THE FIL-AM PERSPECTIVE

Electronic gadgets should be banned for kids 12 and below, experts say

By Gel Santos Relos

On Asian Journal Op-Ed

 

(Photo credit: www.androidios.com)

 

MANY of us probably felt guilty, after reading this warning.

After all, we think that we are helping stimulate our kids’ mental faculty when we allow them to watch TV or videos and play games via electronic gadgets. We believe we are helping them learn their ABCs and 123s ,new languages, even their analytical thinking and eye-motor coordination.

It is true, though, that there are times when these electronic gadgets help a lot in keeping our kids preoccupied, especially when we need to attend to other things like household chores, work, or simply a need for a quiet “me” or “couple” time.

However, it can't be denied that there are others who let these electronic babysitters take an almost “full-time job” in raising their kids. Now we know doing such could bring dangerous consequences.

As concerned parents, these new findings by experts on child psychology and psychiatry are worth reading and discussing. Maybe they can answer some questions we’ve always had: why many kids now suffer from ADHD, obesity, emotional and behavioral problems, aggression, and many other challenges which seem more persistent with the new generation.

Let me share with you this piece by Pediatric Occupational Therapist Chris Rowan, published by the Huffington Post.

 

The American Academy of Pediatrics and the Canadian Society of Pediatrics state  infants aged 0-2 years should not have any exposure to technology, 3-5 years be restricted to one hour per day, and 6-18 years restricted to 2 hours per day (AAP 2001/13, CPS 2010). Children and youth use4-5 times the recommended amount of technology, with serious and often life threatening consequences (Kaiser Foundation 2010, Active Healthy Kids Canada 2012). Handheld devices (cell phones, tablets, electronic games) have dramatically increased the accessibility and usage of technology, especially by very young children (Common Sense Media, 2013). 

As a pediatric occupational therapist, I’m calling on parents, teachers and governments to ban the use of all handheld devices for children under the age of 12 years. Following are 10 research-based reasons for this ban. Please visit zonein.ca to view the Zone’in Fact Sheet for referenced research.

1. Rapid brain growth

Between 0 and 2 years, infant’s brains triple in size (Preview) , and continue in a state of rapid development to 21 years of age (Christakis 2011). Early brain development is determined by environmental stimuli, or lack thereof. Stimulation to a developing brain caused by overexposure to technologies (cell phones, internet, iPads, TV), has been shown to be associated with executive functioning and attention deficit, cognitive delays, impaired learning, increased impulsivity and decreased ability to self-regulate, e.g. tantrums (Small 2008, Pagini 2010).

2. Delayed development

Technology use restricts movement, which can result in delayed development. One in three children now enter school developmentally delayed, negatively impacting literacy and academic achievement (HELP EDI Maps 2013). Movement enhances attention and learning ability (Preview) (Ratey 2008). Use of technology under the age of 12 years is detrimental to child development and learning (Rowan 2010).

3. Epidemic obesity

TV and video game use correlates with increased obesity (Tremblay 2005). Children who are allowed a device in their bedrooms have 30% increased incidence of obesity (Feng 2011). One in four Canadian, and one in three US children are obese (Tremblay 2011). 30% of children with obesity will develop diabetes, and obese individuals are at higher risk for early stroke and heart attack, gravely shortening life expectancy (Center for Disease Control and Prevention 2010). Largely due to obesity, 21st century children may be the first generation many of whom will not outlive their parents (Professor Andrew Prentice, BBC News 2002).

4. Sleep deprivation

60 percent of parents do not supervise their child’s technology usage, and 75% of children are allowed technology in their bedrooms (Kaiser Foundation 2010). 75 percent of children, aged 9 and 10 years, are sleep-deprived to the extent that their grades are detrimentally impacted (Boston College 2012).

5. Mental illness 

Technology overuse is implicated as a causal factor in rising rates of child depression, anxiety, attachment disorder, attention deficit, autism, bipolar disorder, psychosis and problematic child behavior (Bristol University 2010, Mentzoni 2011, Shin 2011, Liberatore 2011, Robinson 2008). One in six Canadian children have a diagnosed mental illness, many of whom are on dangerous psychotropic medication (Waddell 2007).

6. Aggression 

Violent media content can cause child aggression (Anderson, 2007). Young children are increasingly exposed to rising incidence of physical and sexual violence in today’s media. “Grand Theft Auto V” portrays explicit sex, murder, rape, torture and mutilation, as do many movies and TV shows. The US has categorized media violence as a Public Health Risk due to causal impact on child aggression (Huesmann 2007). Media reports increased use of restraints and seclusion rooms with children who exhibit uncontrolled aggression.

7. Digital dementia

High speed media content can contribute to attention deficit, as well as decreased concentration and memory, due to the brain pruning neuronal tracks to the frontal cortex (Christakis 2004, Small 2008). Children who can’t pay attention can’t learn.

8. Addictions

As parents attach more and more to technology, they are detaching from their children. In the absence of parental attachment, detached children can attach to devices, which can result in addiction (Rowan 2010). One in 11 children aged 8-18 years are addicted to technology (Gentile 2009).

