Category Archive for: media

kultura

2009’s Notable Cultural chevers*

As with all year-ender lists, this is necessarily full of itself, and can be accused of having a false sense of power, imagining itself to be comprehensive and truthful and correct. Unlike many of those Best of 2009! lists though, this is conscious of itself and its limitations, and is willing to be shot in the foot for missing the point entirely. Too, this isn’t really a Best Of list (haha!); this is really just a list of my top 10/11/12? spectacular (-ly negative, positive, happy, disappointing) things that did happen in our shores as far as popular, alternative, online, indie culture was concerned, as distinct from what have been termed notables of the year in books, theater, art and music. All these terms of course are highly arguable, but then again, culture is highly arguable, and is in process, as with everything that is lived. So maybe this is really just a way of reckoning with the past year, looking at what we did, where we are, what else is there to do, given the good the bad, the sad the happy, the almost-there-but-not-quite, that happened for and to culture in 2009. The hope is that we will continue to argue in the year 2010, over and above – and more importantly because of – the relationships we hold dear, the interests we treasure, and well, where we clearly stand about real and relevant change.

1. Uniting Against the Book Blockade. In the summer of 2009, poet and teacher Chingbee Cruz blogged about being taxed at the Post Office for books that she had ordered online. This would begin the fight against the taxation of imported books which, according to U.P. Law School Dean Marvic Leonen is against the law: books are tax-exempt, no ifs and buts about it. And yes, the last we heard, we are going to court on this one. (more…)

komentaryo

the good, the sad, the ugly —

— or the life and death of critical discourse.

so carlos celdran takes jim paredes to task for being, in gay lingo, a negatron, i.e., a nega, a negamall, about the philippines. what paredes had said seems irrelevant now, because what came to matter as far as ANC’s Media in Focus panel that included celdran was this: can you blame media for showing just the bad news? isn’t celdran mouthing government rhetoric that says we must see the positive in all these? and was celdran, praytell, correct in saying that there’s something good in GMA, and that well, it’s worth the news? and for the more exciting part, does paredes’ migration to australia matter in any form or manner?

THE GOOD — or why i was with team carlos for a while there.

between celdran and paredes, it is the former that has me listening. this man just has the balls, you know? he publishes what’s on his mind, then takes responsibility for it regardless of the outcome.  which is really what made for fascinating viewing as well, of the twitter exchanges and that fateful MIF show.

it’s also quite refreshing to hear someone from the same social class dishing it against his own, and well, not minding being at the receiving end of it. i mean of course it’s easy to dismiss celdran as just a konyo boy, at the same time, he is one who seems more involved than his kind, seems more daring in terms of taking stands and having convictions, and really, he seems to have a better sense of his limitations at the same time that he lives his freedoms.

and so yes, he will critique government at the same time that he will openly campaign for gibo; he gets angry at lisa macuja for saying no to the RH Bill campaign, and celebrates lea salonga for being on his side; he will keep the fire going — as many middle and upper class netizens did — throughout the ondoy tragedy and aftermath, even as he has gone on to talk about other things that are more current and well, that are a little happier.

which is why it’s no surprise that he will say, there must be something good to write about the philippines, here and now, right? we must not want to be negatrons, and instead start building a pinoy identity that’s more positive. we must consider what it is that so many in the world think about us, given what it is they know (or not) about the philippines. so he demands for a balance between the bad and good. he also says there must be something good about GMA, even if it’s just that spanking new train.

but here is where celdran’s limitations become clear.

