mracoma

[mracoma]

Shattered Glass Reflection

The film Shattered Glass was based on real events of former journalist Stephen Glass and how he fabricated his articles in the 1990s. Throughout the film, the main issue that the movie presents is fabrication, which according to Harrower, is “manufacturing quotes or imaginary sources, or writing anything you know to be untrue.”

The film starts out with Stephen Glass as the protagonist, portraying him to be a charismatic, well liked and all-around friendly man in the office. When his editor, Michael Kelly gets fired and is replaced by Chuck Lane, Glass’s character as a reporter slowly becomes revealed to the audience. It began with his article about Jukt Micronics and Hack Heaven: when other editors and reporters try to verify the story and the sources, they find that Jukt Micronics does not pay taxes, has a website that seems unofficial, and every time somebody tries to call their landline, it usually goes to voicemail. This indicated that the so called company only had one telephone, which led Lane to question Glass’s credibility. Lane gave Glass the benefit of the doubt and both characters went to the place where Glass supposedly had a conference with the hacker but it turns out that the restaurant wherein the business meeting supposedly took place was closed on Sundays. When Lane confronted Glass, all he could say was, “I have been led to believe that I’ve been duped” and “I’m sorry”, basically denying the possibility that he fabricated Hack Heaven. As the story progresses, it is made clear to the audience that Glass was not at all duped, but rather, he consciously invented the story and lied to everyone about it, even to the point of involving his own brother to act as one of his sources. To resolve the problem, Lane decides to suspend Glass for 2 years at first, due to the fact that even his boss says that, “people love Steve here.” Towards the latter part of the story, Glass admits to Lane that it was indeed his brother who covered up for him and tries to get sympathy from Lane, but he gets fired on the spot: “I said I was sorry” “I know. But you have to go.” The whole team of editors and reporters are initially taken aback due to the fact that they all loved Steve, but upon hearing Lane out and actually rereading Glass’s articles, they realize that Lane was in the right. In the end, it is revealed that 27 out of 41 pieces were either partially, or entirely invented in order to further Glass’s career. 

The way that the film portrayed one of the seven deadly sins, fabrication, was insidious in the sense that Glass was portrayed to be such a likeable and credible character. Everyone seemed to like him, and he was even giving talks about journalism to a class in the beginning. This caused me to believe in him and give him the benefit of the doubt at first, until it was revealed that he ultimately was the bad guy. The film trivialized fabrication in the sense that Glass was only fired and not put to jail. Inventing stories and passing them on as if they were true is a crime. Especially today since everybody relies on the news and journalism in order to know about what is happening in the world. Publishing false stories for the sake of furthering your own ulterior motives should be punishable by the law as it is a danger towards anyone who reads it, and especially anyone who is directly involved. For example: if a journalist today were to fabricate an article about extrajudicial killings being resolved when in fact they were not, then it would be detrimental to society because some of us would take it as face value and stop protesting against it. Hence, this film reminds us to not take every piece of news we read at face value, and ensure that the source is credible and reliable before spreading it around.

Another issue that was tackled in the film was photographic evidence. The iconic quote, “you know what could’ve prevented this don’t you? Pictures”, emphasizes how crucial photographic or film evidence is towards a story. Sometimes, the mere fact that something was caught on camera is what enables it to become a headline. Being an aspiring photographer or photojournalist, it just reiterates to me how important photography is in telling stories and that it truly captures a thousand words. Although, like words, since photographs can be edited as well, it is important to remember to verify them before you believe it. In summary, Shattered Glass was able to successfully depict how our actions have consequences, especially when it involves people on a global scale.

