Issues That You Are Already Getting Fed Up With

[carpediem]

don't you think its better na nag-utos ang gobyerno ng news blackout? kesa hayaang mag self regulate ang media?

I said from the start that the government is not without blame. In fact from the beginning mali na sila.

I am just taking the case of media, with the incompetence of goverment and police as a given.

how would you explain self restraint??? if the media thinks that at that moment of time ay may self regulation o restraint naman sa team nila?

Common sense. If media thought that they had self regulation or restraint, then walang common sense ang media.

Kung mauulit ang the same situation, given the same incompetence of the goverment and police such that there were no orders to control media, and media would still do the same without self-restraint, then quoting angelo, katangahan na talaga ang tawag doon.

[judE_Law]

don't you think its better na nag-utos ang gobyerno ng news blackout? kesa hayaang mag self regulate ang media?

I said from the start that the government is not without blame. In fact from the beginning mali na sila.

I am just taking the case of media, with the incompetence of goverment and police as a given.

how would you explain self restraint??? if the media thinks that at that moment of time ay may self regulation o restraint naman sa team nila?

Common sense. If media thought that they had self regulation or restraint, then walang common sense ang media.

Kung mauulit ang the same situation, given the same incompetence of the goverment and police such that there were no orders to control media, and media would still do the same without self-restraint, then quoting angelo, katangahan na talaga ang tawag doon.

well, hindi na kita tatanungin kung ikaw ang nasa kalagayan ng media.. siyempre isasagot mo hindi mo ie-ere ng live yun.. masasabi ko na lang, iba talaga kapag ikaw ang nasa sitwasyon na yun.. especially, kapag alam mong wala kang nilalabag na batas, gagawin mo ang iyong trabaho ng buong tapang. napaka-simple lang naman ng gusto kong mangyari. gumawa ng batas kung hanggang saan dapat ang media.
self restraint is based on one's conviction.. if he thinks he's not violating anything, why would he stop doing his job?? unless of course, may batas nga diba? 

[pinoybrusko]

hinde magkakaroon ng batas para magkaroon ng boundaries/limitations ang media kasi mavi-violate ang freedom of the press na nakasaad sa constitution. Sa lahat ng nagtatrabaho kahit anong field merong work ethics. Kaya nga ang media based dun sa IIRC report ay ibinigay na sa KBP to evaluate if it requires to give sanction or not. Most probably hinde naman criminal charge kung meron man.

Media men need not to have separate laws para matigil sa pag-report kasi as I said meron naman work ethics (unless hinde ito inaaply). Since nasa media ka, may kaakibat kang responsibility sa tao lalo na pag live ang airing. You have to make sure everything is true and delivered as 100% for the understanding of the people. Pero mapapansin mo meron din talaga naging overboard na sa pagrereport. Halimbawa, alam naman natin may right ang tao kung ayaw magpainterview at magpakita sa tv di ba so i-respeto na lang pero makikita mo sa news ipinagpipilitan pa ng reporter na habulin yung iinterviewhin at ipapakita pa yung mukha. Hinde muna tinanong ung tao kung payag ba siya o hinde tinatapatan na kaagad ng camera at nakikita na pala sa tv. tama pa ba iyon?

[Mr.Yos0]

dapat natuto na sa nangyari.

sana sa susunod maisagawa na ng maayos ang mga SOPs, protocols, ethics, guidelines, etc.

[judE_Law]

hinde magkakaroon ng batas para magkaroon ng boundaries/limitations ang media kasi mavi-violate ang freedom of the press na nakasaad sa constitution. Sa lahat ng nagtatrabaho kahit anong field merong work ethics. Kaya nga ang media based dun sa IIRC report ay ibinigay na sa KBP to evaluate if it requires to give sanction or not. Most probably hinde naman criminal charge kung meron man.

Media men need not to have separate laws para matigil sa pag-report kasi as I said meron naman work ethics (unless hinde ito inaaply). Since nasa media ka, may kaakibat kang responsibility sa tao lalo na pag live ang airing. You have to make sure everything is true and delivered as 100% for the understanding of the people. Pero mapapansin mo meron din talaga naging overboard na sa pagrereport. Halimbawa, alam naman natin may right ang tao kung ayaw magpainterview at magpakita sa tv di ba so i-respeto na lang pero makikita mo sa news ipinagpipilitan pa ng reporter na habulin yung iinterviewhin at ipapakita pa yung mukha. Hinde muna tinanong ung tao kung payag ba siya o hinde tinatapatan na kaagad ng camera at nakikita na pala sa tv. tama pa ba iyon?

isa iyon sa tinatanong ko.. binigay yung IIRC report sa KBP pero pano yung mga media na hindi naman miyembro nun?
while it is true na dapat 100% accurate ang ibinabalita, it is also true na dapat on time ang ibinabalita.. hindi ka magbabalita ng nangyari na nung nakaraang linggo pa, o nangyari na nung isang araw pa.. even in news abroad, like cnn, bbc, aljazeera.. bakit nila ihu-hook ng live yung hostage crisis kung sila rin ay may self restraint.ethics.code.. whatever.. din na sinusunod?
you see.. hindi malinaw ang self restraint na sinasabi ng gobyerno, hindi na rin ako magtataka kung mauulit at mauuli ito.