THE SAD thing isn’t so much that we must even thank GMA for the good news of a train that is her responsibility to renovate to begin with, it’s really that as we thank her for you know, the elevated u-turn on C5 or the highway to Subic, we cannot but imagine who was marginalized in these processes of “development”.

how must it feel to deal with that elevated u-turn, when you are the commuter who’s public transport isn’t allowed to pass on it, and instead must contend with thetraffic it creates beneath it? how must it feel to be the farmer or worker who now has to contend with destroyed mountains and land, plus a highway that’s impossible to cross, in order to maintain a living?

and yes, how do we imagine the train being a fantastic thing when the impoverished that exists in its immediate vicinity are blamed and ostracized, made to feel unworthy of its existence given it’s new beauty?

carlos conde, who was also guest at the MIF panel, has it right: much of the good news we do have is premised on something sad, if not altogether bad. efren penaflorida‘s success is really about poverty and the sad state of education in this country; manny pacquiao‘s athleticism is based on the fact of necessity, and so is charice pempengco‘s singing style and success.

these successes are plenty true, and there are tons of good news, but context — the bigger picture — is all encompassing. the sad truth is that where we do come from, there is no escaping the sadness. and maybe there is no reason to. because the moment we do, then we might forget. and i imagine that forgetting is also the last thing that celdran wants to happen. or paredes for that matter. regardless of whether they live with it everyday or ehem, have it in theirhearts, as filipino-migrant-apple-picker-and-writer Carlos Bulosan already said decades ago.

THE UGLINESS of this all lies really, in the way things were resolved between celdran and paredes. the catfight via twitter was exciting to say the least, but for it to have been resolved beyond the confines of the online world where it had happened, and then for it to just be concluded without explanation or further discussion, seemed like a cop out. it seemed like the quickest life-and-deathof critical discourse as we know it.

it would’ve been great to get the discourse going, on many things that the celdran-paredes argument had raised. there’s media responsibility, the fact that news are chosen, and yes, that there are certain kinds of news that appeals to the international audience. there’s also the question of tourism and world perception and filipino identity. there’s the question of citizenship and migration, and the right to complain, as well as the need to do something about it.

butmaybe the ugliest thing to come of this is the fact that in the end, as spectator, i am made to realize that there is sameness here. both celdran and paredes are actually in the same boat, and when celdran says at least he’s doing something about changing the philippines even as he complains about it, maybe he only thinks himself better than paredes.

because while there is value in celdran’s daring, his limitations are very clear: the status quo is where he’s at. systemic change, making sure that the problems that create a pacquiao and a penaflorida and a pempengco, an ondoy and extrajudicial killings and an impoverished majority, is not his point here. his is a band-aid, a way of making the healing of wounds a little faster and a little less painful, which is noble in itself. but this won’t keep the wounds from not being inflicted again, won’t make for real change at all.

in that sense, while he is no negatron like paredes, and while he has stayed in the philippines instead of making a big deal about migrating elsewhere, and while there is value in the ways in which he wears his heart on his sleeve, celdran doesn’t seem to be any different from paredes when and where it matters.

maybe that’s good enough for him. and maybe that’s not ugly after all. it’s just downright sad.

komentaryo

the eyes have it? patricia evangelista votes!

I have personally taken to ignoring Patricia Evangelista. now that she has gone up the ladder of media empire ABS-CBN as creator and producer of Storyline (which does romanticize tragedy in its writing, camerawork, conceptualization), there seems to be no stopping this girl. yes, even when half the time what she does in her Philippine Daily Inquirer opinion column is rehash what it is that has come out in her TV show. signs of these media times? there’s is no explanation for cheap thrills. or notions of credibility.

but it is precisely because she is in these positions of “credibility” that sometimesit is just difficult to ignore Patricia, lest she be under the illusion that she’s getting away with saying things that limn over the bigger issues of the day, as she passes her opinions off as political and correct and valid. at the very least, she passes them off as well-informed and well thought out, when really, they are far from it.

in her last column “Chiz Escudero 2010” Patricia spent most of her space rehashing what Chiz Escudero said at his press con announcing his defection from NPC, then she summarized it by saying that all Chiz did was to say that “a man running for president must not belong to a party, because to belong to a party is to give up independence of action”.

that this conclusion glosses over the other things that Chiz did say at the press con in relation to being freed from party politics is just so un-journalistic, and goodness, just downright uncritical.  this is a grave simplification of what it is that went on in that press con, an unacceptable display of an inability to see beyond one’s own biases – one that is for Noynoy Aquino (which we will get to in a bit).

