Death by commoditisation
July 16th, 2009 by benign0In his recent blog post, Ben Kritz describes the utter failure of the Melissa Roxas affair to capture the sensationalist tastes of the Filipino public, much less raise any semblance of “outrage” in the United States (Melissa Roxas is a U.S. citizen).
I don’t think there is anything disturbing about the Filipino public’s being desensitised to this sort of thing.
Melissa Roxas is a Filipino-American person who is affiliated with some kind of U.S. chapter of the commie group “Bayan Muna” (an organisation headed by Satur Ocampo — go figure). By the way, try reading the “vision” statement of Bayan Muna out loud while resisting being siezed by the gagging reflex…
Bayan Muna, the people first. This is our battlecry. A society where true freedom, democracy, justice and peace prevail. This is our vision.
… and you may end up seeing your lunch shooting out of your nostrils.
Anyway, Roxas comes to the Philippines apparently to check out the real happenin’ “Bayan Muna” scene herself (this indeed is a Fil-Am generation raised on Reality TV!). To be fair, most “activists” can relate with that primal urge to make makibaka with da masa in da bundoks (roughly translated: to come down from the proverbial hill to consort with the revolting peasants at the battlefront). Again, go figure — she ends up, of all places, in Central Luzon, according to her affidavit, to “join with their members at La Paz, Tarlac to conduct an initial survey of the place for a future medical mission”. It’s like saying that Gabriela is all about women’s issues with a straight face.
There goes another rice noodle out my nose.
Like, Kritz, I’m left scratching my head trying to figure out a basis for an understanding of what happens next. Roxas’s account of her “abduction” and “torture” is readily available to the public in Ding Gagelonia’s thin-on-analysis “The Ordeal of Melissa Roxas” piece (well, he’s a “reporter” after all). For its part, the Bulatlat article I cited at the beginning of this blog does not fail to highlight that it is “a sworn affidavit” (kind of like describing an inspection as ocular — How else does one “inspect”? With one’s nose?) and, get this, that it is but another case …
[...] typical [of] the 200 cases of abduction and 1,010 cases of torture recorded since Gloria Macapagal Arroyo became president of the Philippines in 2001 [...]
But of course, Ka Satur; so therefore Arroyo is the cause of all that “injustice”, right?
It is interesting to note how the mouthpiece of a satellite organisation fronting for a movement whose singular mission is the destruction of everything that we currently consider to be legitimate, would find any semblance of value in a document such as a “sworn affidavit” that derives its credibility from endorsement via the country’s legal system. I suppose convenience is always relative.
[NB: GetRealPhilippines.com is currently migrating off its Geocities account which will go offline by the 26th October 2009. In the future, the above link can be accessed here (that page may not have been migrated as of this writing). Watch this space for updates on our migration project. - benign0].
So why has the public’s care factor towards such “atrocities” gone cold? Perhaps it is because not only have such kinds of news been commoditised, the preferred approach to dealing with them has been commoditised as well.
The Dingman as well as his fellow Bulatlateros just happened to have cherry-picked but a single sample of what is really a routine thing going on in the Philippines. And I’m talking about not just extra-judicial deprivation of a person’s liberties (as what happens in an abduction), I’m talking about extra-judicial everything — even in our preferred approach to changing heads of state.
Tough luck.
You simply can’t sensationalise something “extra-judicial” in a society where the term “extra-judicial” describes an entire way of life
The approach of using sensationalism as a means to get some kind attention or even resolution for all sorts of stuff in the Philippines has itself become commoditised. So we have a commodity injustice being actioned by a commodity method of raising public awareness — just like the options for deposing the commoditised Pinoy despot don’t seem to extend beyond our tired old commoditised “revolutionary” (read, ocho-ocho) approaches.
In the Philippines our unimaginative diskarte simply does not cut it any longer — not even if it involves a Fil-Am balikbayan, those demi-gods once revered for winning Los Angeles beauty titles and filling airplane cargo holds with big bulky boxes of corned beef. Nowadays you have to be a Ces Drilon to ellicit any kind of significant “outrage” over an atrocity created by any one of the hundreds of bands of bandits that roam the Philippine Islands with impunity. And even that little incident’s been swept under the rug.
============
Join us on Facebook!
July 16, 2009 at 4:16 pm
So Benigno. then sensationalise something judicial! Think of this scenario: Sydneysider OzziePinoy goes to the Philippines and in the interest of a fair go and he/she fair dinkum gets abducted by thugs. The AussiePinoy if he/she had learned how to deal with these kinds will not hold a pressie but get even! That itself will fan the tribal Aussie Aussie oi oi!
July 16, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Some thing is being said by the Pinoys-in-Pinas voters when Palparan gets elected into Congress. Go figure!
July 16, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Benign0:
The word is “commodification,” not “commoditisation.”
July 16, 2009 at 5:46 pm
How then, Marck, do you say it in verb form, i.e. “commoditise”, using your approach to spelling it? “Commodificate”?
July 16, 2009 at 5:56 pm
Benign0:
Commodify.
July 16, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Both — commodification and commoditization/–sation — can be used to mean “to turn into a commodity; make commercial.”
July 19, 2009 at 11:15 pm
commode-de-infestation
July 17, 2009 at 12:11 am
Benigno is correct, though not on the spelling.
com·mod·i·ti·za·tion [kə mòddəti záysh'n]
noun
making of product into commodity: the process by which a product reaches a point in its development where one brand has no features that differentiate it from other brands, and consumers buy on price alone
BTW Benigs,
This is in relation with your previous post that a “cockroach” will survive a nuke which I said Pinoys will survive it too because they were worst off than the cockroaches living in the crevices of Payatas landfill. I think Pinoy has lost its outrage over injustices because they have grown accustomed with daily murder, torture and and indignities. They have in accord with your Darwinian formulation become “adaptive” to these kind of environment.
July 17, 2009 at 5:45 pm
in which case, jcc, the pinoys will–resilient as they are–survive.
July 18, 2009 at 4:14 pm
British spelling… but why spend so much finger-ache on just the spelling when you know the meaning.
