legality of the warrant of arrest issued by the
Pasay Regional Trial Court against Mrs. Arroyo. Notice too: When the Supreme Court issued a
temporary restraining order (TRO) [lifting a travel-ban implemented by the DOJ against Arroyo],
these included some conditions. Yet, in quick time, [the SC itself] admitted that these conditions
need not have been met to begin with. [Mild expression of exasperation], they stipulated all
these conditions that they had no intention of observing! We [presumably the DOJ] followed all
of what due process dictates, yet we are now being accused of being belligerent. Who in their
right mind would not doubt the true agendas [of the Supreme Court]?
This is not the first time that the Supreme Court implemented decisions that are difficult
to understand. According to Article 7, Section 15 of our Constitution [NB: the following excerpt
lifted verbatim here]…
Two months immediately before the next presidential elections and up to the end of his
term, a President or Acting President shall not make appointments, except temporary
appointments to executive positions when continued vacancies therein will prejudice public
service or endanger public safety. yet we all know that Mrs. Arroyo [despite the above] forced
the issue of appointing the SC Chief Justice. She did so not two months before the election but
one week after the election. On the basis of the Law, the Supreme Court can only do so if the
position is deemed a temporary position. They violated all this when they endorsed Arroyo’s
appointment of Corona as Chief Justice — a position not within the jurisdiction of the executive
branch but of the judiciary. The question is therefore this: Did the Supreme Court violate the
Constitution?
Another example of [a Supreme Court] decision that is difficult to understand is the one
about the forming of Congressional districts. According to Article 6, Section 5 of the
Constitution, each district should have a minimum population of 250,000. The problem is that
there are some Congressional districts that do not meet this requirement, such as one district in
[the province of] Camarines Sur which has a population of just a bit more than 176,000. This is
why when I was still a Senator and chairman of the Committee on Local Government, we
questioned the forming of this district. Unfortunately, this was trashed by the Supreme Court.
The question is: If population can no longer serve as the basis for forming a district, what would
be the bases upon which legislators will implement future redistricting? What I mean to say is
that there are bases for forming cities, but when it comes to forming provinces of districts, there
are none? I can only empathise with the new chairman of the Senate Committee on Local
Government, Sen Bongbong Marcos: Good luck, sir, in your efforts to resolve this problem.

We do respect the co-equal powers of the judicial and executive branches of

government. We have no intentions of eoncroaching upon the rights of the judiciary or
disrespecting anyone’s credibility. But we do have to re-visit the basic principles of democracy.
We who swore to the duty [of upholding said principles] only have you — our “boss” — the
Filipino people to answer to. We are here to serve the country and be role models to all
Filipinos. Now if we find a public servant who fails to deliver on this promise to the people who
are, ultimately, the source of his authority and, instead, serves a patron who had been
instrumental in putting him in the position where he currently sits, will we be able to continue to
rely on him to look after the interests of the Filipino? I am not a lawyer. But just the same, I
grew up with a clear view of what is right and what is wrong; and what is and isn’t in the
interests of people. I hold that justice is not a steering wheel that can simply be turned one way
or another according to its driver’s will. Justice is not a toy that lawyers and courts can play
with, to be turned over and spun according to their whims. Let’s come back to what I mentioned
earlier: the powers of the Supreme Court, the President, and Congress ultimately originate from
one “Boss” — the people. As such, it is only the interests of the people that we should be on
the side of and should defend. I swore to protect and defend the Constitution, abide by its laws,
be just to every person, and apply my very person to the service of the country. I have no
intention of reneging on my sworn duty. I have no intention of failing the people. It is not only
mine but everyone’s obligation to stay the course under a unified aspiration: to serve and
protect the interests of the general public. To all of us who stand shoulder-to-shoulder as we
walk down the straight path, we must persevere. As long as we are on the side of
righteousness we will not retreat from any fight. As long as the people are behind us, we will
succeed. Let us not fail the people. Thank you very much. [End of English translation]

TASK 5. Code of Ethics. Instructions. The code of ethics in the workplace should be carefully
thought out since it will guide the employees in assessing what is right and wrong for your
business. If you were put up your own business, what values would you incorporate in your
company’s Code of Ethics?

A code of ethics sets out an organization's ethical guidelines and best practices to follow for
honesty, integrity, and professionalism. For members of an organization, violating the code of
ethics can result in sanctions including termination. In some industries, including banking and
finance, specific laws govern business conduct.

ASSIGNMENT: Instructions: Students will look into these topics and do advance research to
answer these questions.

1. How do you think has communication changed or improved overtime?

ANS: Communication has changed so much over the years. From speech to the postal
services. And from the postal services, technology has come a long way and has changed
our world. There's now telephones, cellphones, computers, and email; which makes the
way we humans communicate extremely easy and fast.
2. What modes are now being utilized and were not present before? What are the
advantages and disadvantages of each mode?
ANS: Communication modes and transfer modes.

There are a number of modes that were not present in the old times.
 Today, there are advanced communication mods, TV, cellphone, radio, etc.
 Also, humans can travel through advanced modes of transportation.
 The modern transportation modes include buses, taxis, railways trains, airplanes, jet
planes, etc.
 These inventions have made human life easier and better.