[mracoma]

Happinews Video Story

[mracoma]

Profile of Classmate

Claudette Artificio, 20 years old, was born January 13, 1999. She is 5”4 and the youngest of 2, her older brother being 3 years older than her. Her zodiac sign is capricorn and she is afraid of frogs and heights because she does not like the feeling of falling and does not like how slimy they are. “They are just so slimy and disgusting”, she says. She currently studies Interdisciplinary Studies with tracks in Communication and Computer Science in Ateneo de Manila University. Before entering Ateneo, she studied in Miriam College and has lived in Katipunan her whole life. Some of her hobbies include playing PS4 and watching films, specifically horror movies but she does not get scared of them. “I like watching them but none of them ever really scare me”. She has played 8 sports in her life, namely: swimming, football, badminton, volleyball, ultimate frisbee, basketball, muay thai, and boxing. Her most favorite food is chicken, although she does not particularly like oily food with fried chicken being the exception. Claudette eats anything and has won a german sausage eating contest held in the Ateneo Study Abroad Fair (ASAF), where she went against 4 foreign males. Being a film fanatic, her favorite class is film. She is currently taking an internship in Temps and Staffers, and hopes to continue doing marketing in France in the future. In addition to this, she is currently a member in Ateneo Student Exchange Council and her first time out of the country was with her org members, where they travelled to Singapore in order to learn more about their culture. Through this organization, Claudette is given more opportunity and exposure to various cultures - from Asian to European to American, and so on. She hopes to continue to travel in the future.

[mracoma]

Story Search

“We strongly condemn this response… We demand for CFC-FFL to recognize the harmful impositions this statement contains amongst the marginalized members of society using their religion. This perpetuates not just conscious persecution, but the systematic violence committed against good and productive members of this nation by invalidating their experiences of gender identity, gender performance, and sexual orientation” states Von Carolina, the Sanggunian Head Commissioner on Gender Equality. This was in response to Couples for Christ Foundation for Family and Life’s (CFC-FFL) statement: “Respect, Yes; Pride, No. Compassion, Yes; Celebration, No” towards One Big Pride. RJ Moriones, coordinator of Life Live program, a major part of CFC-FFL’s lay response movement, Live Christ Share Christ, defends the statement, saying, “it was necessary to call out the institution because they are a premier Catholic educational institution tasked to develop men and women to be practitioners of the faith. The statement is based on the Church’s teachings.” Moriones directly replied to Sanggunian ng mga Mag-aaral ng mga Paaralang Loyola’s statement, noting, “We do not intend to cause any harm to the LGBTQ+ community nor bring them any form of discrimination. We say no to pride celebration that promotes gender ideology, which seeks to redefine God’s natural design for man and woman.”

There were varied reactions towards CFC-FFL’s statement by the LGBTQ+ community, one being Gigi Esguerra, a 21-year-old transgender woman studying AB Communication Grad in Ateneo, stated, “I honestly did not care for it. I really just brushed it off, I did not even bother finishing the article after reading the first few sentences”. Carlo Jardeleza a bisexual/androgynous 22-year-old, 5th year student studying AB Communication in Ateneo de Manila University, had a similar reaction, stating, “I did not feel offended or anything because church groups usually do that.” Digo Benzon however, a 20-year-old AB Interdisciplinary Studies student who identifies as gay noted that, “I try to be as compassionate as I can and educate them further about the issues.”

Sanggunian have already launched initiatives to combat inequality and discrimination within the campus. “Just this intersession, with the Commission on Anti-sexual Misconduct and Violence, we’re working in close proximity to the Gender Hub and some of the admin to see how we can better approach these problems. I think it’s important to realize that a lot of these problems are deeply systemic and here, the Sanggu is limited. I think one of the main thrusts of the Commission of Gender Equality would be this year; that is good administration and sector relations to bridge the gap of those that have the power to address these issues in a sustainable and effective way, to those that have been victims to oppressive systems for far too long,” Carolina explained.

The Sanggunian also aims to spark a conversation about complex issues on human rights, marginalization, and love.

Bibliography

Racoma, Marielle B., and Carlo Jardeleza. “Ateneo LGBTQ+ Students.” 3 July 2019.

Galvez, Isa., and Gigi Esguerra. “Ateneo LGBTQ+ Students.” 3 July 2019.