July 20, 2009 at 8:42 am
I mean commode-defecation, sounds funny Maro.
July 16, 2009 at 6:59 pm
It will take a while before the “Melissa Roxas” suits filed in USA will be heard in a USA-court. Reason — USA courts do NOT want to make decisions when passions are high.
Here is a case (hardly memorable for Pinoys in Pinas) about a group of OFW-nurses in New York. They were charged with gross-negligence (putting patients at risk) when they resigned en-masse to protest “…maltreatment and recruitment violations by their (Filipino) employers”. New York’s State Supreme Court ruled against the charge of gross-negligence. Reason — they resigned and left their posts AFTER their normal duty-hours were over. The OFW-nurses also lost their case against the recruitment agency and there claim about racial discrimination.
News-story-line is here:
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20090716-215615/26-Pinoy-nurses-lose-racial-bias-case-in-NY
July 17, 2009 at 2:23 am
Do you have a link to a story regarding any legal action Melissa Roxas has initiated in the U.S.?
July 17, 2009 at 4:40 am
Google-search for such legal action (filed in California or anywhere in USA) returned Zero/zilch/nada.
July 16, 2009 at 10:54 pm
This is the result, when a Filipino American thinks she can do
without any trouble to execise her Citizen’s Rights as she exercises
it in the U.S.
She should be aware that the Philippines is ruled by people who can
violate your rights and can even make you disappear without even
bothered conscienses.
These people who made Fertilizer Funds disappear. Surely, they can have you disappear also.
July 17, 2009 at 2:35 am
unless roxas was born in the u.s.a., i wonder how she became naturalized with her active affiliation with, as you said, a communist organization. if she misrepresented that fact in her naturalization application, that could be a ground for revocation. i wonder how many similar cases are there among fil-ams in the u.s.?
those who are aspiring to become u.s. citizen someday, beware.
July 17, 2009 at 3:05 am
According to her affidavit, her affiliation was a rather recent development. And, it is not necessarily a disqualification, depending on the circumstances. Misrepresentation, as you say, certainly would be though, no matter how innocent the association.
July 17, 2009 at 4:49 am
roxas’ affidavit (as reproduced by ding gagelonia) suggest that she is a natural-born american of philippine ancestry. i believe the girl is a bit naive (like a gnat rushing into the flame) to tempt fate in the manner that she did. she should have known that the philippine government has long been at “war” with the cpp/npa of which “bayan muna” is a not-so-secret affiliate. if she thought she had a free pass by virtue of her american passport, that was a gross mistake and she had a very rude awakening.
btw, membership in an organization that seeks to overthrow a duly established government, e.g. communist, milf, mnlf or abu sayyaf, may not necessarily cause automatic disqualification but it can make the application for citizenship as difficult as getting through the eye of a needle.
July 17, 2009 at 7:20 am
i agree.
i think it is no different from the Abu Sayaff holding 3 ICRC volunteers hostage. at the very least, the Abu Sayaff fessed up. and they will have pending charges. on the other hand, Melissa gets abducted and all you hear is silence.
July 17, 2009 at 3:01 am
I actually had a conversation with a couple people today about what I wrote in that particular post. The general tone of their reaction was “How dare I make light of activists being killed and/or disappearing, and imply that Melissa Roxas is lying!”
I can understand the reaction. Even the most inured people can have enough humanity in them that the treatment of unjust death in anything less than a somber way causes them to recoil in horror. My post was mostly another expression of my savage hatred for Communism, an attitude that I will neither be dissuaded from nor apologize for. I certainly do not condone “extra-judicial” acts; for the government to justify them on the basis of fighting the Red Menace, indeed, on any basis whatsoever is a moral affront and a crime against humanity. Be that as it may, that fig leaf of cause & effect would not even exist were it not for Joma Sison and his dim-witted band of thugs.
Melissa Roxas, no matter what her story is, has disqualified herself from any sympathy from me despite whatever unjust treatment she received. She chose to ally herself with an organization that perpetuates the root cause of the unacceptable violence in the country. If her true intentions were to help the disadvantaged, there are a number of apolitical organizations with which she could work. And she is an American: she has no business being involved in even the most innocuous way with any group that overtly seeks to overthrow the government of another sovereign nation, no matter what her personal feelings may be. That is actually punishable under U.S. law, should the authorities back home choose to get pissy about it.
What happens to the country? The government and the armed forces lose all sense of justice and professionalism, the population becomes numb to the mayhem, and only the wrong people – like Bong V’s doctor friend – truly suffer. And you can thank that pseudo-intellectual sophomoric jackass living the high life in Utrecht for it. Get rid of him and his sycophants, and you can at least start cleaning up this mess.
July 17, 2009 at 4:18 am
Commie phobia aside – Bayan’s appeal lies in the consistency of its message and its personalities.
Its members have not swung from one party to another like the political butterflies that dominate the trapo parties which can’t be told apart from each other. Lakas-NUCD, KAMPI and the likes are parties that are creations of the group that holds the reins of administration.
As there are no mainstream parties which have a track record the likes of an RNC or DNC, Bayan comes into consideration as being consistently pro-poor, anti-dictatorship, pro-human rights. It is also attractive to well-meaning individuals who have gotten tired of trapos, of trapo parties – and more often than not with results that wind up costing selfless people their own lives – as in the case of Dr Bong Peñera, Dr Bobby de la Paz.
As a party in the left, Bayan is an option for people who believe in political and economic system needs to change BUT without resorting to armed struggle. However, this is controversial as Bayan is perceived to be an offshoot of the CPP’s United Front tactics. Which brings focus to another party of the left that believes in electoral struggle – Akbayan. This group of individuals were formerly from Bayan Muna but who felt there was not enough democratic space and that Bayan Muna is too dogmatic in its approach. Akbayan is the nearest thing the Philippines has to the DNC issues-wise.
Can you imagine LAKAS-KAMPI doing a medical mission? or doing a fundraiser for poor folks? I would bet the mention of the word LAKAS-KAMPI brings to mind a gathering of crocodiles and vultures out to feast on the carcass of the masa.