so in the process of dissing Chiz, Patricia reveals that she can’t even respond to the more important things that he had raised: a brave stance versus contractualization and the oil deregulation law, versus the oligarchy’s ways of demeaning the jobs of those in the lower rungs of government service, versus the pork barrel, versus corrupt government officials. this is more than any of the presidentiables have dared say about their platform, about what it is that ails current politics, about what is all wrong here. an intelligent and critical reading of what went on at that press con would’ve meant looking not just at what Chiz announced, but at what else he did say.

and then Patricia reveals her simplistic analysis of Chiz’s defection: that since Chiz said that he has never been dictated upon by the NPC, this defection is meaningless. really now. to say that he has never been dictated by his party, doesn’t mean that there has never been any pressure to go with the party’s political flow and flaws. that Chiz has remained as part of the opposition despite NPC politics is a good thing, not a bad thing. that he now decided that he wants out, out of Danding country, out of party politics, is a good thing.

that in the process Chiz reveals the evils that exist in, the limitations of being part of, a party like the NPC is a fantastic thing.

was this all about him? absolutely. is it possibly about us too, as an electorate intelligently looking for options and wanting change? absolutely.

does Patricia know this? obviously not. in the end, she only revealed herself to be part of the youth who are closet-conservatives, unable to see the value of revolt, the importance of an ability to rebel, to break through the boxes that define who we are. these members of the middle to upper class youth are the scariest kind because they imagine themselves as intelligent voters, they imagine themselves critical, and the future of the nation. and yet when they are faced with the choice between revolt and compromise, change and the status quo, they will weigh things according to their own personal stakes: will i be able to keep my job, will i be able to keep my friends, will i be able to keep my reputation? and in the end they will choose the happy comforts of their old lives, stay where they are, blindly criticize those who shout based on the mere fact that they are shouting.

Patricia ends her tirade againstChiz’s defection from the NPC with

Mostly, I write this because, very frankly, I cannot trust a man whose mouth says one thing, and his eyes another.

now frankly, I wonder what it is that’s in Chiz’s eyes. or in Noynoy’s for that matter – he who is obviously Patricia’s candidate because, as she says, Chiz’s decision to defect is sold as

another touchstone of national change on the heels of Noynoy Aquino’s rise as the nation’s moral, if less articulate choice.

in the guise of being objective, i.e., acknowledging how Chiz’s defection is being seen, Patricia only reveals her own biases: that Noynoy is only a “less articulate” choice, and nothing else.

I wonder if she realizes that in the process of assessing Noynoy as such she has put her foot in her mouth, proving to us all that she has yet to even assess Noynoy as her candidate, over and above what he says.

oh, but wait, maybe that is the point: Noynoy has yet to have anything to say. At the rate the Aquino campaign is going, we’re hearing more of Kris. or is Patricia happy enough listening to her? and pray tell, what do Kris’ eyes tell her? and while she’s at it, since when were people’s eyes the reason for endorsing a candidate? this is not naiveté. this is carelessness. and irresponsibility.

go for it young media practitioner. there’s nowhere to go but up.

komentaryo

a wonder

how does ABS-CBN do it? of course we know it’s a capialist enterprise, an empire almost, that has us all bound in its cultural products and basic services. but the way in which the News and Public Affairs arm has kept mostly quiet, save for its guard dogs and mouthpieces online who have poo-pooed the plagiarism charge of stuartsantiago, reeks of yabang and hubris.

because if their head Maria Ressa were smart, she would’ve already apologized about the plagiarism. because anyone who’s serious about writing absolutely anything would know that a paraphrase is STILL plagiarism unless its source is acknowledged with: “according to…”. because even if they have exactly the same sources that were used for Himagsikan sa EDSA, as kbc says in her comment over at stuartsantiago, there would still only be 1 chance in 1,000,000,000,000,000 (one quadrillian) that two people would use a sample of the 1,000 most common words of a language in exactly the same order, exactly the same way.

when i was teaching at the Ateneo and i’d catch plagiarized work, i would announce it to the class and give each student the chance to see me and admit that they had gone online and used information that isn’t theirs. no fail, if i caught two students plagiarizing, at least 10 would admit that they might have plagiarized.