Galvez, Isa., and Bengzon, Digo., “Ateneo LGBTQ+ Students.” 3 July 2019.

Yap, Kathleen., and Von Carolino. “Sanggunian Head Commissioner on Gender Equality Interview.” 3 July 2019.

Yap, Kathleen., and RJ Moriones. “Interview with a Member of CFC-FFL” 3 July 2019.

CFC-FFL. “CFC-FFL Statement on the Ateneo Pride March.” Cfcffl.net, CFC-FFL, 19 June

2019, https://cfcffl.net/cfc-ffl-statement-on-the-ateneo-pride-march/

Sanggunian: Commission on Gender Equality. “A Statement from the Sanggunian in Response

to Couples for Christ Foundation for Family and Life Online Statement on Ateneo's One

Big Pride.” Metro Manila, Metro Manila, 25 June 2019.

https://web.facebook.com/472445306545888/posts/719143971876019/?_rdc=1&_rdr

[mracoma]

Blogs on Bato de la Rosa’s “Shit Happens”

The topic that I chose to focus on is Senator Bato de la Rosa’s statement, “Shit happens”, in response to the death of a 3-year-old who died during a drug raid. The 5 blogs that I chose were articles written for the Philippine Star, Inquirer, Rappler, Sunstar, and GMA Network. From last to first, I would rate (5) Inquirer (https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1138986/dela-rosa-on-shit-happens-remark-sorry-for-the-wrong-choice-of-words), (4) GMA News (https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/699904/bato-on-death-of-3-year-old-in-drug-raid-nobody-wants-it-but-shit-happens/story/), (3) Sunstar (https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/1813275), (2) Philstar (https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2019/07/08/1933018/bato-sorry-shit-happens-remark-says-it-again-anyway), , and (1) Rappler (https://www.rappler.com/nation/234598-dela-rosa-says-collateral-damage-drug-operations-cannot-be-avoided.). First of all, the main reason as to why Rappler and Philstar come out as top 2 is because the articles contain photographs - Philstar of Senator Bato de la Rosa and Rappler showcasing the actual scene of the crime. While the writing of the other articles were more complete in detail and eloquent, it is essential in journalism to include footage or photographs of the story in order to fully capture the moment as well as showcase the highlights of the story. Even if a person does not read the words, a simple photograph can already reveal the story. Additionally, Rappler also included history of the Drug War, a feature that no other article had, which provides more context and insight to the story. In effect, this shows how relevant the current story is as it emphasizes the duration and period in which it has been going on for. On the other hand, what I liked about Sunstar’s article is the fact that they included the 3-year-old girl’s name, “Myka Ulpina”, an important factor that the other articles neglected. It is important to include specifics in journalism, especially in casualties and deaths, in order to humanize and remind people that the story they are reading really happened to a real person - could be your sister, neighbor, classmate, workmate, etc. However, GMA News ranked 4th due to the fact that the story was comprised mostly of quotes, with lack of background to the actual story. The article also lacked photographs, footage, and/or the name of those involved, which are crucial details to a news article. However, Inquirer ranked last due to the fact that their headline, “Dela Rosa on ‘shit happens’ remark: Sorry for the wrong choice of words” does not provide context to those who have not heard about the story. In effect, this gives off the impression that the story cannot stand alone as a headline. Overall, all articles strayed from bias and relied heavily on quotes, but factors such as photographs, names, and headlines are what compelled me to rank them the way I did.