9. Radiation emission

In May of 2011, the World Health Organization classified cell phones (and other wireless devices) as a category 2B risk (possible carcinogen) due to radiation emission (WHO 2011). James McNamee with Health Canada in October of 2011 issued a cautionary warning stating “Children are more sensitive to a variety of agents than adults as their brains and immune systems are still developing, so you can’t say the risk would be equal for a small adult as for a child.” (Globe and Mail 2011). In December, 2013 Dr. Anthony Miller from the University of Toronto’s School of Public Health recommend that based on new research, radio frequency exposure should be reclassified as a 2A (probable carcinogen), not a 2B (possible carcinogen). American Academy of Pediatrics requested review of EMF radiation emissions from technology devices, citing three reasons regarding impact on children (AAP 2013).

10. Unsustainable

The ways in which children are raised and educated with technology are no longer sustainable (Rowan 2010). Children are our future, but there is no future for children who overuse technology. A team-based approach is necessary and urgent in order to reduce the use of technology by children.”

Technology Use Guidelines for Children and Youth

 

Confer the Philippine National Artist Award to DOLPHY: Will You Sign The Petition?

 

By Gel Santos Relos

 

 

 

Namayapa man si Dolphy, ang paggawad sa kanya ng karangalang ito ay pagpupugay sa kanyang pangalan...o legacy...o pamana sa sining at kultura ng bansang kanyang minahal, pinaglingkuran, at pinasaya sa loob ng 65 taon bilang isang tunay na artist sa stage, radyo, TV at pelikula.

Will you sign the petition (http://www.change.org/dolphy ) to honor his name and legacy in the history of Philippine arts and culture so the generations to come will know and appreciate the King of Comedy who brought so much joy and laughter to us in the midst of our struggles as a nation?

Dolphy was laid to rest on Sunday, July 15, but the clamor of a nation in mourning to give the King of Comedy the much-deserved Philippine National Artist Award lives on --  and the uproar only grows louder and stronger after his death.

 

Yes, this recognition could be given posthumously. The first award was posthumously conferred to Filipino painter Fernando Amorsolo. 

 

Dolphy had definitively satisfied all qualifications for this honor: He made significant contributions to the cultural heritage of the country; his highest level of artistic accomplishments on stage, radio, television and film helped promote creative expression as significant to the development of a national cultural identity; and he dedicated 65 years of his life as an artist, which helped forge new paths and directions for future generations of Filipino artists.

 

The King of Comedy also reaped many awards as an actor in the films “Omeng Satanasia” and Lino Brocka’s “Ang Tatay Kong Nanay.” He was also given the “Best Performer” award in Brussels International Filmfest for his portrayal of the role of Markova, a Filipino homosexual man, forced into prostitution during the war.

 

It has been so many years since Dolphy was nominated for the highest national recognition given to Filipino individuals who have made significant contributions to the development of Philippine arts. But the award, given only every three years, had been elusive to the King of Comedy in his lifetime.

 

Some say politics had something to do with it. In an interview on ABS-CBN News Channel (ANC), Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB) chairperson Grace Poe-Llamanzares hinted that Dolphy's endorsement of her father Fernando Poe Jr. during the 2004 presidential elections did cost the the country's "King of Comedy" the National Artist Award.

 

ABS-CBN news quoted Llmanzares as saying: "He [Dolphy] suffered a lot for the [FPJ] endorsement because the past [Arroyo] administration, they were a bit vengeful. There were some exchange of words to the point of [Dolphy] saying, 'I'm sorry, Madam, if I hurt your feelings.”

 

Others lament how personal prejudices of a few cost the King of Comedy this much deserved title, especially after National Artist Awardee for Theater Cecile Guidote- Alvarez revealed that Dolphy's portrayals of gay men throughout his film career cost him the national artist award. 

 

In an interview on ABS-CBN Radio DZMM, Guidote-Alvarez said inclusion in the final list of nominees for national artist was "passionately" opposed in the deliberation committee, which is tasked to recommend notable personalities to be awarded the title. The loudest voice came from then Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) president Nicanor Tiongson.

 

"Basically, siya ang pinakamatindi. Sa botohan na-shock nga kami, hindi nakapasa si Dolphy. Sa recollection ko, ang sinasabing protesta was basically hindi karapat-dapat ang body of work [ni Dolphy] na nagpe-presenta not in a good light about the gay [community], the life [of gay men]," Guidote-Alvarez said, as quoted by ABS-CBN News. 

 

Consequently, Dolphy was removed from the shortlist the NCCA and the CCP would jointly recommend to former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

 

But many kababayans from different parts of the world could not and would not accept these reasons why Dolphy should not get the recognition, even after his death. 

 

The clamor has increasingly intensified after Guidote Alvarez pointed out: "As of 1997, meron pong joint NCCA-CCP board which said the president has the authority and the prerogative to deny anything that was recommended by the NCCA-CCP, has the right to name a category, has a right to elect or add anybody in their judgment through the validation of the Honors Committee, who should be given an award, a state award.”

 

In 2010, President Noynoy Aquino conferred the Grand Collar of the Order of the Golden Heart to Dolphy (the highest award given to a private citizen by the President of the Philippines) for his contributions to the entertainment industry and for his many years of charitable and philanthropic works. 

 

Many Filipinos believe PNoy could have done better by using his executive power for Dolphy to be seriously considered for the highest recognition of being named as Philippine National Artist.

 

The biggest online Filipino community on Facebook called  “Definitely Filipino” initiated a petition addressed to President Benigno Aquino III, NCCA & CCP. (http://www.change.org/dolphy )

 

Founder of Definitely Filipino, Ben Totanes, said: “The award wasn’t given to him when he was alive. But now that he is gone, they should give it him. It’s still an honor.”

