My take on the Arnold Clavio issue

Posted here is a part of one of my papers in my Media Ethics class (so you better not plagiarize, lol, ang assumera ko). Pardon me for the grammatical errors (this is taken from my first draft) and what is written here is my opinion (backed up by what I learned in class)

What was wrong in the way the media handled it

What was the mistake done by Arnold Clavio? I will have to say a lot. In fact, in my opinion, he violated all the ethical principles in journalism. First accuracy. Truth-telling is all about accuracy, checking your facts before reporting/writing and consulting multiple sources (among others). It seems apparent that for Clavio, Cristy Ramos’ side is telling the truth (even if investigations are being made and there is no conclusion yet to the case) and the Azkals’ are the ones to be blamed. I am not saying that the Azkals are innocent but until a decision has been made, one should not judge people. Also, based from his statement, he only relied on the statements said by Ms. Ramos.

Second he violated justice (fairness). As a journalist, he should not be biased. He should not overtly show his bias to Ms. Ramos and scorn the Azkals. He should present both sides so as to better inform the public (and not mislead them) of the situation and not make the Azkals appear as the monsters. So, he indeed made an effort to explain the Azkals side but it was done in a way that makes it appear that the Azkals are still in the wrong (as made evident by his statement about how boastful the Azkals are, how lascivious they are, etc.).

Third, he violated both the principles of freedom and stewardship in that by his actions, especially the words which sparked the racism issue, media (especially the network that he works for) is put in a bad light. Journalists or broadcasters are given the freedom by the constitution to express their views but Clavio clearly stepped out of bounds. Let’s say that he was only vocal (probably because of his status in GMA) in voicing his opinion about how the Azkals got the attitude, he may be right in a way (again, this is up for contention), but making that remark about how not being a kayumanggi disqualifies you as being Filipino is uncalled for (it does not even directly relate to the sexual harassment issue being talked about), there is such a thing as ‘responsible journalism’.

Which leads me to the last principle violated that of humaneness. I remember our discussion where we discussed that in reporting about an event, a journalist/broadcaster should: a) consider the subject b) society, and c) his responsibility as a human being. Surely, it is imperative for the journalist to assure that no harm is done to his subject (whether physical or psychological). In the present case, it is not right to only care about Ms. Ramos’ reputation, the Azkals’ reputation should also be considered, especially because they bear our country’s flag. Making accusations such as what Clavio uttered did not only tarnish/harm the Azkals’ reputation it also casted doubt about our society, how ‘girls apparently throw themselves at handsome guys’ – indirectly assuming how superficial Filipina fans are. It also attacked the Fil-Foreigners, in that being of mixed blood does not make you a Filipino, that no matter how much effort you give for your country (the Philippines) it will account to nothing because at the end of the day, you are not a Pinoy. He did not only cause harm to the Azkals, he ‘inadvertently’ caused harm to Filipina fans, Filipino of mixed race and the Philippines (because the Azkals carry our name). (will end here, currently thinking what to write next)

p.s. Wala po akong kinikilingan, nagbibigay lang ng opinyon. Sa totoo lang, sa bahay namin, tanging sa GMA7 lang palaging nanonood.