[pinoybrusko]

sana hinde na maulit. Alam na dapat ng mga concerned officials involved ang gagawin nila. Magsasagawa na lang sila ng total blackout ng media para makaiwas na maulit tutal walang self restraint, work ethics at guidelines ang media  Magrereport na lang after na lang ng incident.

[judE_Law]

sana hinde na maulit. Alam na dapat ng mga concerned officials involved ang gagawin nila. Magsasagawa na lang sila ng total blackout ng media para makaiwas na maulit tutal walang self restraint, work ethics at guidelines ang media  Magrereport na lang after na lang ng incident.

i think that's better Brusk.. at least hindi mabi-blame ang media sa huli..

[angelo]

sa aking pagkakaintindi, circumstantial naman yung pinagtatalunan dito.

media kasi kinunan bawat galaw ng pulis. they had an idea that there was a television inside the bus yet, gave access to the "strategy" ng pulis (kung meron man) which allegedly led to the detriment of the PNP as well as hostages. nakikita ng nag-iisang hostage taker versus the army of policemen kung gaano sila ka-incompetent to handle such situation, which then became advantageous at some point for Mendoza.

pwede naman live coverage but not directly focused on the bus at point-blank range (tuloy pati yung pulis who used a mallet to break the windshield became a fool of himself). pwede naman situational but not blow-by-blow. dito pumapasok yung self-restraint. simple lang naman eh. it still satisfies being able to report what is happening (1) and being very timely (2).

the point of the iirc report is that on all angles, lahat ng involved may maling nagawa. wala na siguro ang naparusahan kasi wala naman pwedeng magmalaki na ganito o ganyan ang dapat nangyari kasi lahat nagkamali. kaya dapat lang na itama at hindi na mauulit muli.

[judE_Law]

sa aking pagkakaintindi, circumstantial naman yung pinagtatalunan dito.

media kasi kinunan bawat galaw ng pulis. they had an idea that there was a television inside the bus yet, gave access to the "strategy" ng pulis (kung meron man) which allegedly led to the detriment of the PNP as well as hostages. nakikita ng nag-iisang hostage taker versus the army of policemen kung gaano sila ka-incompetent to handle such situation, which then became advantageous at some point for Mendoza.

pwede naman live coverage but not directly focused on the bus at point-blank range (tuloy pati yung pulis who used a mallet to break the windshield became a fool of himself). pwede naman situational but not blow-by-blow. dito pumapasok yung self-restraint. simple lang naman eh. it still satisfies being able to report what is happening (1) and being very timely (2).

the point of the iirc report is that on all angles, lahat ng involved may maling nagawa. wala na siguro ang naparusahan kasi wala naman pwedeng magmalaki na ganito o ganyan ang dapat nangyari kasi lahat nagkamali. kaya dapat lang na itama at hindi na mauulit muli.

i understand what your trying to point out angelo, pero inuulit ko iba ang sitwasyon that time..

1. Nagsimula yung kaguluhan ng arestuhin ang kapatid ng hostage taker.. Live na naka-air ang mga News kasi yun ang timeslot nila kaya anumang galaw meron dun tiyak na hindi makakalusot sa camera
FYI: ang TV Patrol, umere ang first gap na hindi puro hostage crisis ang topic, in fact pumasok pa ang starnews.

2. Umaga pa lang may live shots na nung Bus at i'm sure, aware na ang mga awtoridad including Malacañang. The fact na nakikita sa telebisyon ang kuha ng Bus at nalaman agad na may TV sa loob ng Bus, hindi imposible na makita nga ang lahat ng galaw sa labas ng bus. Eh bakit hindi pinahinto ang live coverage kung alam ng pamahalaan na makakagulo ito sa sitwasyon? dahil ba sa telebisyon lang din nila mino-monitor ang sitwasyon?

3. Self Restraint - restraint imposed on oneself by oneself; self Control
     Clearly, the self restraint we are talking about here is not written in the law, it is imposed on oneself by oneself, meaning.. it depends on the individual or the organization on how they understand "self restraint". kailangan ko pa bang ipaliwanag kung pare-pareho ba o hindi ang self control ng bawat isa?
V
V

Self-control is directly related to the pressure an individual may face:

Good Pressure: When an individual is in a competitive, yet non-judgemental and non-prejudicial environment, the individual may want to be like those around them. An individual may become motivated and inspired and gain self-control.
Bad Pressure: When an individual is in a judgemental and prejudicial environment and there is no competition, an individual may become depressed and unmotivated, lose self-control.
No Pressure: When an individual is free and there is no competition, and can do what one may feel, self-control is based on how an individual may feel. Since there are no other individuals to compare, an individual may be less motivated or more motivated depending on the urgency of whatever they are doing.