 

Responding to opposition founded on the belief that Dolphy’s portrayal was demeaning to gay people, and on a more conservative view that “homosexuality is a sin, and therefore playing gay roles is a sin,” Totanes said that gay roles were not demeaning to the gay community. He argued that the King of Comedy’s portrayal of gay roles even helped raise awareness, understanding, respect and even acceptance of the gays in the community.

 

The “Definitely Filipino” petition states:

 

“This petition aims to show the support of the Filipino people in the process and eventual conferment of the National Artist 2012 Award to Dolphy for his outstanding contribution to the arts and culture of the Philippines . It is the voice of the Filipino asking: 

 

1. That Dolphy be included in the short-list of nominees/awardees submitted by the NCCA and CCP to the Office of the President;

 

      2. That President Benigno Aquino III will heed to the call of his "boss"        - the Filipino People - in declaring Dolphy as National Artist in 2012. 

 

This petition supports the resolutions filed by the City of Manila and that in the Senate by Senate President Pro-Tempore Jinggoy Ejercito-Estrada, asking the President to declare him as National Artist in this year's competition, which is only being held every 3 years.

 

This petition serves as a documentation of the public's support for Dolphy in this time of mourning and recognition of his contribution in Philippine cinema and in the lives of countless Filipinos.”

 

Per guidelines outlined by the National  Commission for Culture and the Arts, “A posthumous conferral consisting of the medallion and citation shall be given to the family or legal heir/s of the honoree. The cash award of P75,000 in cheque shall be given to the honoree’s legal heir/s or a representative designated by the family immediately after the ceremony or at another time and place as requested by the family.”

 

Will you honor the King of Comedy by signing this petition? 

Go to http://www.change.org/dolphy

 

Paalam, Dolphy...Salamat sa Mga Halakhak!

 

By Gel Santos Relos

 

 

The man who brought joy and laughter to generations of Filipinos is gone.

 

After two years of his most intense battle with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Dolphy joined our Creator last Tuesday, July 10, at 8:34 in the evening at the Makati Medical Center, due to multiple organ failure, secondary to complications brought about by severe pneumonia, COPD, and renal failure. 

 

The whole nation mourns-- it is as if one member of the family died. Yes, that is what Dolphy is to us. 

 

For six decades, Dolphy has been part of almost every Filipino family’s history, making us laugh and cry, on stage, radio, television, and film. 

 

The ‘King of Comedy” started entertaining the Filipino people at the age of 17 as a stage performer on Avenue and Lyric Theaters during the Japanese occupation. 

 

He was on radio starting in the 1940s when it  was the major source of entertainment for Filipinos. He starred on Conde Ubalde’s radio shows, most notable was the program “Wag Naman” which topbilled Pancho Magalona, Tessie Quintana, and Baby Jane. It was also during these golden years of radio when his comedy duo with Panchito started.

 

Dolphy was on television since it started in the 1950s, appearing for the first time on ABS-CBN’s Buhay Artista. For decades, Dolphy made us laugh through his other programs as well, including “John and Marsha” and “Home Along da Riles”.

 

Dolphy’s first movie was when he was 19 years old  with Fernando Poe Sr. He started doing movies for Sampaguita Pictures in 1952, and did movies with other movie outfits while being on television. He started producing his own films via RVQ Productions in 1965.

 

His most memorable early films as a comedian were in the 50s like “Sulyap Mo Tita”, “Jack and Jill”, “Silveria” and “Tanzan”-- the re-runs of which I am sure you truly enjoyed watching on  television in the afternoon siesta time,  like I did as a child growing up in the 60s and 70s.

 

  The King of Comedy also reaped many awards as an actor in the films “Omeng Satanasia” and Lino Brocka’s “Ang Tatay Kong Nanay”. He was also given the “Best Performer” award in Brussels International Filmfest for his portrayal of the role of Markova, a Filipino homosexual man forced into prostitution during the war.

 

On July 25, 2008, Dolphy celebrated his 80th birthday, with the launching of a biographical book--  Dolphy,” Hindi Ko Ito Narating Mag-isa” (Dolphy, I Didn't Get Here All By Myself)-- I was honored to be given a copy of this book signed by Dolphy himself, when I interviewed him on Balitang America.

 

In this book, Dolphy shared about his humble beginnings. He was Rodolfo Vera Cruz in real life, born in Tondo, Manila in 1928. He was second of ten children, and his father was a ship mechanic.

 

As we reported on Balitang America, Dolphy’s biography revealed that his exposure to movies started while, as a young man working inside the theater selling peanuts, he watched so many many movies for free. He was only thirteen when World War II started. He helped his family by doing odd jobs including shining shoes and working as a stevedore at the pier. And then the stage later beckoned, and the rest was history.

 

It was these early struggles in life that has made him the compassionate, giving, and down to earth person he had always been known and admired for.

 

In 2010, President Noynoy Aquino conferred the Grand Collar of the Order of the Golden Heart to Dolphy - the highest award given to a private citizen by the President of the Philippines - for his contributions to the entertainment industry and for his many years of charitable and philanthropic works.

 

But many kababayans believed he deserved to be given the Philippine National Artist Award. Even years before his passing, his supporters have been clamoring for this, as they believe Dolphy more than met all the qualifications and requirements for this distinguished honor.