The parties of the Philippine Left do not indulge in horsetrading, dare to call a spade a spade, and have active debates within their ranks. Contrast this to mainstream Philippine parties which survive on the basis of largesse and patronage. Thus, I am not surprised that the young and the idealists will tend to gravitate towards the parties of the Philippine Left, by default.
As to Melissa Roxas’ experience, it will validate what Bayan Muna has been saying all along, and this will gain more adherents to the cause. I think the Melissa’s abductors did more harm than good by dancing to the tune that Bayan Muna has been singing all this time – and on cue.
July 17, 2009 at 9:17 am
There’s Left, and then there’s Out In Left Field.
Akbayan is one of the very few political parties in this country that even fit the functional definition of one. Bayan Muna is a front, and it’s harder to take them seriously than even LAKAS-KAMPI, because they expect people to be so stupid as to think they actually believe the bullshit they spew – whereas LAKAS-KAMPI for the most just drops the pretense of spewing any bullshit in the first place. It actually wouldn’t be a bad outcome if the shenanigans of M. Roxas & friends do drive people to *the cause*, but the progressive one that groups like Akbayan legitimately try to promote, and not the totalitarianism for which fronts like Bayan Muna try to provide a mask of respectability.
July 17, 2009 at 4:32 am
Some Filipino Americans have DUAL Citizenships. Most of us remit money to our love ones in the Philippines. Our money is used in the Philippines. We vote also. We have the same rights as any Filipino
to have a say on how our country is governed.
Some of us will come home someday when we retire. We want to live
in a better Philippines.
July 17, 2009 at 4:44 am
Dual-citizenship can be a problem.
The Philippine authorities would have been able to detain Melissa Roxas for three-months-or-longer if she also carried a Philippine passport, and USA will have greater difficulty in extricating her.
July 17, 2009 at 7:25 am
detain for what reasons? please cite the specific statute under which Melissa Roxas can be detained for more than 3 months. is the statute applicable to the circumstances under consideration?
July 17, 2009 at 9:12 am
to BongV: in simpler English (and we’ve seen it displayed time and time again by China, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Somalia, Haiti, Venezuela, Cuba, others) there is very little the outside world can do when authorities of a specific country makes decisions (legal or illegal) about its own citizens.
DJB’s “eagle passport” provides him marginal protection while he/DJB is in Pinas because if Malacanang or Crame were to decide to act on Filipino-citizen Bocobo, that he is Filipino citizen makes him just as vulnerable to “stuff” as MLQ3 or Primer. Pinas laws (and normal practices ) are operative over Pinas-citizen DJB while DJB is in Pinas.
The USA, on the other hand, can raise a much stronger stinker of a ruckus (and insist on Geneva Convention-type or UnitedNations-type rules or rules-of-diplomacy ’stuff’) to protect USA-citizen JoeAmerica.
July 17, 2009 at 9:20 am
At least, the authorities of said countries declare responsibility – unlike the Philippines.
July 17, 2009 at 7:56 am
For that matter, why travel under a Philippine Passport if you’ve got the option to travel under another flag anyway?
I once said that one of the best parts about becoming an Aussie citizen was throwing my Philippine Passport into the crapper.
That document is not worth the paper it is printed on. The very notion of calling it a “passport” is yet another irony lost in our society.
All this “passport” gets you is a full cavity search at every Western European border and a patronising stare from employees from just about every North American consulate.
July 17, 2009 at 9:23 am
to benign0: a reason to hang onto Pinas passport is “just-in-case” one encounters bad guys — really bad guys — whose special agenda against Aussies or Americans is significantly harsher than their distaste for Pinoys.
July 17, 2009 at 9:28 am
True story. Thanks to our own display of national idiocy in electing G. Bush not once but twice (well, okay, once for sure), our stylish birdie book is no longer as appreciated in some places as it used to be.
July 17, 2009 at 10:09 am
“That document is not worth the paper it is printed on. The very notion of calling it a “passport” is yet another irony lost in our society.”
Manoy Benignz sobra ka naman! It is just a piece of documentation and identification. Why belittle the Philippine Passport? Swerte mo may kakuntsaba ka ngayon? Why do you guys really hate the Philippines?
People who wanted to have dual passports as long as they are allowed to, can do it, why not? This is still a free Earth and Universe.
As for Miss Roxas, pabayaan mo na siya. Leave her alone, if she wanted to do it in the ways she wants to. Ikaw, if the same thing happens to you, you can also make the same noise, drama and sensationalize it too! That’s why Hollywood exist!
You seem to have the time in your hands to be angry at everything Filipino. Mag-smile ka nang kunti at mag-dancing-dancing.
Slow down ka sa kada-dak-dak sa mga Pilipino or half-pilipino. BTW, which one is better dakdakero or bulatlatero? If prefer bulatlat.
July 17, 2009 at 10:22 am
Hmmmmm. I can surmise from what I read above, Ms. CheekyChic that the crux of your contention with me in this instance is my statement that the Pinoy “passport” is not worth the paper it is printed on.
Yet I look through the rest of what you say, and you offer no convincing counter-argument to this assertion other than your quaint appeals to emotion.
Tough luck. :-D
July 17, 2009 at 11:00 am
My sweet reply to Manong Benings 10:22a.m.
Not interested. Nakakasakit nang ulo ang brilyante mong libro at ang iyong reasoning at logic!
What counter argument? what..what? do we need it? what for? how much Australian dollars would I get if I do that? Huh?
Quaint! what… appeals to emotions mas madrama!
I-simplify mo nga artikulo mo Benigno in a few sentences, if you can. In a few words, tell me, why would it bother you if Miss Roxas sensationalizes what happened to her? Eh.. babae naman siya! She has every right to.
Tough luck too when you call yourself Australian, when most Australians will not even take you as one, even if you have an Australian passport and you’ve been there for yonks of years, whether you are Caucausian or not.
Yeah, it’s all about the passport. Uhum… Teka, linisin ko muna kubeta nang amo ko. Excuse me Sir Benign. Huhum..Nakakapagod magalit… makapagpabotox nga!