MIGHT HAVE plagiarized.

in truth, ABS-CBN should’ve already apologized for the mere possibility that their creative team DID plagiarize. because otherwise, i watch their news and public affairs shows and i wonder: how much of what i hear is original? how much of what their reporters mouth are truly theirs?

and what is it that they teach viewers when they in a sense dismiss a plagiarism charge? what is it that they prove? that they are high and mighty? that they refuse to be corrected, refuse to admit faults?

this is no different from keeping Willie Revillame on the air, even when his crassness and kabastusan just go against everything they say the network stands for. it’s like saying: the buck stops with us. we have the power to decide. we might have committed a crime, but our voice will prevail. we are invincible.

well, as stuartsantiago will prove, not anymore.

komentaryo

plagiarism and karen davila

i say plagiarism, at the very least, is a shameful display of one’s inability to write. and think. my nanay speaks:

while it was great that upon cory’s death pinoy tv was swamped with docus that revisited her exalted place in philippine history, one docu, Laban ni Cory,  produced and aired many times by ABS-CBN 2 from august 2 onward, raised my ire and my eyebrows.

my ire because some of karen davila’s narrative spiels covering the period of the snap elections through to EDSA sounded oh so familiar, so very close to, if not my very own words in, Himagsikan sa EDSA — Walang Himala! and yet there was no attribution, as though karen davila herself researched and wrote the stuff (wow ang galing), something that took me all of twelve years, lol.

I
KAREN DAVILA:

(010) Sa paniniwalang sila ang tunay na nanalo sa eleksiyon, isang victory rally ang inilunsad sa Luneta nina Cory at Doy, na dinumog naman ng mahigit isang milyong tao.

(013) At bilang tugon sa malawakang dayaan sa eleksiyon, inilunsd nina Cory Aquino at Doy Laurel ang civil disobedience campaign, Himinok ang taong bayan na huwag magbayad ng koryente, tubig, at iboykot ang media, bangko at iba pang kompanyang pagaari ng mga tuta ni Marcos. Marami ang sumangayon at sumunod sa panawagang ito. Wala pang isang linggo mula nang unang manawagan ng boycott si Cory nameligro ang ekonomiya ng bansa at nataranta ang mga negosyante.

HIMAGSIKAN SA EDSA–Walang Himala! page 40 last paragraph

Ika-16 ng Pebrero, sa isang “victory rally” sa Luneta na dinumog ng mahigit isang milyong tao, inilunsad nina Cory Aquino at Doy Laurel ang kanilang civil disobedience campaign. Nagpilit si Cory na siya ang nagwagi sa eleksiyon at nangakong pupuwersahin niya si Marcos na magbitiw, sabay hinimok ang taong-bayan na sabayan siya sa pagsuway sa mga utos ng diktador — huwag magbayad ng koryente at tubig, iboykot ang crony media at crony banks, gayon din ang Rustan’s Department Store, San Miguel Corporation, at iba pang kompanyang pag-aari ng mga tuta at katoto ni Marcos.

page 42 paragraph 2

Wala pang isang linggo mula nang unang manawagan ng boykot si Cory…

page 41 paragraph 1

Nataranta ang malalaking negosyante, gayon din ang multinationals …

II

DAVILA:

(022) Kakaiba na noon ang ihip ng hangin. Palaban na ang taong bayan, sabik sa pagbabago at may natatanaw nang pagasa, salamat sa biyuda ng isang tao …

HIMAGSIKAN page 42 last paragraph

Salamat sa biyuda ni Ninoy, kakaibana noon ang ihip ng hangin. Mapanghimagsik na ang timpla ng taong-bayan, punong-puno bigla ng pag-asa, sabik sa mga naamoy na pagbabago, noong bisperas ng EDSA.

