44. Should journalists in the Philippines just get guns for their safety?
It's a common suggestion whenever media security comes up
Welcome back to Slow News Days, a now-and-then newsletter on journalism and journalism-adjacent topics in the Philippines.
—
One of the suggestions from the media community after the Percy Lapid killing, and one that comes up every time media security is brought up, is for the government to just let us bring guns so we can protect ourselves in case someone threatens or actually attacks us.
To be clear, the law regulating firearms does recognize that journalists — alongside lawyers, bank tellers, accountants and the clergy — are in the category of people who are in imminent danger because of their jobs. This means they can own guns and apply for a permit to carry them outside their homes.
At a media forum on Sunday, one journalist called for a "tooth for a tooth" policy where journalists would be allowed guns so they just shoot it out with whoever wants to harm them.
It's a sentiment that would appeal to many, including myself, and likely stems from our increasing frustration at the government's ability to keep us safe.
But it's unclear whether being armed would necessarily make us safer. Data from the US suggests there is little evidence for the "good guy with a gun" argument and, in any case, arming journalists would mean being responsible for the training and discipline that would make them effective with a firearm — time and resources that not all journalists might have.
Arming journalists as policy would also have implications on accreditation — a requirement for licensing — and would inevitably mean unequal access to the protection that having guns would hypothetically provide.
I am not sure any would, but would members of the alternative press be given the privilege of a gun license if they asked for it?
Given the labeling and red-tagging that government agencies and affiliates do to the alternative press, being issued a gun license and carrying a gun might even put them in more danger and will certainly bring more anxiety to the communities they visit and report about.
RELATED: Journalists union denounces red-tagging of officer | Quiboloy network called out for red-tagging anew
At a time when law enforcement has been shown to have arrested journalists and activists on made-up evidence and based on faulty warrants and where a Department of Justice review of "drug war" cases found breaks in protocol and in the custody of evidence, having a gun might just make journalists and easier target.
A disclosure: I grew up around guns and was a member (if not a very good one) of the shooting team in college. I have recently started shooting again and am planning to get a license for a gun.
I will do so, though, without the illusion that it will necessarily keep me safe, much less change the conditions that journalists in the Philippines work in.
If anything, it will be an acknowledgement and a gesture of resignation at how dangerous the profession remains.
RELATED: On first National Press Freedom Day, journos reiterate call to defend free press
For the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines, getting a gun is a personal decision that media workers will have to make after a careful risk assessment as well as the assessment of their skill and temperament.
Addressing impunity over attacks against and killings of journalists would have more long-term effects on media security and safety.
The government making it clear that journalists play a vital role in society and should not be targets of violence would also help, as well as making sure that media workers are paid proper wages and benefits to help them avoid unethical practices like going into the payroll of local politicians that might put some of them in danger.
We need to address factors that contribute to an environment where journalists can be attacked and attacked with apparent impunity, guns or no.
—
Within hours of the police saying the alleged broker in the Percy Lapid killing had been secured, the justice secretary announced he had actually died days before. An autopsy of the alleged middleman’s remains raises red flags like, for example, the autopsy being done after he had already been embalmed.
I have long been a fan of Geela Garcia, and her latest series in NoliSoli is further proof of her ability to jump between sociopolitical reporting and lifestyle features and even merge the two.
Further in the arbitrary application of laws: Juanito Remulla III, the justice secretary’s son and who was arrested over more than 800 grams of kush shipped to him from California, refused to take a drug test in a case where it would have been mandatory.
Rappler’s (and NUJP’s!) Jairo Bolledo writes:
"Existing jurisprudence is clear that it was well within his rights to refuse the drug test, but some human rights advocates railed at how these same rights were denied poor drug suspects before him."
Sort of related to that case, Cavite Rep. Elpidio Barzaga wants the House to reopen its probe into ABS-CBN Corp., the broadcast giant it denied a franchise and whose shutdown led to thousands being laid off, "to determine if the company had corrected the legal infringements and the other violations that led to the denial of its legislative franchise in 2020."
How are they related? Possibly through this statement of support for Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla, who called out the network for having too many updates about his son’s case.
The network also aired photos showing Juanito III’s face, when others used the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency photos where his face had been blurred prior to release to media.