 

It is the highest national recognition given to Filipino individuals who have made significant contributions to the development of Philippine arts. This award is conferred no more frequently than every three years, honoring:

 

Filipino artists who have made significant contributions to the cultural heritage of the country;

 

Filipino artistic accomplishment at its highest level and to promote creative expression as significant to the development of a national cultural identity;

 

Filipino artists who have dedicated their lives to their works to forge new paths and directions for future generations of Filipino artists.

 

This recognition has been raised to the level of a Cultural Order, ranking fourth in precedence among the orders and decorations that comprise the Honors of the Philippines, and considered equal in rank to the “Order of National Scientists” and the “Gawad sa Manlilikha ng Bayan”.

 

As we reported on Balitang America-- despite his death, the Philippine House of Representatives will still tackle a resolution seeking to declare Dolphy a National Artist.

In a radio interview, Rep. Salvador Escudero III said that lawmakers may also recommend a posthumous award for Dolphy.

 

Dolphy gave much needed respite in times of trials and desperations of our kababayans for many generations. Through his comedy, Dolphy also taught us how to  laugh at ourselves, imperfections and all. With  his gift of laughter, Dolphy lifted up our spirits and reminded us that no matter how hard our circumstances might had been, not all was lost.

 

Paalam, Dolphy...Maraming salamat sa mga halakhak.... 

 

Photo Credit: Arlu  www.helloballoon.com

 

Kababayans’ Comments On Sotto’s Threat to Pull Out Funding for CNN Ads Because of “Pagpag”

By Gel Santos Relos

 

 

In my previous article, I asked our kababayans if they agree with Senator Sotto that CNN shouldn't have aired "Pagpag" because the Philippines is an advertiser.

 

Senator Tito Sotto threatened to pull out the reported $63 Million Dollars worth of advertising spots on the international news channel Cable News Network (CNN),  after it aired  the documentary "Eye on the Philippines" illustrating poverty and hunger in the country through "pagpag"  or left-over chicken scavenged from the garbage by the poor, washed, recooked, and sold to poor Filipinos. 

 

However, in a separate "Eye on the Philippines" story, CNN also featured the good side of the Philippines and the Filipinos despite hardship and budget limitations, focusing on the country's collective effort to boost tourism in the country. (Click to Watch video here)

 

The Department of Tourism invested in ads spots featuring “It’s More Fun in the Philippines” 15- or 30-seconder ads to be shown during CNN programming’s commercial breaks. DoT hoped to reach CNN’s wide global market.  

 

Sotto said the Philippines was stabbed in the back, considering the Philippine government has poured a lot of money on CNN's commercial spots. CNN, he argued, should have just shown good and success stories in and about the Philippines instead.

 

 Tourism Secretary Ramon Jimenez responded, saying “All we bought were spots, WE DID NO BUY CNN, and therefore, we can't tell CNN what to do...The Philippines is not without its problems, what did they find out [through the CNN ads] in the end? They [the prospective tourists] found out that we are one of the most progressive countries in our part of the world. If they want to cut the tourism budget for CNN, they have to think twice."

 

 

 

Kababayans weighed in on this issue and here are some of the comments:

 

I agree with Sen. Sotto. Kung may producto ka at gusto mo i-advertise sa TV o kaya sa Radio, courtesy ng broadcast entity na yun na alagaan ang mga nagpagkukunan nila ng income. The Philippines paid $63 Million tapos masisira lang because of that news item. They can air that news item if the advertising contract with the Philippines has already expired. -- Macky

 

Journalism and advertising are two very distinct issues although admittedly, from a business perspective, it is common knowledge that news organizations (print, online, broadcast, web) rely on advertising to survive or be profitable. However, the journalism code or ethics ARE NOT TO BE compromised for the sake of advertising.  Politicians or people who think they have bought a news organizations' favor simply because they placed an ad are those who, in the long run, would also be the ones to complain why wrongdoings of their political opponents or rivals are not being reported...would they accept an explanation that: "Well, sir, they also placed an ad." So in the process, are we to kill what journalism is really all about on the basis of a few hundred or even millions of dollars worth of ads? And news organizations who end up reporting only about the good side of an advertiser should stop masquerading as journalists or being in the journalism profession... -- Albert Alba

 

Hindi nagbayad ang DoT para gumawa ng documentaryo ang CNN.  Nag bayad ang DoT para magpa labas ng mga "its more fun in the Philippines" ads. Porket nag bayad ba tayo ng $63M so CNN, mawawala ba ang problema sa kahirapan at gutom sa Pilipinas? Yan ang problema sa Pinoy (which unfortunately includes me) Pag di natin nakikita, di rin natin iniisip. Out of sigh, out of mind. Di natin nakikita ang mga problemang yan sa atin, kaya di natin na iisip na nangyayari na nga yang problemang yan. Kaya nga andyan yang mga diaryo at mga programa sa TV para ipa alam at remind sa atin na may mga ganon nga na problema ang mga kapatid natin sa ibang lugar. Kaya nga dapat natin pasalamatan ang mga news agencies for reminding us, na may ibang mga Pinoy na naghihirap at kailangan tulungan. -- Mike Ybanez

 

