Janet Lim-Napoles, JLN Corporation, seven affiliate senators and 23 congressmen, 10 billion pesos – anyone in sync with current affairs would be familiar with these associations to the pork barrel or Priority Development Assistance Fund, which the press had resurrected as early as July this year, following whistleblower Benhur Luy’s unraveling of an elaborate NGO’s mechanism for the siphoning of funds supposedly appropriated for the discretion of legislators on how to better meet the needs of their constituents.
The issue is far from new. The Philippine Daily Inquirer’s 1996 expose on the congressional kickbacks in the Countrywide Development Fund (CDF) made known to the public the modus operandi of lawmakers who sought to limit the enjoyment of the CDF’s allotment for their own accounts, as well as the accounts of their business partners, auditors, and local government partners.
Even as the CDF had been amended into the PDAF, the same dynamic seems to have prevailed, despite outrage at the misuse of public resources. Journalists from 17 years ago, and even before that, had already been looking into the misuse of public resources in whatever name it goes under, not simply to appease the public but to do the people justice, and rightly inform that very public of what transpires where the public feels it cannot directly participate regardless of whether or not policymakers act to change. Despite all the backlash against mainstream media’s integrity, if not for the press, then from what source would discussion, progress and eventual reform be derived?
What should remain constant is the commitment and integrity of press to inform, and to serve the public interest where government may or may not fall short, and where powerful interests may impede the dissemination of what is more or less a simple presentation of the facts.
The Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility states the role of the press and media as being that of a government watchdog, as a medium for check and balance beyond that which the tripartite check and balance mechanisms of the executive, legislative and judiciary provide. In as much as it cannot directly change policy, it is by the civic right of press to influence said policy that is reflective of the responsibility to inform the public and serve public interest in good faith by providing balanced reportage.
Where this lofty directive stems from a media institution advocating the responsibility of the press and fighting for its rights on a global and national scale, wherever journalists may be, on-campus journalism, regardless of form, primary language, platform or medium, must conform to the basic guiding principle of student journalism stated in the Student Charter, Section 3.5: “Student publications shall serve as the principal medium for free and responsible expression, dissemination of information, and interaction among the different sectors of the academic community.”
In this vein the student press should continue to provide avenues for informing the public – that is, the University community, whether student, faculty, administrator, staff and all of its other members. More than providing avenues for the public, the student press should keep to its creed and purpose, free of censorship and undue mitigation from institutional forces, using the right to free expression responsibly in imparting information and never deliberately pandering to any exclusive interest.
The press’ responsibility, after all, is to be the watchdog – to be alive, awake, and barking mad when the storms come, when thieves break in, or when the house starts burning thanks to the fire of an unnoticed stove. Those who refuse to heed the barking may be surprised to find themselves flooded, robbed, or burnt by the very flames they left alight in the night.