July 17, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Well, it seems that even you, Cheekychic, given all this outrage over “Pinoy bashing” that you perceive in my brilliant work aren’t even willing to defend the dignity of the Philippine “Passport” for free.
Kawawa nga naman talaga ang Pinoy.
Her staunchest defenders find no shame in expecting a buck for their trouble.
Hey wait… that’s what I say here!
[NB: GetRealPhilippines.com is currently migrating off its Geocities account which will go offline by the 26th October 2009. In the future, the above link can be accessed here (that page not migrated as of this writing). Watch this space for updates on our migration project. - benign0].
:-D
July 17, 2009 at 3:02 pm
“Kawawa nga naman talaga ang Pinoy.
Her staunchest defenders find no shame in expecting a buck for their trouble.”
After you saying that. All I can say, talagang may diperensya yang tuktok mo. Of all people to be even accused of that, it would have to be someone like me. Talagang katok ka man. Suwerte ka mababait ang mga Pilipino, who read your freaking writings. Kung hindi, well,I dont need to describe it
I’m only asking if it is worth even for a flippin’ 1000 or 100 Australian dollars? Your week’s wage or salary, let us say to have a convincing counter argument… even for FREE. the answer is NO!.. hear me N-O! NO!. I hope so.
Take your happy meds Benign0, go and see a Counsellor as I can see you need a lot of help. I dont go around insulting people but you deserve it. Grrr…Bastos ka binababoy mo ang Pilipino and you just want us to take it.
My sincere apologies to whoever runs and administers this blog.
July 17, 2009 at 8:05 am
That much credit I can give to Pinoy commies. They are consistent to the point of dogmatic moronism.
But let’s not put consistency out of context. Consistency can also be applied to the art of bullshittery.
That is the whole point behind having “front” and “arms”.
You can have front organisations to apply a consistent but bullshit face of legitimacy (in order to be able to “participate” in legitimate governance processes) on one hand, a military arm to apply consistent but violent pressure on the field, and a core cadre at the epicentre of the cell network to enforce ideological consistency and purity across all these fronts and arms.
It’s simple, really™
July 17, 2009 at 9:09 am
b0:
exactly. but then the commies wouldn’t be true to their doctrine if they didn’t do so.
all things being equal, at the end of the day, kanya kanyang BS yan – you’ll just have to sort through the BS or come up with one. and be consistent about it.
i think utrecht misses the point – by engaging in protracted war instead of accelerating the efficiency of the means of production to bring about prosperity and untold wealth he loses the momentum. after all if the dogma that political power stems from economic power, then it stands to reason that the priority is to support and promote capitalism in order to create the conditions leading to the evolution of a more advanced system – a hybrid.
the ability and capacity to wage.war needs to be refocused and rechanneled towards building prosperity for all. wealth should be embraced not despised. after all what really is the end being sought for by ideologies – happiness, peace, stability, prosperity – the devil of getting there is in the details – and that’s where the fun lies.
as Deng XiaoPing would say it does not matter if the cat is black or white as long as it catches mice.
July 17, 2009 at 10:54 am
Benign0,
I laughed for 10 minutes at the noodle out the nose.
Jcc has hit the nail properly on its flat beaner. “Jaded” is the term that comes to mind; that is the popular non-response to corruption and the violence attached to a variety of affronts to individual rights.
I also appreciate the legal perspectives of the two Bens, as I roam the edge of propriety by being here on a visa but opining obnoxiously about this and that, where often this is government and that is stupidity. But I would not be so extreme as to align myself with an anti-government group; most seem to me to engage in fund-raising the typical way, through extortion, intimidation, destruction and other jolly ways in which they demonstrate their good will toward people.
Joe
July 17, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Hey Joe, if you don’t mind, I think you’ve given me my blog topic for today, you’re not touchy about your IP on the phrase “roam the edge of propriety” are you? (Best thing I’ve heard all day). Check me later; I need a nap first.
July 17, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Ben K,
Hope your snooze was good. Blog away, I’m not touchy. Where may I go to read same?
Joe
July 17, 2009 at 12:38 pm
The thing is the case is a serious matter if Melissa Roxas was indeed abducted and tortured by government agents,
Whether you are pro or anti Gloria, pro or anti communist, if you are committed to democracy and its values, you will not excuse human rights violations of any kind and of any degree.
Benigno’s post misses the point, as usual.
July 17, 2009 at 12:56 pm
If that’s the point you took from it, then I think you missed it too. The point I took from it is that the real tragedy is that such things are no longer considered extraordinary here.
The *real* thing is that it should be a serious matter regardless of what actually happened, and it’s not. And that’s a seriously deep problem that goes way past partisanship and ideologies.
July 17, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Ben K,
The matter is taken seriously. Unfortunately, those who take it seriously are dismissed by Benigno as communist or anti-government etc. He even mocks the process as commoditisation.
When someone speaks about a personal experience of barbarity at the hands of government it is not kosher to accuse them of sensationalism
The decent, civilized reaction is to call for a thorough investigation of the matter.
July 17, 2009 at 5:44 pm
how do you know its not serious? or extraordinary?
is the litmus the length of media coverage?
if so, is MJ’s death the most important thing this year so far? what about anna nicole smith?
July 17, 2009 at 6:05 pm
The decent, civilized reaction was what was exactly prescibed by the UN rapporteur in 2007. That was predictably dismissed by the government, and apart from the commentary of angsty bloggers and the liberal elements of the media, not strenuously or proactively taken up by anyone else among the population. People can be enlisted in droves to go protest a columnist in Hong Kong or a bimbo TV actress in the US, but is the same fervent effort being applied to try to whip up mass indignation over this crisis? NO. And do not rest on the laurels of vigilant commentary in the blogosphere or Bulatlat or the PCIJ, because you know as well as I and everyone else here does that those lines of communication do not reach more than the smallest fraction of the country. Who has attempted to leverage the humanitarian and business interests of the foreign community here to try to expand knowledge of the issue and put the government under the international microscope? NO ONE. Who among the overseas Filipino groups has made representations to foreign governments, NGO’s, or the UN to try to bring diplomatic pressure to bear? NO ONE, including that putz Sison and his gang, who like to portray themselves as the victims in all this.