IT'S NOT ABOUT HIDING THE TRUTH regarding the poverty stricken sector of our country,, I'm sure all Filipinos are already aware of this biting reality, and I'm also sure that we are finding ways to resolve it. Hindi mo kailangang ipaglandakan sa mga banyagang bansa dahil ito ay nagdadagdag sa maling impresyon sa ating mga Pilipino at diskriminasyon sa ating kakayahan bilang isang bansa.  CNN should have practiced ethics in treating their advertisers(cash cow) COURTEOUSLY in relation to the shows they will air--the ad campaign should not be in the same timeline with those programs that question its integrity. IT DEFEATS ALL PURPOSES AND EFFORTS TO MAKE THE SAID CAMPAIGN EFFECTIVE --GinebraSanMiguel_AngInuminNgTunayNaLalake

 

Tama si Sotto... Di niyo kasi naransan maliitin sa ibang bansa,,, Ako kahit lumaki akong meron din kaya sa buhay , sinasabihan ako ng amo ko kung nakahiga na ba raw ako sa kama o mayron ba raw ref s pinas etc..masakit din kaya yun...Na ang alam nila talagang walang wala tayo at para s kanila,  gold daw ang bansa nila..Kaya kahit anong gawin nila pagmamaltrato ok lang kapalit ng pera...pero di tama yun..  -- Lynn Li

 

May kalayaang ihayag ng sinuman kung ano ang tunay na mukha ng isang bansa.. ang mga ganitong klase ng palabas katulad ng idinokumentaryo ng CNN or BBC ay isang panawagan para sa gobyerno ng ating bansa at buksan ang isipan ng bawat isa sa atin.. hindi ito isang klase ng paninira kundi isang panawagan para sa mga lider ng ating bansa, kung gaanong naghihirap ang maraming pilipino habang sila ay nagpapakasasa at naliligo sa pera ng taong bayan.. -- Joshua Espiritu

 

Problema dito eh yng mentalidad ni Sen. Tito Sotto.. ang pag-isip nya ay katulad ng karamihan (halos lahat) ng mnga Filipino."UTANG NA LOOB".. ang inisip ni tito sotto porque binayaran ang CNN, ibig sabihin, meron cla utang na loob sa Pilipinas
kaya yun nasaktan at feeling betrayed cya.. sino ang mali --CNN or ang pag-isip ng mnga Filipino na pinakita ni Sen. Tito Sotto in full view? -- Esmeraldo C

 

Paying a certain amount for an advertisement spot doesn't mean you have the right for censorship, specially if the issue at hand is a reality. There is nothing wrong with the documentary that was shown by CNN. In fact, they even did us a favor, they showed the world that like any other countries out there, the Philippines is not perfect, it has it's flaws. And yet, despite all these imperfections, still, IT IS MORE FUN IN THE PHILIPPINES. I am a Filipino, and by showing the whole world the negative side of the Philippines when it comes to hunger and poverty doesn't make me a lesser person, or us for that matter. On the contrary, what Sotto should be ashamed of is corruption.-- Floyd Derick Guico

 

In the first place, hindi po dapat nagbabayad ng ganun halaga ang gobyerno para mag advertise... $63million??? ilan pamilya na ang mapapakain nyan... ilang kabataan na ang mapapaaral at ilang komunidad ang mabibigyan ng hanap-buhay. kung gusto po nila ng good publicity, gumawa sila ng tama dahil ang mismong mga international organization naman ang makakarecognize kung merong nangyayaring mabuti sa Pilipinas. -- Janice Bancud

 

Huwag tayong short-sighted. Kung magiging successful ang advertisement.. mas malaki pa sa $63M ang mage-generate nito.. mas maraming pamilya ang mapapakain.. mas maraming kabataan ang mapapag-aral at higit pa dyan, maraming trabaho ang maibibigay sa mga Pilipino.. dapat may foresight tayo.. -- Luz V

 

Halos lahat ng SEA nations my ads sa CNN about tourism. papahuli ba naman tayo? come to think of it guys. -- Niko Mina

 

I believe the advertisement was to promote the good side of the Philippines. Ang mga nakikita ninyong pinapakita ang bad side ng pinas ay sariling research at topic ng CNN at BBC. We can't blame them kasi that's their job. Ang punahin lahat bad or good.Kaya mas dapat nga na mag advertise tayo ng good side to neutralize it and di kailangan i-witdraw and Ad Spot na yun as what Sotto is suggesting.With or without that Ad Spot, Philippines has been topic of its bad side. So having this Ad Spot promoting the Philippines good side will me more beneficial. So the world will know there are good thing in the Philippines. -- PinoyAko

 (Asian Journal Column Article, May 19, 2012 )

 

 

 

 

Your VOTE Can Help Jessica Sanchez Be the Next American Idol!

By Gel Santos Relos

 

 

 

Filipinos all over the world were shocked when Jessica Sanchez almost got eliminated last Thursday for getting the lowest number of votes. Surprisingly, American Idol judges Randy Jackson, Jennifer Lopez and Steve Tyler used their powers to "save" Jessica in order for the 16-year-old Filipino-Mexican to be able to continue competing in the show.

 

Hailing from San Diego, Jessica is so talented -- receiving nothing but standing ovation and accolades from the AI judges and studio audience every week. How could she be voted out of the contest? 

 

Already I have been getting text messages, emails, tweets and Facebook messages from kababayans back home with the same questions: Are Fil-Ams not voting for Jessica? Isn’t ABS-CBN The Filipino Channel doing a strong campaign to make Filipinos in America vote for our bet? 

 

Jessica can’t lose, they say. Many of us are optimistic that she will be the first Filipina to win American Idol! What happened? 

