On Wednesday, August 27, 2014, the title of our Editorial was, “They just shot your freedom”.
We said: “Early yesterday morning, Mr. Orlando ‘Orly’ Navarro was shot in the back by an unidentified gunman but fortunately survived the attack. An act of violence against another human being that we do not know is something that happens all the time. We hardly think about it. As long as we are not directly touched, it is really not our problem. However, in the case of Mr. Navarro, it is our problem—it is everyone’s problem”.
“Orly Navarro is better known as ‘Kabog’ in his area. He is President of the Pangasinan Press Club and station manager of DWIZ 89.3 FM News, a sister company of the BusinessMirror”.
We took this personally. It was not just another attack on press freedom but a physical, ‘bullet-in-the-head’ attack on a friend and colleague. Other members of the local press and media dutifully reported the shooting.
The National Union of Journalists of the Philippines Pangasinan chapter, in a statement, called on authorities to “ensure the safety of media practitioners who are only doing their job of exposing the threats and dangers to society.” Interestingly, though, no determination seemed to be ever made if this was “business” or “personal.” Navarro was a sometimes-fierce critic of certain local politicians and had many commentaries against illegal-drugs pushers and users in the area.
We wrote then that “an attack on his freedom of speech is an attack on the freedom of all Filipinos.”
However, since then not one of the press and media, even those biggest defenders of “press freedom,” has written one word about Mr. Navarro. At the time it was a press freedom issue. Did this event turn out not to be about freedom of the press? Is it because Dagupan is too far away from Manila and foreign journalists to be “front page news” around the globe? Perhaps, the shooting of Navarro could not be spun as a government attack on press freedom.
We wrote: “During
successive presidential administrations, the government has treated incidents
like this as isolated. But over time it became a pattern by those who prefer
that we all, those in the press and ordinary citizens, keep
our mouths shut.”
The freedom of public and private speech and therefore the press is the single most important pillar of a free society and a free people. But is there any chance that this “freedom” may be used as a justification for advancing a political agenda? The Society of Professional Journalists—the oldest organization in the US since 1909—has this Code of Ethics.
“Ethical journalism should be accurate and fair even as recognizing a special obligation to serve as watchdogs over public affairs and government. Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived. Refuse gifts, favors, and special treatment, and avoid political and other outside activities that may compromise integrity or impartiality, or may damage credibility. Expose unethical conduct in journalism, including within their organizations and abide by the same high standards they expect of others.”