Tell me who is taking concrete, practical steps to try to do something about it, rather than just complaining, and I’d join them immediately.
@GabbyD, yes the length and character of media coverage, especially here, is a very good litmus test. And while this may be more important to you than Michael Jackson, to the average schmo it’s not. More’s the pity.
July 17, 2009 at 6:19 pm
“…especially here…”
why especially here…?
in the US, MJs deaths coverage has been so ‘extensive’ its been criticized. same with anna nicole smith’s death.
yet, we all know that these things aren’t “important”, merely interesting or entertaining (at best).
here, there… media is usually the same.
i guess my point is, if you think that sustained media attention is the telling evidence for what people think is important or not, i think thats misleading. sometimes its true, but sometimes its not.
now, your next question is interesting: why are there no mass protest actions against it?
thats a far more interesting question.
part of it is B0’s distrust of bayan muna, something thats shared by many (which i don’t understand, hence i shan’t discuss it).
another is the fact that, in order to have successful mass action, you need:
1) a simple story, a meme to grasp
2) the story is cast in stark terms, typically good vs evil, right vs wrong.
3) its best if the outrage in the story can be framed in a picture, an action, a word/phrase…
in the melissa case, not all of the elements are present in the minds of the public yet. so its much harder to mobilize.
an illustrative example (not that i believe this is necessarily the best example): edsa 2
1) simple story: senators refuse to open envelope
2) senators evil, erap evil. the witnesses good, justice denied
3) senator aquino-oreta dancing with glee.
July 17, 2009 at 6:42 pm
@Gabby D,
I say especially here because the media body is far less complex here than in other places like the US, and has a far greater influence on the general population. I don’t have to look any farther than most of my own family for examples; they don’t know what they’re supposed to think if they’re not told by GMA or ABS-CBN. Or by me, which is in its own way just as disturbing.
Your insightful example just supports my contention. The BIG media here has much more power to shape the public agenda. Look at the attention Ces Drilon is able to grab with her various clownishness, and how that instantly shapes public opinion. The ‘Erap’s Envelope’ is a slightly more sophisticated example. So…what’s the story? Why aren’t Mike Enriquez and Julius Babao shouting about this on the news, or better yet, applying the same sort of creative talent the mass media demonstrated in the Envelope Incident, or the Manila Pen circus, or the Drilon kidnapping to guide public policy? ESPECIALLY when it’s a grave matter that no one in the right mind would offer any dissenting point of view on; seriously, who’s going to argue that there’s a positive to people getting killed or vanishing? People will argue the cause and the blame, sure; but the outcry that the mass media could easily orchestrate would likely be enough to stop the madness. And would be a good basis for attracting some outside attraction of a little more practical use than one dude from the UN. No? Yes? Discuss. :)
July 17, 2009 at 7:30 pm
@ben
it seems we’re at loggerheads. its a chicken v egg situation — does the media make the story, or does it take what’s already there.
or, does mike enriquez (or his bosses) decide (singlehandedly) what to talk about in the news, and insists on talking only about that? i doubt it.
i definitely take the latter position, esp for the philippines.
not that i don’t think the former is necessarily false. the classic example is fox news, specifically the opinion programs on that network (the news programs also have this ‘feature’). they talk about certain things a certain way coz they have an audience that likes to listen to it (and only it).
maybe Ding, or a journalist, can describe how the philippine newscycle is determined. who decides what to talk about?
i have one piece of evidence that suggests that my position is correct:
– > the news is very similar every news show you watch.
because its similar, that means everyone is following either each other, or some third party (malacanang press coverage for example).
IF THE NEWS WERE DIFFERENT, or the slants were systematically different, then its clear that they set up the news themselves in an effort to communicate what they want (its stops being journalism, and becomes propaganda).
i watch the late night news on occassion, as well as the early evening news. the stories are all the same. (i like mike enriquez’ voice tho!)
with FOX news, the news slants are noticeably different. its so different, its sometimes even very funny.
—-
aside: i also don’t recall drillon to be clownish. are you referring to the kidnapping incident?
______
hence, if they are just following some 3rd party, then its not media responsibility then to talk about something — its Bayan Muna’s job to market the melissa issue.
like i said, its hard, coz its NOT A SIMPLE story, to the minds of many people.
on the other hand, i’m glad there are no protest actions. as far as ive read, the wheels of justice are turning, albeit slowly. let the authorities investigate, and maybe this complex story will be become much simpler after more light is cast on it…
July 17, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Ben K,
. . . that putz Sison and his gang . . .
Thank you. I thought I was the only one who found his regurgitating typewriter a bit overmuch . . .
Joe
July 17, 2009 at 8:13 pm
I would submit that the Melissa Roxas story is not the most useful one in bringing the larger issue of extra-judicial brutality into the light. The Roxas matter is too full of holes and mystery to package neatly. And, she’s alive and unharmed. That’s good for her, but really, it’s a tough sell compared to something like a Neda, for example. I know it sounds crass, but I think you see what I’m getting at. That’s one thing.
The other is, I think the reverence for journalism vs propaganda is a bit disingenuous in this day and age. All media shapes the story, whether they do it independently or together. Are the deaths of soldiers fighting ASG or NPA rebels given the same prominence as, say, the discovery of yet another ’salvage’ victim in a vacant lot somewhere? Hardly. We do the same thing here. The majority of us have a respect for fact and rational discourse, but let’s face it, we talk about the things we want to talk about. All Fox News (which I can’t stomach, but I at least respect the honesty of their chosen mode of presentation) has done is to drop the pretense of impartiality and claim their justification for doing so was that no one else was being impartial, either. But beyond that, it was a commercial decision. Just as aping one another is a commercial decision (and probably a good one) on the part of the two big networks here.