 

Immediately, kababayans from all over the world ask: How can they help? Can they vote in whatever way possible to ensure our pamabato’s victory in American idol?

 

While some kababayans are eager to learn and explore all possible options, others, like our Balitang America LA Correspondent Yong Chavez warn how doing so may do more harm than good.

 

“I think we should follow AI rule on who can vote (US/territories). Breaking it might create backlash against her and Pinoys,” Yong Chavez said.

 

American Idol stipulates who can vote in the contest:

 

-Toll-free Voting:  Anyone calling the toll-free numbers from an area code from within the Continental US, Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands will be able to cast their vote(s) for American Idol.

-AT&T Text Voting: Any AT&T wireless subscriber who has the ability to text message and has an area code from within the Continental US, Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands will be able to cast their vote(s) for American Idol.

-Online Voting:  Anyone with a Facebook account registered within the Continental US, Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands will be able cast their vote(s) using the online method. 

 

Such pragmatism among our kababayans around the world has been tempered by the desire  to make Jessica win the crown within bounds of American Idol rules. As Yong Chavez articulated, we do not wish for Jessica and Filipinos to be put in bad light for rule-breaking or 'cheating'.

 

“Voting for AI and you're not in (any) US territories is cheating! Ang tawag diyan.. flying voters! Voting on AI na hindi taga Amerika!,” kababayan Pat Punzalan says. And Filipinos get this.

 

Kababayan Evita Garcia suggests that it is “better to campaign to all friends and relatives in the US, not just to watch Jessica but also to vote for her.”

 

True enough, many Fil-Ams publicly said “mea culpa,’ admitting that they have been complacent. They believe Jessica is a strong candidate and that many would vote for her.  They did not feel the pressure and urgency to vote for her consistently every week. A classic case of a ‘diffused sense of responsibility.'

 

But last week’s surprise made many Fil-Ams realize how important it is to vote, in order for Jessica to win. They realize that in American Idol, the best and most talented singer does not necessarily win. Winning is based on popularity and number of votes.  

 

Fil-Ams have in fact organized several “American Idol” viewing parties all over the United States and plan to vote quite obsessively together for Jessica within the designated voting time after the show in each time zone.

 

Other Filipinos have articulated their analyses of why Jessica was almost booted out of the contest. Some point to race. Others say it is because the young female audience who comprise the big voting block of AI prefer to swoon over white, good-looking guys as their "American Idol."

 

Still some believe Jessica does not look glitzy enough, or that she chooses the wrong songs. She might have proven her singing prowess but failed to connect with people emotionally last week because of her song, Stuttering. Some opined she should share more of her self that the American voting public may identify with.

 

But then there are those who wonder how we Filipinos treat Jessica’s almost elimination from American Idol like it is a national crisis that requires immediate and serious attention. Others lament how “Pinoy pride” can truly be so misplaced and tied to showbiz and contests and boxing, etc.

 

I just hope Jessica will still be in American Idol by the time you read this column. Jessica vows to “step up her game.” She is so talented -- she may just be the next American Idol. 

 

But we, Fil-Ams need to do our role in voting for her, as passionately as we believe in her. Yet if she doesn't make it, we know that she has already made it known to the world that her star will continue to shine, even after the curtains of this season's American Idol closes. 

 

Good luck, Jessica!

Pagbabalik-tanaw Sa Mga Alaala Ng TV Patrol: 25 Years Na!

 

By Gel Santos Relos

Maybe you were still in elementary school when your family watched TV Patrol at 6pm every night before dinner. Or perhaps, beginning in the mid-90s,  you were a Fil-Am who was thrilled to watch this newscast everyday in America via The Filipino Channel, and somehow found a way to “re-connect” with the motherland you left many years ago.

  

It was the voice of Kabayan Noli de Castro which has left an indelible impression in our collective memory, as he anchored the news program that helped Filipinos made sense of the world since 1987.

  

It was 1986 and the Lopez family had just recovered ownership of Channel 2 and its broadcast station in Bohol Avenue Quezon City, after Marcos was ousted from power.  They had to start all over again to find their niche in the Philippine broadcasting industry. The journey required a great deal of soul searching for the network owners and executives. 

 

Channel 2  had a few twists and turns and several bumps along the way, in the quest to find its identity. Its new rationale was to deserve the privilege of using the airwaves of a country that has just reclaimed its democracy.

 

Guided by the vision of El Kapitan of ABS-CBN, the late Geny Lopez Jr., the network embarked on a mission to find a way for Channel 2 to be of service to the Filipino. 

 

In a country that has been deprived of freedom of speech and information for so long under the Marcos regime, the challenge to make Filipinos follow the news again with trust and passion was embraced by the network’s leaders.

 

And so defying conventional news programming, broadcast icons Freddie Garcia and the late Rollie Cruz followed their instinct  and pioneered a different kind of newscast - a news magazine that spoke to the ordinary Filipino in terms of content, language, and packaging.

 

TV Patrol dished out a one-hour newscast that went beyond the usual headlines of local politics, economy, world news, sports and weather. Patterned after the top rating early radio news programming of ABS-CBN’s AM radio DZMM Radyo Patrol, TV Patrol sent reporters out to different beats, especially expanding four important elements of the news that have enjoyed wide following on radio: police report, public service, balitaktakan and entertainment news.

 

TV Patrol has been regarded by some as a “tabloid newscast” because of its perceived "sensationalization" of the news. Many followers of TV Patrol, however, looked at it in a different perspective, saying the newscast has been successful in the way it has fully used the visual medium of television in telling the story, especially the police stories, which used to be just reported through words by the sound medium that is radio. 

