What Should Have Been Done

Media coverage of an ongoing crisis such as hostage-taking incidents has always been a challenge to journalists. Though there are existing guidelines to help them decide what to do when placed in that kind of situation, it’s always not easy to stick what is said. It’s different when you have time to think and when you’re put on the scene, live.

But what really could have the media done to minimize the possible harm their coverage could have caused to all the people concerned, especially the hostages?
Two of the principles journalists adhere to have been in conflict here. First, seek truth and report it, and second, minimize harm.

Even though it is the media’s job to convey vital information to the public, media should have taken into consideration what possible consequences disclosing that information may cause to the people involved.

In my Journalism Ethics class, we have recently studied about coverage of sensitive topics and vulnerable groups. In covering an ongoing crisis such as what happened when dismissed Senior Inspector Rolando Mendoza hijacked a busload of Chinese nationals from Hong Kong near the Quirino Grandstand on Monday, August 23, media should always be careful.

Media should have fought the urge to go live from the scene of the hostage taking crisis and withheld valuable information such as the tactics and the positions of the SWAT members. Reporters should have thought first that Mendoza may have had access to their reports through radio or television. Since Mendoza did have access, he knew exactly what was happening around him through the media’s blow-by-blow accounts of what the policemen were doing and planning to do.

They should have simply told the public the reason why it was necessary to withhold some information, the primary reason being to protect the hostages and to not interfere with the SWAT’s actions. If they did that, I believe the public would have understood why they were doing it.

Also, they should not have shown the arrest and handcuffing of Mendoza’s brother. Many believe that this was the one that caused Mendoza to be outraged, thus fire his gun and start killing some of the hostages. Who would not be outraged when you see your loved one being dragged and handcuffed anyway? It is also very important for media to be extra careful when interviewing family members of the hostage taker.
But media isn’t only the one that should be criticized; there are also the police and SWAT.

The article, Ten things the Philippines bus siege police got wrong, by BBC said it all. Our policemen really lacked both training and equipment.
It seemed as if the policemen were still waiting for Mendoza to shoot someone before they would start taking action. The lack of equipment was clearly shown in their attempt to smash the windows of the bus.

The police also obviously didn’t properly control the crowd. Many bystanders were near the scene; they should have created a barrier or even at least used the yellow tape to make it clear to the public and even to the media that crossing that line wouldn’t be allowable. This action could have at least prevented a bystander from getting shot.
The police should also have set rules on what media could cover and what they should not. This could have controlled the media from interfering with their tactics.
Lastly, one thing that has been going in my mind since that hostage-taking crisis is… Who really shoot the people?

Was it hostage taker Mendoza? Or were the shots from the guns of the policemen themselves?

I believe these questions have been in other people’s minds too. So I believe an investigation is necessary for the said crisis. I line with that investigation, I think it was also acceptable that Manila Police District director Chief Supt. Rodolfo Magtibay requested to temporarily leave his post. Since he was the one who led and gave the assault order, his leave was to ensure impartiality in the investigation.

Many fingers also point to President Noynoy Aquino- his said absence while the hostage-taking crisis was ongoing. It did seem as if Pres. Noynoy lacked competence in this incident. Many people were looking for his leadership in what happened. Now, many are expressing anger over how Noynoy handled the crisis in his fan page.

It may be acceptable that the public is currently outraged. Who would not be?

But come to think of it, what’s been done has been done; no one could really go back and undo what has been already done.

What’s in our hands now are the present and the future. We just got to learn from the past, start moving on, and do better next time.