I’m think Ding would disagree with me, but really, if you’re in the *business* of journalism, the rational thing to do is to produce the product that is going to earn you the highest return. If there’s a story that needs to be told, the most effective way to do that is to stop thinking of it in terms of an issue or matter of principle and think of it as a marketable object. You can express your ideals and guide public policy by way of which objects you choose to market, and how. If that’s propaganda, then it is. Best make use of it before someone who’s not on your side does.
July 18, 2009 at 8:56 am
Ben K,
There is the idealism of youth and the deceit of the elders. We are taught (in the US) of the goodness of the American Way, then we learn, as we grow older and wiser, of the bad deeds that have been done, some from societal blindness (racism), some from bad information (Iraq), some from mistaken assumptions (Viet Nam), and some for personal greed (partisan politics, aimed at re-election rather than public service). We learn that the “perfect and all-knowing” parents of our childhood cry, curse, argue, fail in their jobs and endlessly screw up.
We learn that journalism is as unbiased as the human who writes the story, or the editor who demands a point of view.
I studied journalism in college. It was a couple of years ago, heh. News objectivity was important then, as a principle. You are right, today it has gone to the dogs of commercial reality. Papers can’t compete, can’t survive, unless they bring in audience. So they go for the gore. Or the glamor, gone bad (Michael Jackson, Paris Hilton). Same with TV.
The media shape the message, the messenger, and the story itself. Take sensitivity to “body count” in wars; it has become very extreme. Look at the slaughter of the American Civil War versus the pristine wars of today, where each American death makes the front page. Even enemy deaths (civilians) are the subject of investigations and condemnations.
The media are today shaping how the Afghanistan fighting will play out: more focus on constructive developments for Afghanistan and more effort on ending the civilian deaths.
So like many things in our chaotic world, bad begets good as good begets bad. God doth toy with us in His infinite sense of humor . . .
Still, it is hard for me to let go of the principle that news should be objective, and hard to let go of the principle of public interest before self-interest. They seem somehow more honorable than prostitution of principle.
Though, in saying that, I must admit I like prostitutes, in the main, for most have a definitive objectivity about their work. Honest, as it were.
Hmmmm. . . maybe that is your point, huh? There is a certain honesty to be found in the prostitution of media.
Joe
July 17, 2009 at 7:23 pm
I agree.
July 17, 2009 at 7:25 pm
i agree. i don’t think the point was missed – the point is being expressed in different ways.
July 17, 2009 at 1:02 pm
It even goes beyond that, jcc, to include pretty much any kind of misfortune that besets our hapless lot.
Take that long-forgotten maritime “mishap” that happened mid last year where I highlighted a similar kind of silence:
And still we fail to deal with it.
Typical.
In Roxas’s case, I am with BenK here:
Same principle as some of the comments I’ve read back when Ces Drilon was abducted. She chose the territory. Rescue her but then don’t make the whole thing out to be a case of some innocent sod gunned down at the park while eating his lunch.
July 17, 2009 at 6:05 pm
how does the organization perpetuate the root cause of violence in the country?
July 17, 2009 at 10:53 pm
on this benigs, i have a parallel comment in one blog:
“She placed herself in peril by following-up a leads to determine who is now the head of the brigand and terrorist group “Abbu Sayaf. Who cares? Mr. Marcos during his time has twitted on media’s addiction towards criminals by needlessly interviewing them as if they were heads of State and giving them inordinate media coverage to spew their vitriolic against the government.
Mr. Marcos is also a criminal, but atleast he was the head of State.”
July 17, 2009 at 5:02 pm
whats wrong w Bayan Muna’s mission statement? why is it so ludicrous?
July 17, 2009 at 7:58 pm
The words are so glorious as to be meaningless. Its like taking a gay and cheery wow-Philippines billboard and posting it in front of the squatter’s village down by the river-sewer.
Joe
July 17, 2009 at 8:11 pm
that’s the point of a mission statement – to get from point A to point B
the fun begins when the discussion on “how to get there” starts. kanya kanyang BS na yan.
July 20, 2009 at 10:28 am
is that all thats wrong with it?
July 17, 2009 at 7:11 pm
Tsk tsk. You give me too much credit, Ms. Cheekychic.
Look around you. It does not take cute little moi to make a mockery of the Philippines — because it already was one long before “benign0″ even became a household name.
Making “baboy” da Pinas, you say? Guess again. Maybe you should tell that to the people who on a daily basis use Manila’s esteros as their personal toilet and Manila’s sidewalks as their personal garbage dump.
Better yet, check out my seminal piece Tourist industry of last resort, where I make this observation:
Kung baga, madame, the Philippines actually IS a beautiful country. It’s the PEOPLE that make it ugly.
:-D
July 17, 2009 at 8:30 pm
That — the extremely rapid loss of primary forest land area in the Philippines — is very disturbing. That reduces the likelihood that a Pinoy or Pinay scientist in Pinas discovers the next antibiotic or anti-aging product. This is one more reason to allow foreigners to buy land so that some European dude can save Pinas forest for posterity (as has already happened in Latin America).
July 17, 2009 at 11:04 pm
There are FILIPINOs who preserve the land and want to keep it beautiful. Until today – BUT they are a minority. The poor state of philippine forests and reefs reflects a global trend. A trend that gave rise to organizations like Greenpeace.
In the Philippines, there are people who are out to protect the environment BUT, lots of them are DEAD – shot by rogue elements paid by parties who would rather extract the resources under the forest or the sea.
And, the tree-huggers happen to be the Bayan Muna activists or more recently, the fashionistas who have taken on the environmental challenge due to the prestige and hipness of going green.
I am inclined to presume that LAKAS-KAMPI stalwarts will be more interested in how much money can be made out of the remaining forest cover – either as timber sold in the blackmarket or as possible tourist destinations.
There seems to be a fetish for MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE WIN-LOSE solutions when a WIN-WIN can be crafted.
For example, unabated strip mining can turn vast tracts of forest into Nauru – and you don’t need a Filipino to do that – you just need the Nauru government to sell it to UK, AU, NZ, and DE.
