Freedom House noted the positive legal framework which mandates that "no law shall be passed abridging freedom and speech and expression,’’ our "vibrant and outspoken press,’’ and the absence of licensing of media institutions and journalists. We failed to get included in the free category because of the deteriorating political and economic environment and the alarming violence against journalists. Despite the growing number of journalists who have been killed since 1986, only one has been indicted, prompting concerned media organizations to describe the present media environment as one which has bred a "culture of impunity.’’ A not too favorable indicator is the concentration of media ownership. Businessmen with close ties to politicians influence journalists with economic incentives, the report further noted. It is within this environment that future rationalization of our media and communication policies be undertaken.

The perceived crackdown on the media, the behavior of the Philippine National Police when they raided the Daily Tribune, and the surveillance of media establishments and a number of media professionals suspected to be anti-administration, as well as the lack of consensus on existing media guidelines are enough justification for holding continuing dialogues among the key players – the Department of Justice, the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC), the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster sa Pilipinas (KBP), and its counterpart for the print media – the Philippine Press Institute (PPI). In addition to mediating conflict arising from differences in perception on the role of government and regulatory agencies, understanding of the limits of existing rights and freedoms, and balancing media freedom with responsibility, it should also seek to resolve issues of jurisdiction or responsibility among the above key players and the courts.

There are pending bills on freedom of information and disclosure policies which need to be prioritized. Given existing legal limits to media freedom such as national security, libel, privacy, and obscenity, we should endeavor to further define these limits, provide examples of application, and popularize these concepts to enable greater public participation. The role and function of new information and communication technologies like Internet on enhancing or limiting freedom should be addressed. Our population is becoming more technologically literate in the use of the new technologies which are now altering the concepts of access and propaganda. There is also the role of a transparent media in curbing corruption and technical smuggling, a priority concern since it is apparent that our entertainment-oriented media is not providing adequate time and space for investigative and in-depth reporting.

These are just for starters towards initiatives in convening a series of dialogues that hopefully would actively engage as many sectors of society. Please e-mail me at florbraid@yahoo.com