62. Beijing pokes journalists covering the West Philippine Sea
(No puns, but at least I am here)
Welcome back to Slow News Days, a hopefully weekly newsletter on journalism and journalism-adjacent topics in the Philippines.
—
Reviving this newsletter after a very long hiatus that included a change in jobs, a bout of depression and self-doubt, and a bit of self-care after a chaotic year. More on that later, maybe, but I look forward to doing these short notes again each week.
Anyway, you may have seen journalists’ organizations up in figurative arms this week over characterizations by China’s Foreign Ministry and by its embassy in Manila of journalists joining the Philippine Coast Guard’s resupply missions in the West Philippine Sea as propagandists for the government.
Beijing claimed that the journalists, mostly Filipinos, are made to “manipulate the videos they recorded to make sensational news and project the Philippines as a victim”.
The Foreign Correspondents Association of the Philippines, National Union of Journalists of the Philippines and the Defense Press Corps have issued separate statements condemning the allegation as — as FOCAP says — a bare-faced lie, “an insult to the integrity of journalists and an alarming attempt to muzzle an independent press.”
NUJP, of which I am a member, generally views embedded coverage as problematic and risky and advises — because embedding cannot be avoided — journalists joining security operations to “scrupulously preserve their independence” and to avoid being “cheerleaders for military operations.”
That doesn’t mean, however, minimizing what journalists on the missions see and experience for themselves or ignoring documented incidents of water cannoning and dangerous maneuvers by Chinese ships in the West Philippine Sea.
As much as casting doubt on the integrity of the media covering these resupply missions, China’s labeling of media as “troublemakers” and propagandists is dangerous because it paints them as participants in the incidents that they are there to document.
Being “participants” would mean, if you squint, that actions that would affect them or put them in danger would be slightly more acceptable (again, if you squint).
If all this seems too familiar, it may be because “troublemaker” and “propagandist” are labels that have also been thrown at journalists from within our borders, and to similar ends.
We can trumpet our free press (relative to China’s) but should also keep in mind how fragile that freedom is.
—
NUJP came out with a few guidelines on reporting on China in 2022 as part of a project with the International Federation of Journalists, in case you’re interested. The Ethical Guide for Filipino Journalists is also a (free) gift that keeps on giving.
Further on guides and manuals, alternative news site Bulatlat released its Filipino Journalist’s Guide to Human Rights Reporting this month as a reminder that every story is a human rights story.
Meanwhile, a very deep dive into Twitter bots by New York Magazine documenting our favorite social media platform’s continuing descent into the sea: Who’s Behind All the ‘Pussy in Bio’ on X? I clicked all the way through so you don’t have to.
An update from PCIJ on the International Criminal Court probe into the “drug war” beyond Harry’s histrionics: 'We want the trial to start': What happens now to ICC's probe into Duterte's drug war?
Also a look at WhatsApp, the world’s favorite messaging app and the nemesis of fact-checker colleagues from India and elsewhere: How WhatsApp became the world’s default communication app
Finally, this sad reminder of shrinking newsrooms, news deserts and corporate capture of journalism: Chevron owns this city's news site. Many stories aren't told