Right to Sell Telecomm Load Does Not Include Endangering Law Enforcers

But the concept of Press Freedom espoused by Rina Jimenez David and those nice clever folks at the Philippine Daily Innuendo, apparently does! In their need to scoop each other, or at least not to be scooped, the Mass Media are no different from our shabu-addicted bus drivers on Edsa, who have a similar need, attitude and behavior towards the Law...Who can deny that Journalism is a lucrative commercial enterprise that buys and sells information, entertainment, DATA of every conceivable sort, and is murderously competitive. The Media has been pouring pious holy oil all over itself and, full of hubris, won't admit they screwed the pooch at the Manila Pen!

WHAT'S THEIR BEEF (Philippine Daily Innuendo): There is no law that says journalists are obligated to follow the orders issued by law enforcers in the midst of a conflict. A warning to vacate the premises simply means that journalists who do not wish to die alongside their subjects, or inhale the painful fumes of tear gas, should leave as soon as possible.

But neither do I think that those journalists who chose to stay with Trillanes, Lim and their cohorts did anything wrong. Whatever their motivation -- to stand witness, to produce a story as the events wound down the wire, to stand as human shields against a police assault -- the media people were well within their rights and were following their reportorial instincts. If they were willing to bet big, and you can’t get any bigger than with your safety and life, then that was their and their editors’ look-out. But they did not deserve to be handcuffed and processed for doing their jobs.

And neither does the Philippine media community deserve the pre-censorship, to be held back before the fact, simply on the say-so of some paranoid old man.

Well, there you have it folks, the Mass Media are basically ABOVE THE LAW that applies to "non-journalists" who, the last I checked are ALL obligated to obey the lawful orders of competent authority in situations of public crisis and emergency. What Rina and her ilk consistently ignore in situations like this is that it is the police law enforcers who are most in danger of getting killed or injured in a situation like that which arose at the Manila Pen. (It's them that the Magdalo might have killed while hiding under your silly skirts of illogic, Rina!)

But I am pretty sure that neither paranoid old men nor big fat lady pundits are gonna be able to hold back the Media people from getting in the way of law enforcers to stand as human shields for rebellious putschists, get themselves handcuffed and gleefully photographed.

It's all part of the Edsa Envy Syndrome, a peculiar mental affliction in which the subject fantasizes of becoming a famous and esteemed hero by participating in a bloodless, peaceful, but utterly victorious Revolution, ideally as a brave journalist covering and protecting the military rebels and civilians fighting the Fascist Dictator (even if it's just the dipsomaniac Erap), and serving the ever loving Public's Right to Know by selling telecomm load and movie star gossip.

But Ms. David really comes off the rails with this:

About the only legitimate reason I can see for curtailing media coverage of a crime or violent situation is the preservation of evidence.

Really? How about the prevention or the minimization of death and destruction from violent crime so that perhaps evidence won't be so necessary? The Mass Media KNOW that they really screwed up at the Manila Pen. They overstepped their own professional and ethical bounds, but the supreme hubris that infects them means they will not admit it and will only use the incident to inflame the situation further.