To restate a statement by a conference on community rights and corporate social responsibility – The central question boils down to “whether or not the wealth created by the latest {insert favorite industry here} boom will benefit the people living in areas where the resources being extracted are located… whether this wave of extractive expansion generate the national developmental impacts that the transnational corporations (TNCs), international financial institutions (IFIs), and governments of the central capitalist countries claim that it will?”
The answer, unfortunately, is no. At least not without significant shifts in policy on the parts of all the major players involved – the international community, local and foreign corporations, and perhaps most importantly, the Philippine government interested in developing sustainable export economies redesigned to benefit a large number of their own citizens.
One can argue “again and again for bringing the state back into development,”. However, to bring the state back into development one has to immerse in the world of realpolitik. The world of backroom deals and horsetrading – you can blast the dealings till the cows come home – and not get results or you can get involved and get results.
And I have a shameless plug – visit our forest by the sea – Shimric Beach Farm in Talomo, Davao City – where we rehabilitated the coastline through a blend of solutions – turning sand dunes into forests which resisted erosion and actually helped expand the coast line. This is augmented by artificial coral reefs so that the overfished Talomo Bay gets a respite.
The stiffest resistance to the program was actually – the fishing community!!! Because, the artificial reefs will destroy their nets (come to think of it – there isn’t anything much left to fish after the fishing community waylaid the natural reefs through dynamite fishing). The very community you are trying to help is the very community that will stop you in your tracks.. We could have just thrown the towel and concluded that the fishing community as retards – though we did have that conclusion. But we didn’t stop there. We asked ourselves what can we do to solve the impasse – or we are back to square 1.
So we had to change our tack, and implemented a public relations campaign. Got the community on board, got the barangay on board, identified the areas where the artificial reefs are located, asked what the communities concern was. When the dialogue was finished – our coastal rehabilitation program wound up being adopted by the barangay, the fishing community formed volunteers who will help protect the artificial reefs/identify alternative areas for the reefs. It was a tough job, but someone’s gotta do it – you can’t rely on steak commandos.
We can’t change Talomo bay overnight but we have our daily success stories, and we still have our naysayers – but, we don’t give a damn, our implementation is on track, our forest by the sea is greener than ever. Next goal in the horizon is R&D on small-scale prototypes for generating home electricity – solar/wind/wave, technology to come from the more developed economies, possibly some reverse engineering in cooperation with the local academe- lotsa stuff to do, and have fun doing it.
July 18, 2009 at 5:28 am
Bong, UP n,
I read somewhere that the notion of nature preserves is someone of a misnomer because nature herself has a way of constantly changing the animal populations and vegetation. The pine forests in the US are a fairly recent development. If the preserves can just be saved from logging, they will grow back. Maybe different than today, but “natural” nonetheless.
In the Philippines, the promise is that things grow abundantly.
Still, I agree with efforts to keep it “as is”, of course.
Joe
July 18, 2009 at 8:06 pm
Joe:
we actually wound up attracting new species into the area – including trees whose oil (when extracted, Lauren Hutton sells for $20 an oz) – it is an oil that “possesses a unique capacity to promote the formation of new tissue, thereby accelerating wound healing and the growth of healthy skin. This process is known as cicatrization. For this reason, it is a widely used traditional topical aid. In Pacific island folk medicine, it is applied liberally to cuts, scrapes, burns, insect bites and stings, abrasions, acne and acne scars, psoriasis, diabetic sores, anal fissures, sunburn, dry or scaly skin, blisters, eczema, herpes sores, and to reduce foot and body odor. The oil is also massaged into the skin to relieve neuralgia, rheumatism and sciatica. Said oil is employed by Polynesian women for promoting healthy, clear, blemish-free skin, and is also used on babies to prevent diaper rash and skin eruptions. ”
The product started as an oil, and we are now developing creams, ointments, and soap with the oil as base. :)
July 19, 2009 at 2:37 am
Bong V,
That sounds like a great project, indeed.
Joe
July 17, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Well, look no further than Subic Bay UPn. It takes an American military base to preserve original rainforest trees in Luzon. No wonder the natives were so quick to turn the facility into a playground as soon as the Americans vacated…
July 18, 2009 at 4:23 pm
So the Americans actually help to preserve the environment? Now that’s an interesting note. This needs to be studied more and the facts thrown in the face of anti-Americans.
That natives are usually the ones who waste their own environment is not a myth. Extinct species like the dodo and quagga were wasted that way.
July 18, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Chino F,
I bought 1.25 hectares of raw jungle and tidal swamp in Mindanao, right on the beach. The locals thought I was nuts because the cost to fill it would be 2 million pesos, and they really thought I was nuts when (after having bought this crap land for cheap) I told them I would leave it natural. See, I love the huge lizards that inhabit the place (water monitors), the fish spawning in the tidal lakes, and the hundreds of bird species that fly in and out, or live there. I later found there are huge spiders and poisonous lizards, not to mention cobras. Wild orchids. Hundreds of plant species, ferns out the gazoo.
It is the only natural preserve in the area, the neighbors having leveled and chopped things to the stark civilized look they prefer.
Joe
July 18, 2009 at 11:20 pm
That’s great Joe. Hope you can keep it that way.
It’s interesting also to note that environmentalism originated out of Philippine shores. If we rejected everything foreign, we’d be rejecting a lot of good causes.
July 18, 2009 at 7:01 am
You can’t solve a problem Mr Resident Alien Benign if you are out of the country. You got rid yourself of your Filipino citizenship and the whole thing that involves it, bottomline is you are not a Filipino. You still want to be part of it, as life in Australia is “too boring” probably.
You must be one of these brats who grow up not knowing how others live and survive. As you are living and enjoying your high life in Australia then all these dak-daks are useless. My bet some have gone tired arguing with you and will just agree with you.
You presume everything and that all Filipinos will ask for your money. Mr Resident Alien, you accuse me of asking for money as I knew my time is worth more than you could think.
I can call you names but I will just bite my tongue and keep my decorum. Mr Resident Alien, wala po ako sa Pilipinas, hindi ko po habit manghingi nang pera, as I am earning po Manoy.