 

More over, like radio DZMM Radyo Patrol, TV Patrol had also succeeded in connecting with its audience-- the broader Filipino “masa”, by telling the news in the language that they speak and understand -- colloquial Filipino, following a human interest storyline.

  

The network executives also placed their bet on Noli de Castro-- who at that time only had his radio success as newscaster and commentator for DZMM morning primetime to back him up for the prime position. But he was perfect for the job -- his strong loud voice with the sense of urgency “radio style”, his command of conversational Filipino language, the depth of his knowledge about the issues that matter to Filipinos, and his wide following on radio had all been  good capital.

  

Mel Tiangco provided the female energy and perspective to TV Patrol. She was also in charge of Lingkod Bayan, the public service segment of the program that has helped so many kababayans around the country. Like Noli, Mel was also very knowledgeable about the issues, and had her morning radio commentary program (Mel and Jay) after Kabayan’s slot, that also rated very well. 

  

Frankie “Ka Kiko” Evangelista (RIP) was the calm, statesman-like anchor with the grandfather’s wisdom. He was in charge of the “PULSO” segment, which was the opinion portion of the news magazine. Viewers loved this segment, as the three of them sounded like "magkakapamilya" talking in the kitchen table, or  “magkakapitbahay’ exchanging their views in the sari-sari store sa kanto. Each represented a different perspective, voicing out the sentiments of ordinary kababayans out there.

  

Angelique Lazo was the “bunso,” and she was in-charge of the entertainment segment, Star News. Kababayans just couldn’t have enough of the news and inside stories about their favorite artistas, shows, and movies, and all the drama and comedy behind the scenes!

  

Other segments had also been introduced and eventually became full length programs, like the public service/investigative program Hoy!Gising! And who could forget the iconic Ernie Baron (RIP), known not only for his weather report, but more so for his Knowledge Power trivia segment. Noli's standard intro and extro spiel "Magandang gabi bayan..." also became another top rating public affairs program.

 

I had the privilege of working with these amazing anchors, staff and crew of TV Patrol, as pinch hitter for Mel Tiangco whenever she was on vacation. I also got to work with Kabayan, Mel, Jay, Ka Kiko, Korina, Ted, Senator Kiko Pangilinan, Senator Pia Cayetano, and all the Radyo Patrol reporters and staff of  DZMM as a radio anchor and commentator from 1989, until I left for the US in 2001. 

  

Through the years, "TV Patrol" has evolved--- in the late 90s, Kabayan went solo until he ran for public office. There had been rigodons, too, in anchoring and reportorial assignment. Some left and new ones joined the news team. 

 

After Kabayan’s term as Vice President expired in 2010, he went back to anchoring "TV Patrol" with two other “veterans”-- Korina Sanchez and Ted Failon. 

 

I used “veterans” as a term of endearment as they both had been good friends of mine through the years. They were my contemporaries then as junior anchors, and  also my team mates in “Hoy!Gising! “.

 

In its ongoing journey, TV Patrol has earned local, national and international awards for its newscast and special coverages, including international recognitions like the Asian TV Awards, New York Festivals and International Emmy Awards. 

 

Looking forward, TV Patrol will continue to evolve as the program responds to the changing needs of the Filipino community worldwide, adapting to and maximizing technological advances in news gathering, delivery, and sharing of information using different media platform. 

 

Twenty five years hence, TV Patrol has been an institution, a big part of the Filipinos' collective social experience that has somehow helped in unifying and motivating our kababayans to act for the betterment of the Filipino community, especially during times of challenges. 

  

And as it was then, and always will be, TV Patrol has continued to strive to live up to the vision of El Kapitan Geny Lopez Jr.: to be a program in the service of the Filipino, wherever in the world we may be.

 

Mabuhay, TV PATROL!!!

 

(My Asian Journal Column Article--March 3, 2012)

Is the Culture of Denial, Suppression and Retrogression Still Perpetuated in the Philippines?

  
By Gel Santos Relos

Sa makabagong panahon ng internet, facebook, twitter, at international news media coverage, patuloy ba nating maikukubli ang katotohanan para pagtakpan ang kakulangan?

“You have to think about putting the country in a good light,” was Senator Joker Arroyo’s prescription, as he castigated the messengers of bad news for allegedly damaging the country’s image with their reporting on the botched hostage rescue."Don’t tempt us to use our powers here, to now issue a general broadcast policy—that will be a law."

 

During the recent grilling of broadcast media news executives led by Maria Ressa (ABS-CBN), Jessica Soho (GMA-7), and Luchi Cruz-Valdes (TV5)  by RP senators in light of the culpability of the media in the botched Manila hostage-taking tragedy ---did Senator Arroyo et al  really suggest that the local media should  not report the news (Who, What, Where When, How of the story),  if it will would be bad for the country's image?  How about the foreign journalists?  Along with our local media, foreign/international press and broadcast networks were also there to beam what was happening to the whole world as the drama unfolded.

 

I do not mean to absolve my colleagues of any mistakes they have made in this fiasco. Aminado rin naman ang ilang miyembro ng media sa naging pagkakamali nila. I honestly believe many of our media networks failed to observe the guidelines followed by responsible journalists  and their blow-by-blow live reporting may have contributed to the failure of law enforcement operations. But what bothered me was the way the questions were framed and how the inquiry was made.(Part of the exchanges between the Senators and the broadcast news executives transcribed below).

