Speech of NUJP Chairperson Joel Torres during the Lanao Media Peace Summit

Colleagues, peace advocates, guests, ladies and gentlemen,
good morning.

It is an honor to stand here before you and speak about an
issue that I know you have more grasp, and first-hand
experience as a sector, a people living amid the reality of conflict.

I too was born in Mindanao. I grew up here, and because of
the situation that I grew up with, I too nurtured dreams of
peace. I left my family and friends and pursued studies in
Manila with a though that someday I might come home
and share what I learn with my community.

Unfortunately, I was stuck. I rarely come home and if I
do only to cover stories of conflict that that landed on the
front pages of the papers. It is unfortunate.

I am happy to be back and am inspired to be with you to talk
about what all of us long for, to share something to resolve the
environment of unpeace here in Mindanao.

I believe and will always believe that despite the challenges
we face, despite the fighting, and the differences, there will
one day be lasting peace here in my homeland. That fact that
we are gathered here to talk about it is a step towards the
realization of that belief.

Peace advocate John Paul Lederach asked in one of his
writings: How can we as a people living in the middle of
conflict transcend the cycles of violence?

He said it requires the capacity to generate, mobilize
and build what a “moral imagination” that can be pursued
through disciplines that must hold us together to rise above
the violence. These include our capacity to exist in a
“web of relationships” – friendship and our being neighbors,
for instance. He also talked about our “paradoxical curiosity”
to discover before we apply “creative acts” to address the
conflict despite the inherent risks.

Journalists and peace advocates in Mindanao must share a
common belief, and that is to assert that nobody, nobody
except you who live and die here, must propose and work
to address the roots of unpeace in your midst.

Those outside Mindanao, politicians, parachute journalists,
even those who were born here but who live outside, like me,
have no right telling you what to do, even as we share a
common vision.

We must remember that peacebuilding, like writing, is an
art, and peacebuilding, like journalism, is also a skill that
necessitates authentic dialogue among those involved in the
conflict, among those affected by the situation, among y
ourselves especially.

The Role of Media

Since the early 1980s, media had become more than mere
purveyor of news. It also began to educate the people of
the histories of atrocities, especially during the time of
Marcos. It opened the eyes of a people.

After more two decades, however, a second look at Philippine
media make us think. Are we taking a step backwards from that
giant leap in the 1980s?

On the surface, this may not seem to be the case. Reporters and
cameramen, and many of our media colleagues here, are now always
at the front lines of almost every military offensive. Even news
blackouts do not deter us from bringing the news out to the
rest of the country and the world.

But what news does we bring?

Unwittingly or otherwise, the media has contributed to the
creation of a myth - the myth that presents Muslims, for
instance, as enemies of the state. We must accept that media
has played a role in widening the divide between the marginalized
sector, the Moro people for instance, and their own country,
projecting the conflict as a religious war, good versus evil,
Christian against Muslim, the government versus forces
wanting to establish an Independent Islamic state.

As media reports on the situation, many of us ignored the
historical context of the Mindanao conflict, to the point of
influencing public opinion and condoning, if not actually
encouraging, acts of cultural violence.

Much of what the public has come to know about the
situation in Mindanao, as well as their sentiments on
the main protagonists, come from the media. This makes
mass media a crucial factor in public understanding of
the situation, and therefore, in the public's opinions as
important inputs in governance.

Aggravating the situation is the individual reporter's own
beliefs and biases, the quality and quantity of his or her
sources, as well as a media outfits editorial policy. The convictions
and biases reporters have on Mindanao shape the kind
of stories that appear on the front pages, as well as the
opinions that see print or being broadcast.

Media has caused the public to equate the word "Muslim"
for instance with "bandit", "kidnapper" "terrorist", and
"murderer," portraying the Moro people as a backward
if not barbaric people.

Even in the international media Muslims have been portrayed
as a people bent on overthrowing the government, and that
these enemies of the state deserve a mutated form of ethnic cleansing.

The Media and the Moro people

Venue for the Moro people in media remains limited and it
causes misrepresentation or lack of representation. The
problem is due largely on the following reasons.: the language
barrier, accessibility and availability, and cultural nuances.
Sources or alternative means for obtaining and circulating
information are also lacking, if not altogether absent.

Discrimination against the Moro people is an existing reality.
This in turn cements the prejudice of the Moro people against
the media or even against individual journalists. There is
now a tendency of some people here in Mindanao to simply
to ignore the media. Information is treated with prejudicial
generalization and it happens especially if the information
provided is about the condition of the people in conflict zones
or even evacuations centers.

Ironically, in this age of the Internet and satellite broadcast,
people in the rural areas here in Mindanao still rely on
hand-held two-way radios, mostly unlicensed, as a means
of passing information from one community to another.

The only alternative media they can get hold of are those
produced by local publishers like some of you here, and
there are only few of you.

Shining moments

We had our shining moments too. We are not as ignorant as
before about the situation, we do our best to provide context
to our stories, to look at the situation with maturity,
to give voice to the different players in the conflict.

Unfortunately, as things unfold, the situation on the ground
starts to get blurry and emotions run high, many of us started
to, as what one journalist described, “rave and rant” and forgot
all the lessons of history.

The events in Mindanao become just stories, colorful stories,
which many times are incomplete and many times out of
context, leading to confusion.

In the recent conflict, many journalists wrote and reported
without really understanding the situation, without reading
documents, without giving context that could have helped
the already worried public understand. We supplied inaccuracies,
conflicting figures that led to misunderstandings.

We let our biases take control over our reporting and
commentaries, we let our prejudices took over our being journalists.
We became part of the confusion instead of providing relevant
information and context to the public. We showed our
tendencies to be simplistic, pitting Christians against Muslims.

Our biases and prejudices led to labeling that became
counterproductive in what could have been our good
intention to inform. We were used by interest groups
and our lack of depth was used to foment conflict amid
the already volatile situation.

Journalists covering Mindanao, especially those from
Mindanao, must go back to the basics of journalism,
understand the history and culture of the island and
educate those who are not from here, even our bosses in Manila.

Because we did not do our job well to explain, for instance
the meaning, nuances and implications of the conflict
and of our stories, interest groups took advantage of
the situation.

Many of us have tried to highlight the voices of other Mindanao
leaders who do not see the conflict in religious or biased terms,
but we failed to let our networks, our colleagues from Manila
understand. The national media’s failure, and our failure to
educate them led to Philippine journalism’s failure to give
voice to ordinary people – the real victims of the crisis.
It contributed to bias in our reporting.

The media’s failure to present the bigger picture also sowed f
ear and alarm, not only on the general population but also on
policymakers who issue kneejerk statements that led to
misunderstanding and more conflict.

The view that Mindanao is a war-torn, conflict-ridden island is
due mainly to media’s reporting. We have always given value
to “conflict” as news, disregarding its absence as worthy of
our attention. I’ve always insisted that we review our news values.

The situation now presents a great opportunity to develop
alternative media for Mindanao, for internal refugees, for
the victims of war who have limited sources of information,
and no means by which to change the prejudicial attitude
that have been directed at them.

This is where media can do its part. It is high time that
media should take a giant step and portray its role as
educator and promote understanding among people.

Daghang salamat.

Jose Torres Jr.
Chairman
National Union of Journalists of the Philippines