Not wanting to sound radical Manong B for something. I will keep it up to this point, as I can cite more things if you wanted to. I dont want to offend others. As with my years out of the country, I can swear at anyone like a pro, kaya dahan dahan ka sa ka-insulto sa akin at kapwa Pilipino.
Lastly, have some “respect” if you have that in your vocabulary and social ethics, if not then what can I do. I assure, you will meet a lot of people like me. Give yourself a tour of Australia, as there are too many things to see and do there.
Everything is all in the mind. Kaya easy ka sa mga kapwa Pinoy mo, dont be too hard on us. Most of all, I dont give you credit nor thank you for any thing you say. Keep on blogging the way you and may your enemies increase.
Cheers to a whinger like you. How is that mate?
July 18, 2009 at 9:04 am
CheekyChic,
Lunar space module pilot Michael Collins, in advance of the 40th anniversary of his moon visit:
“I really believe that if the political leaders of the world could see their planet from a distance of 100,000 miles their outlook could be fundamentally changed,” Collins said. “That all-important border would be invisible, that noisy argument silenced. The tiny globe would continue to turn, serenely ignoring its subdivisions, presenting a unified facade that would cry out for unified understanding, for homogeneous treatment. The Earth must become as it appears: blue and white, not capitalist or communist; blue and white, not rich or poor; blue and white, not envious or envied.”
Joe
July 18, 2009 at 7:08 pm
wrong, a beautiful country HAS TO DO WITH GOVERNANCE RATHER THAN RESOURCES. Resources like the “common tao” must be governed to become actively participating.
July 18, 2009 at 11:12 pm
leytenean, why are you always thinking of people as commodity, i.e. “resources”? what do you think of them, a herd of carabaos? they have free will, free choice, freedom to behave badly. do you comprehend that?
July 18, 2009 at 11:41 pm
atty ben,
there’s a difference between a lawyer and a manager. Attorneys really see only small parts of the lives of individuals and businesses. An attorney may advise a client manager to change a part of the client’s written business policies or change government policies, and may advise the client manager on how to implement the change. In most cases, that will be the end of the matter for the attorney. For the client manager , however, the work has just begun. The new policy must be remembered and enforced day after day, week after week, month after month, and year after year until something happens to require a revision in the policy. Management is, therefore, not a decision or an event, but a constant process of planning, implementation, evaluation, revision, and replanning. Attorneys expect to make decisions and then move on to something else. They do not expect to take small steps or to monitor a situation over an extended period of time. Oftentimes, other decisions of lawyers may become disasters due to a lack of attention to the process of management/governance. Attorneys may never understand or appreciate management until they can stop thinking of decisions and results and start thinking of long term goals and the step by step processes which will be needed to reach those goals.
Step by Step process= Governance.
sorry attorney ben , I happened to manage a law firm in the past to expand, market and advertise to attract clients. Many lawyers cannot do the process of achieving growth and quality management. It’s not their area of expertise. no offense…
July 18, 2009 at 11:45 pm
atty ben,
the step by step processes require management of people to move on to the next step. people can be the driver and can be a commodity to achieve a desired result. the carabaos are animals not people. :) good day.
July 19, 2009 at 12:38 am
if that’s the kind of “manager” you are ( treating me as a commodity), you can take my job and shove it. you would be a danger, not only to yourself, but to your employer who can be sued for any number of causes of action, e.g., unfair labor practice.
btw, as a law practitioner with my own firm (of which i’m the one who calls the shot) for years, i know a little bit about managing a business.
July 19, 2009 at 1:53 am
leytenian,
There were other management theorists after Taylor, you know.
July 18, 2009 at 4:28 pm
The true problem of desensitization is not that people have gotten used it. It is OK to get used to it, but you may still act on it. The worst part is desensitization so that people don’t do anything about the problem.
About the passport… as I said before… nationalism and nationality are constructs of people, not natural concepts. We can do without them… and I wish we never needed passports to go around the world. That means the world is really at peace. That world though is hard to bring about… tough luck. :P
July 18, 2009 at 10:01 pm
BongV in your success story…
Goal: rehabilitating the coastline , turning sand dunes into forests to resist erosion and help expand the coast line. This is augmented by artificial coral reefs so that the overfished Talomo Bay gets a respite.
Problem: The stiffest resistance to the program was actually – the fishing community!!! Because, the artificial reefs will destroy their nets. The very community you are trying to help is the very community that will stop you in your tracks.. ( benigno’s favorite)
Action and Implemented Solution: But we didn’t stop there. So we had to change our tack, and implemented a public relations campaign. Got the community on board, got the barangay on board, identified the areas where the artificial reefs are located, asked what the communities concern was. ( i share your view and governance style)
Outcome and Result of Performance: When the dialogue was finished – our coastal rehabilitation program wound up being adopted by the barangay, the fishing community formed volunteers who will help protect the artificial reefs/identify alternative areas for the reefs. It was a tough job, but someone’s gotta do it – you can’t rely on steak commandos. ( making things happen)
Your success story is a good example of applying the basic theory of GOVERNANCE and managing solution to improve resources and encouraging the local community to actively participate.
In the past, there were many problems resolve but it needed maintenance and nurturing for sustainability. (Risk Management Issue still does not exist in Philippine Public administration). Some maintainance were like “lip services”.
Good point again bongv, I kinda like the way you blog now.. lol
July 18, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Melissa Roxas temporary kidnapping by force and injury was a wrong approach in conducting uncertainty. It was not necessary to confine her. Managing NGO and activists in the country requires an informed decision in the part of the authorities to regulate other organization’s implementation tactics if its harmonizing with their mission and vision to benefit the community.
The lack of organization and efficient governance by the governing bodies are risk to our country’s economic health. It is discouraging people from actively participating ( apathy).
In addition and oftentimes the media can also drive the people’s attitude to exist apathetic, unless it is their own. :)
July 17, 2009 at 3:20 pm
ha ha! Why am I not surprised with this response of yours?
Suit yourself then, ma’am. Til next time, that is…
:-D
July 17, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Take a happy medicine B0! It will make you feel better. Most of all see a doctor. Something is so wrong.