Democracy is best described as the form of government that is 'ruled by the people.

' It focuses
on the core principles of liberty, transparency, accountability, and representation, legally safeguarding
everyone's rights, including freedom of speech, religion, and the press. Democracy guarantees citizens
the right to engage in electoral and other life-changing societal processes, to scrutinize and hold abusive
and corrupt political parties, commercial organizations, and other external entities accountable for their
actions and decisions, and to protect the interests of both major and minor populations. Ultimately, it
helps create a stable, just, and peaceful society by assuring us that we can live without worrying about
arbitrary government acts. As such, considering the definition above, it is no surprise that press freedom
and democracy often go hand in hand. With a relationship as intricate and synergetic as that of the
anemone that provides protection and shelter to the latter and the clownfish that provides waste
nutrients to the former, both concepts heavily support and rely on one another. While democracy
provides the necessary framework for press freedom to flourish, a free and independent press aids in
preserving democratic values such as human rights, transparency, responsibility, and educated decision-
making.

Like cornerstone pillars to a bridge, it is this role as a primary conduit for information exchange, as a
transparent 'watchdog' within a democratic context that the 4 th estate, Media, connects the gap
between the government and the populace. It is indispensable as a cultivating figure as it empowers the
nation's citizenry to be more involved in electoral and civic activities and more aware of current social
events, government policies, and other relevant societal issues, local or global. Take, for instance, much
of award-winning photojournalist Ezra Acayan's works covering the aftermath stories of extrajudicial
killings that occurred during Duterte's infamous drug war (Rappler, 2018, 0:23). He started posting on
social media because not a lot of publications would publish issues related to it. With the hope of
resonating with those who support and perpetrate it, His stirring and disturbing photographs helped
keep the attention on extrajudicial killings from dying down, consequently encouraging public discourse
later on.

Media is also imperative as a 'check and balance' safeguard against potential power misconduct and
misuse in private and public sectors. According to broadcast journalist Ed Lingao, it is their job as the
Media to be critical, to correct errors of fact, errors of perception, and outright lies that take over public
spaces and endanger the interests of the Filipino public (Rappler, 2018, 0:50). Through in-depth
investigative journalism and rigorous reporting, the media uncovers unethical behaviors, thereby
guaranteeing government and corporate accountability. Simply put, the press acts as our country's
champion of free speech. It is the platform by which common folk can voice their viewpoints, especially
when such opinions question the status quo or scrutinize government actions.

Preserving this connection between press freedom and democracy can be challenging, especially
with how precarious it is. If not vigilantly upheld, press freedom could ultimately threaten democracy
when repressed. Media repression encompasses all measures employed by authorities and influential
entities to limit, regulate, or stifle the autonomy of the media in its operations and erode democratic
values of openness, responsibility, and free discourse. They can come in different forms, such as
censorship, disinformation, propaganda, libel and slander, violence, harassment, surveillance and privacy
violations, economic pressure, and ownership and control, among many others (Rappler, 2018). Take, for
example, reporter Pia Ranada's journalistic experiences. Pia Ranada talked about how she was singled
out and banned from the Malacañang for her unflattering coverage during the Duterte presidency
(Rappler, 2018, 0:00). Such targeted censorship ultimately limits the media's ability to hold the
government responsible and the public's capacity to gain a thorough and accurate grasp of events,
thereby obstructing their ability to make informed choices. Due to her critical reports and their
subsequent repercussion, Pia Ranada also encountered a significant volume of online death threats and
misogynistic harassment from fervent Duterte supporters, raising concerns about potential privacy
violations (Rappler, 2018, 1:27). Now, she feels the need to be brave all the time, especially in public.
Fears over one's safety can ultimately lead to a reluctance to cover sensitive issues and express opposing
opinions, undermining democratic principles of human rights, transparency, responsibility, and educated
decision-making.

Such cases of media repression are nothing new within the history books of Philippine Media. If
anything, everything we are going through right now in terms of journalistic freedom feels like a Deja vu.
Take, for instance, the parallels between the Philippines' post-World War II period and former president
Duterte's administration. During World War II, media was primarily controlled by the Japanese. While it
was restored after, it faced severe restrictions when Ferdinand Marcos declared martial law in 1972.
Independent media organizations were suppressed, and censorship became pervasive, with violence
against journalists and concerns regarding media ownership rampant within the industry.

Although press freedom was restored in 1986 after the historic EDSA people power revolution,
the same issues had come to plague Philippine media again. During the tenure of former President
Duterte, an outstanding number of threats and harassment cases targeted toward journalists and media
outlets critical of the government were recorded. Journalist assaults and homicides notably increased,
encouraged by the broad provisions of the Anti-Terror Law and the administration's extensive
deployment of disinformation-spreading trolls to influence public opinion. According to CMFR, NUJP, PPI,
and PCIJ, at least nine work-related killings, 16 libel cases, 14 cases of online harassment, 11 death
threats, six slay attempts, 4 cases of physical assault, were reported from June 30, 2016, to May 1, 2018,
among other attacks against the press (Rappler, 2018, 0:44). These numbers do not include the vast
majority of cases that goes unreported. Duterte's antagonistic position towards ABS-CBN, one of the
Philippines' significant media networks, and Rappler also resulted in the revocation of its franchise in
2020 and a ban forbidding them from entering the Malacañang and covering him in public places
respectively. State propaganda, boosted by trolls, click farms, hacking, and DDoS attacks, also
systematically targeted dissent. All these prompted worries over press freedom, which are reminiscent
of former president Marcos' dictator-like rule.

If we were to draw a lesson from this historical parallel, it would be that press freedom is
delicate and easily threatened by those currently in power. Issues regarding press freedom repeat with
the slightest imbalance, be it the stance of political leaders that we elect or the laws we allow to pass. As
such, we must push for legal safeguards and push back against threats that may protect or risk press
freedom, be it through active participation in protests, advocacy movements, and diplomatic efforts in
solidarity with journalists and media organizations. In doing so, we can guarantee that journalists can
perform their duties without fear of censorship and repercussions.

As a media student with aspirations in the field, I will keep my responsibilities close to my heart
and uphold the ethical standards of journalism, diligently pursuing accuracy, balance, and impartiality in
my work to prevent the dissemination of misinformation or fake news. Embracing my role as a societal
watchdog, I will refrain from sensationalizing stories merely for attention or controversy, recognizing that
such practices can distort reality and mislead the public. Furthermore, I will also actively engage in
seeking a variety of perspectives and fostering respectful dialogue. This approach not only helps
eliminate bias but also encourages inclusivity, equipping both myself and my audience with a deeper
understanding of current societal issues, media ethics, legal boundaries, and the constantly evolving
societal landscape. By doing all of these, I will exercise my fundamental right to freedom of expression
responsibly.

REFERENCES:

Rappler. (2018, March 29). #DefendPressFreedom: When Philippine media is threatened [Video].
YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1aonoskOaw

Rappler. (2018, April 9). Press Freedom Part 2 | Ezra Acayan [Video]. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lt4GvNT3jjo

Rappler. (2018, April 16). Press Freedom Part 3 | Pia Ranada [Video]. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhaBHxuw4hM

Rappler. (2018, April 23). Press Freedom Part 4 | Ed Lingao [Video]. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ffqw0cUkacI

Rappler. (2018, May 3). Campus journalists on why press freedom matters [Video]. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYDWr6jBigM

Rappler. (2018, June 29). Philippine media under attack: Press freedom after two years of Duterte
[Video]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZGzjVlG4wU