The not so innocent bystanders

This excellent question raised by Edwin Lacierda has landed me in quite a few fights in the newsroom, but what's one more, ey? I think any journalist who doesn't put down his or her camera or lay down his mic for a person in dire need of help is a piece of shit human being unfit for journalism and any other trade that require some degree of human decency and love for life. (Now you see why I get into fights?)

Believe it or not, for this I am sometimes called a radical. The traditional role of journalist as detached observer obviously still rules. But try as I might, I truly don't see the dilemma here. I think there is something wrong when you actually have to weigh an "ethical" question like this:

Human being getting bashed in the head by police needs my help now VERSUS Exclusive live frontal shot of human being getting bashed in the head by police. Man could die but maybe just injured. Shot must be seen by public so that they'll know of human being bashed in the head by police.

I'm still haunted by actual video of a reporter interviewing a dying girl as she lay pinned down by tons of cement in the Baguio earthquake. I think we all died a little there.

We should adopt Good Samaritan laws legally requiring citizens to assist people in distress.  The photogs caught shooting away at the scene of Princess Diana's fatal car wreck were investigated for violation of the French good samaritan law. We should have the same laws!

Edwin Lacierda on Role of Media
ANC has brought the rallies to the living room. Watching all the ANC footages, one sees the many montage of policemen dispersing the rallyists. You see them pulling and dragging the rallyists by force, grabbing their shirts, hitting them with truncheons. These are live shots with camera men right there where the violence is occurring.

And so, we ask: What is the role of media? Is its sole role to bring the news to our salas?

In the face of endless violence that happen in front of the cameras, should the camera person continue shooting the scenes and watch haplessly while a human person is being dragged against his will or while being beaten to the pulp? Does the media person have the obligation to stop and help the poor fellow and tell the law enforcement officials to stand down?

This has been the classic dilemma of media. Are they passive observers to an event or can they shape and influence events as they are happening?

I do not know if there is ever going to be a solution to this endless debate about the role of media. I do not even know what hierarchy of values a media person has to wrestle with in the very face of the events.

Maybe, we should ask our media-bloggers and shed light on the role of media in the light of violence and fluvial “cannonization” ceremonies. I am sure there is no dearth of opinion on this matter. But we still await for some enlightenment.

Comments

[dawin]

Miron,

Thank you for answering that vexing question. I am that glad that some media persons continue to hold on to their humanity over the pursuit of news.