While some news executives in the panel conceded that somehow  they failed to exercise self-restraint and adherence to their self-regulatory policies in airing critical information and images, they expressed concern over the lack of leadership from the police authorities. Maria Ressa said, "There was the failure of authorities to actually create a functioning chain of command, to regulate, to set the parameters where media should be. It's not just Filipinos who want to see what happened. We did not expect [that] those in charge [to] not be in charge of the situation. We need a mechanism to tell us to pull back when needed."

 

Senator Joker Arroyo's response? "The problem, Maria, is this: Everybody is scared of the media. Let’s face it… You publish something unfavorable, then we’re finished. The point is, we hesitate because you are media. If you weren’t [in the] media, we would craft the law immediately."

 

Ressa cautioned against any new law that may be used by local and national government to curtail press freedom. This may be in violation of Article 3 Section 4 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. We have witnessed how this power to curtail freedom was used and abused during the Marcos regime. The good news is that this  hostage-taking crisis  has prompted some of the news media organizations --yes, both local and foreign--- to do some honest to goodness soul-searching on the role and ethical responsibility of media in society especially during hostage crisis coverage.

 

But as foreign observers have also observed and noted---this could have been avoided or averted had the police authorities exercised their already existing power to limit public and media access to the scene of the crime. Or is what many of our kababayans think true? That the police force has been craving for publicity as they executed this high intensity hostage drama in real life? Or do they even have a well-orchestrated plan as they carry out their operation?

 

In the process of truth finding on this systemic problem, what was disturbing was the seemingly obsessive focus of Sen. Joker Arroyo  on the apparent need to deliberately cover up what is going on in the country, just so we won’t tarnish the country’s image, are indicative of a policy of retrogression. And with reference to his confessed fear of the media---is this a major motivating force in the way the good Senator and his esteemed colleagues decide which bill to draft and pass into law--- political survival and expediency?

 

First of all, as former Sen. Aquilino Pimentel Jr., counsel for Radio Mo Nationwide, reminded the senators --- the world has changed many times over in this information age of the internet, Facebook and Twitter. Traditional media is no longer the gatekeeper of news. And foreign/international broadcast media will cover this big story which is of international significance, no matter how much we try to silence our local media. Would the Philippine government impose rules on them too?

 

Second, are we going back to the age of dictatorship and censorship? Are we covering up something here just to maintain a pretentious image of  efficient and effective law enforcement?  Even Wall Street Journal Asia editorial board member Mary Kissel  said, instead of going on a "media witch hunt," Philippine politicians should focus on the issues surrounding the August 23 hostage crisis. Babalik na naman ba tayo sa panahong sinisikil ang malayang pamamahayag para paniwalain natin ang ating sarili at ang mundo na ayos lang ang lahat kahit hindi?

 

Denial and repression may provide temporary relief for tension, anxiety and shame brought about by a crisis, but  these defense mechanisms never solve problems. No amount of cover up can hide incompetence and mismanagement of our government institutions, especially in this modern world of electronic global communication.

 

If the good senators in the investigating panel need to castigate the media then they have to do what they have to do in accordance with the law. But they have to do it for the right reasons. Do it for media's non-adherence to highest ethical standards. Do it for  the alleged inteference in botched negotiation.  But please--not for allegedly tarnishing the country's image just by reporting what really transpired.

If the government is serious about putting the country in a good light, it must own its mistakes, confront them head on and solve the very core issues of the problem, so that the media—both local and global—will have something good to report about!

 

(Part of Senate Investigation-transcript)

Arroyo: Where did international media get their footage? Did the footage [which was] shown abroad come from stations here?

Legarda:  Have there been many incidents in the past [when] you sold or provided information to international broadcast networks?

Ressa: ABS-CBN is a broadcast partner of CNN, we have access to their video, they have access to ours. CNN also has their own team in the ground, shooting the incident. We have many arrangements with international organizations -- Reuters, APTN, [with] every news event that comes in.

Dela Pena(GMA): Videos of GMA has been shared with APTN before.

Enrile: CNN has a correspondent in the Philippines, why did you assume the role of a correspondent of CNN instead of allowing rep of CNN to do it?

Ressa: CNN does not have anyone based in the Philippines. They brought someone in after [the event]. I [didn't] offer my services. They asked me to report. It's something international media does(media affiliates). They go to people who know the story.

Arroyo: Aren't you in a position of conflicting royalties at that time? Don't you think you have to find a way to balance your obligation to the country?

Ressa: As a reporter, the job is to tell the story and [to] tell the truth. It crosses country lines, it is an international dictum.

Arroyo: As far as I’m concerned, what was beamed overseas from what was taken during the hostage crisis, has damaged the Philippines immensely and we have not recovered from it.

Ressa: There was the failure of authorities to actually create a functioning chain of command, to regulate, to set the parameters where media should be. It's not just Filipinos who want to see what happened. We did not expect [that] those in charge [to] not be in charge of the situation. We need a mechanism to tell us to pull back when needed.

Arroyo: The problem, Maria, is this: Everybody is scared of the media. Let’s face it… You publish something unfavorable, then we’re finished. The point is, we hesitate because you are media. If you weren’t [in the] media, we would craft the law immediately. Don’t tempt us to use our powers here, to now issue a general broadcast policy—that will be a law.