III

DAVILA

(063) Naghudyat si Ver ng all out attack sa riot police, sa marine artillery, sa mga helicopter gunship, at mga jet bomber.

(067) Naririnig din si Marcos sa radyo. Isinusumpang lilipulin ang mga rebelde.

HIMAGSIKAN page 135 paragraph 2

Sa Fort Bonifacio, naghudyat sina Ver at Ramas ng all-out attack sa riot police, sa Marine artillery, sa mga helicopter gunship, at sa mga jet bomber. Naririnig si Marcos sa radyo, isinusumpang lilipulin ang mga rebelde.

IV

DAVILA

(070) Pumosisyon ang mga sundalo at nagkasahan ng mga baril. Subalit walang atakeng nangyari. Lumapag ang mga chopper sa Crame. Isa-isang lumabas ang mga pilot, may hawak na mga puting bandila at naglalaban sign.

HIMAGSIKAN page 138 paragraph 4

Napakagat ng labi ang mga sundalo, nagkasahan ng mga baril, pumosisyon.

page 139 from last paragraph page 138

Isa-isang lumalabas ang mga piloto, may hawak na mga puting bandila at nagla-Laban sign.

V

DAVILA

(076) Ala singko ng hapon, sa kabila ng banta sa kanyang seguridad sumaglit sa EDSA si Cory …

(081) Sa main entrance ng Philippine Overseas Amployment agency o POEA building nagbigay siya ng maikling talumpati sa mga taong nagtipon sa kantong iyon ng Ortigas at EDSA. Pinuri ni Cory ang mapayapang pagkilos ng mga tao…

HIMAGSIKAN page 165 paragraph 1

Bandang 5:00 ng hapon, nagpakita sa wakas sa EDSA/Ortigas si Cory Aquino, na Sabado pa ay hinahanap na ng mga Coryista. Sa main entrance ng Philippine Overseas Employment Agency (POEA) building, sa kanto ng EDSA at Ortigas, siya dumaan kasama ang kanyang pamilya at mga tagapagtaguyod.

paragraph 5

Sa kanyang talumpati sa mga taong nagtipon sa kantong iyon ng Ortigas at EDSA, pinuri ni Cory ang mapayapang pagkilos ng mga tao …

the docu’s closing credits list the writers and researchers.   i expect the researchers cited their sources of info, it’s part of the job, and  if so, who decided not to mention na lang these sources, the writers or the hosts?   na okay lang naman as long as magaling sila and they can write the material in their own words.   but even then, dapat ay mayroon pa ring acknowledgement sa dulo ang sources of information na hindi pa common knowledge.

kung hindi pala sila ganoong kagaling, dapat ay inamin nila by writing-in “ayon kay…  sa librong so-and-so….”    or maybe it was karen davila who couldn’t be bothered with “ayon sa’s”, akala niya ay makakalusot?   whatever, whoever, wittingly or un-, she committed plagiarism by lifting and appropriating my words for her own use without a by-your-leave or a thank-you,  how unprofessional, how dishonest, how disgraceful.

nakakataas ng kilay kasi it doesn’t take much time and effort to cite and acknowledge sources.   unless of course the idea is to give the impression that hosts and writers of ABS-CBN News & Current Affairs productions are all-knowing and sufficient unto themselves?

so, okay, now that i’ve vented, what next?    what do i expect?   well.   iniisip ko nga.   an apology?   too easy to shed crocodile tears.   credits on the docu?   rather too late, unless of course they have plans of selling dvds, in which case, okay, credits, and a share in the profits?

suggests a writer friend:  like a lawyer can be disbarred, a beauty queen forced to abdicate, ask for the head of the plagiarist in the form of dismissal or suspension.   or how about punishing the culprit by having her write a million times in longhand a very long mea culpa — the equivalent of 20 years of keyboarding chores or tendonitis.   oscar lopez could also buy the next edition of your book to give away to all libraries nationwide.

sounds good, all of the above ;)