4. Walang Solidong batas na nagbabawal sa mga Media na kuhanan ang isang insidente gaya ng Hostage Crisis, pero maaring ipag-utos ng Awtoridad o ng Pangulo ang News Blackout sakaling alam nilang malalagay sa alanganin ang kalagayan ng mga hinostage.. sa pagkakataong iyon, malinaw na hindi alam ng mga Awtoridad kung ano nga ba ang sitwasyon ng mga Oras na iyon. Patunay dito ang pagtawag dito na isang 'isolated case', ilang oras bago nauwi sa malagim na katapusan.

inuulit ko, sa tingin ko, may ilang indibidwal sa media ang hindi maikakailang nakagulo sa sitwasyon.. pero kung ang pagtatalunan ay ang coverage ng media sa nangyaring hostage crisis,  hindi naman yata makatwiran pagbuntunan ng sisi iyon.

[ram013]

hindi nman totally sa media ang sisi, everyone involved is accountable for what happened and media has something to do with it as well.

Sometimes, nwawalan na tlaga ng restraint kung anu ang dapt ipakita sa tv e

[carpediem]

Jude, I only disagree with you on the issue of self-restraint.

Let me attempt another analogy.

Let's say you are a logger (woodcutter) for a logging company. There's this certain wooden area of land whose trees produce high quality logs that are in very high demand. Needless to say, your company and other logging companies have all converged to log in this area.

Unfortunately for the local folks living close to this area, their lives will be jeopardized if the area becomes deforested, as the trees protect their lands from natural disasters. The area is fast becoming deforested due to logging, and the local government there is apathetic of the situation, and has issued no laws or rules governing the cutting of trees in that area.

All of the logging companies know the situation. The question is, would you continue to log in this area?

[judE_Law]

Jude, I only disagree with you on the issue of self-restraint.

Let me attempt another analogy.

Let's say you are a logger (woodcutter) for a logging company. There's this certain wooden area of land whose trees produce high quality logs that are in very high demand. Needless to say, your company and other logging companies have all converged to log in this area.

Unfortunately for the local folks living close to this area, their lives will be jeopardized if the area becomes deforested, as the trees protect their lands from natural disasters. The area is fast becoming deforested due to logging, and the local government there is apathetic of the situation, and has issued no laws or rules governing the cutting of trees in that area.

All of the logging companies know the situation. The question is, would you continue to log in this area?

okay, sige, ikumpara natin diyan sa logging na sinasabi mo.
una sa lahat mayroong batas na nagbabawal pumutol ng mga puno especially sa mga protected areas.
if may permit nga from denr and the local government may mga kasunduan din namang kapalit..
like sa pagputol ng isang '30 year old' na puno eh inire-require sila na magtanim ng 100 seedlings?? at yung kikitain sa bawat pinutol na puno ay para magka-kuryente ang mga naninirahan sa liblib na lugar o sa bundok?
what if isa kang logger na sumusunod lamang sa utos ng boss mo?
what if kung ikaw din ang logger na kapag wala kang naputol na puno sa isang araw ay magugutom ang limang anak mo?
what if kung walang pinuputol na puno, may mauupuan kaya tayong gawa sa kahoy? o gamit pangbahay? etc.


all i can say is your analogy with the logger and the trees are totally different from a 'hostage crisis'.

[marvinofthefaintsmile]

im fed up with the kabobohan ng presidente ng pilipinas.. c pnoy = bobo

kainis, me pasok sa nov. 2.

[Mr.Yos0]

incompetent talaga.

[carpediem]

(OT: sorry guys, don't mind us)

Jude, I only disagree with you on the issue of self-restraint.

Let me attempt another analogy.

Let's say you are a logger (woodcutter) for a logging company. There's this certain wooden area of land whose trees produce high quality logs that are in very high demand. Needless to say, your company and other logging companies have all converged to log in this area.

Unfortunately for the local folks living close to this area, their lives will be jeopardized if the area becomes deforested, as the trees protect their lands from natural disasters. The area is fast becoming deforested due to logging, and the local government there is apathetic of the situation, and has issued no laws or rules governing the cutting of trees in that area.

All of the logging companies know the situation. The question is, would you continue to log in this area?

okay, sige, ikumpara natin diyan sa logging na sinasabi mo.
una sa lahat mayroong batas na nagbabawal pumutol ng mga puno especially sa mga protected areas.
if may permit nga from denr and the local government may mga kasunduan din namang kapalit..
like sa pagputol ng isang '30 year old' na puno eh inire-require sila na magtanim ng 100 seedlings?? at yung kikitain sa bawat pinutol na puno ay para magka-kuryente ang mga naninirahan sa liblib na lugar o sa bundok?
what if isa kang logger na sumusunod lamang sa utos ng boss mo?
what if kung ikaw din ang logger na kapag wala kang naputol na puno sa isang araw ay magugutom ang limang anak mo?
what if kung walang pinuputol na puno, may mauupuan kaya tayong gawa sa kahoy? o gamit pangbahay? etc.


all i can say is your analogy with the logger and the trees are totally different from a 'hostage crisis'.

The analogy is a hypothetical situation. That being said, just consider it as it is, that is, let us say there are no extra goverment laws -- the area is not protected, you do not need extra permits nor pledges of planting seedlings in order to cut trees.

Let us also consider the scenario that you are the director or a top executive of the logging company, where you direct orders to cut down trees in a particular place.