[mracoma]

Class Blogs

https://capilicomm76.weebly.com/

https://prdsmeg.tumblr.com/

https://cockatooo.weebly.com/

https://kathleenyap.wixsite.com/comm76

gelawritesstuff.blogspot.com

https://margaritatorres4.wixsite.com/mysite

leonellg.tumblr.com

https://abbotcomm76.wordpress.com/

https://rocioespirituobf.tumblr.com

https://enriquesantiago8.wixsite.com/website

isagalvez-blog.tumblr.com

https://stevenayrtonvs.wixsite.com/comm76

claudettea.weebly.com

[mracoma]

Broadcast News Reflection

The film Broadcast News premiered in 1987 and is premised around the lives of three main characters - Jane Craig, Aaron Altman, and Tom Grunick, in relation to their job in televised news. Based on this film, a TV newsroom differs from a print or newspaper newsroom in many ways. TV newsrooms are supposedly broadcast live, unfiltered, and unedited, which leaves room for no error, unlike in newspaper newsrooms, wherein stories are type-written and edited before they are published. Secondly, people interact on the spot in TV newsrooms, which compel news anchormen and producers to think fast and force them to know all the facts in case any difficult questions are raised in the process. While the medium of print or newspapers rely heavily on photographs and words, TV newsrooms lean more towards videos and directly engage with their audiences by presenting news in a way that makes it seem as if they were involved as well. Although, both newsrooms are similar in the sense that both are fast-paced and time is a crucial aspect towards the success of both, in the sense that news can get outdated if not delivered as soon as possible and before competitors. 

As the film progressed, the dilemmas of the three characters became more transparent. First, Jane’s dilemma was that she found herself caught in a love triangle between Aaron and Tom, which translated into a conflict between her personal and professional relationships with them. In effect, this hindered her capability and talent as a producer because her personal relationships became distractions in the workplace. On the other hand, Aaron’s dilemma was that he was secretly in love with Jane and her attraction towards Tom (at the beginning) led to arguments. Lastly, Tom’s dilemma was that he was inexperienced and just so happened to land a job even if he was not credible enough. Relating all the characters, one of the climaxes in the film was when Aaron revealed to Jane that Tom’s story on “date rape” was staged, in such a way that he purposely made himself tear up to make it seem as if he was sympathetic towards the woman who was allegedly raped. After Jane discovered this, she confronted him and argued that he breached ethical considerations in journalism, and refused to go to London with him. 

Some of the lessons that I learned about journalism, and the process of covering, writing, and presenting a story, is that you need to be fully informed and educated about the story you are covering in order to effectively deliver it to an audience. At the beginning of the film, one of the lines that stood out to me was Tom’s line, “Half the time I don’t get the news that I am talking about.” Without the mentorship and help of Jane, his career would not have taken off in the way that it did. Another line that stood out to me was “would you tell a source that you love them just to get information from them?” and everyone responds “yes” vs. the scene wherein Jane confronts Tom for breaching ethical protocols. This reflects that while ethical considerations in journalism should be black or white, it can also be a gray area - depending on the situation, what is ethical and unethical can be perceived differently from different people. In writing a story, it is important to wholeheartedly know the facts, because the truth cannot be altered but the way in which you navigate from the truth can. This means that TV newsrooms present only the truth, devoid of opinions, biases, etc. The film also taught me that TV broadcasts are more than just the fact that the audience sees; there is so much going on behind the scenes. This was evident through the professional relationship between Jane and Tom, and the scene of the first time Tom broadcasted live. Without her talking to him in his ear, it was obvious that he would not have been able to deliver the news successfully. Lastly, another line that stood out to me was, “when you feel yourself just reading, stop. Start to sell a little” and this line just goes to show that despite everything, at the end of the day, TV news are still a form of business. It is important to remind ourselves of this underlying concept and not take very single story at face value because some may choose to exaggerate or purposely leave out parts of information in order to portray themselves in a certain light. 

In summary, comparing the three films all distinctly show how newsrooms operate - the challenges that come with writing, covering, and presenting a story, and how different elements and characters work together to overcome them and deliver the truth.

[mracoma]

The Paper Reflection

The Paper is a film about the life of a journalist - both professional and personal, and revolves around the murder of two businessmen. One of the main messages depicted in the film is that in the professional world, sometimes there can be an imbalance between work and family, which can lead to personal dilemmas and ultimately affect your health and relationships with people. This was evident in the relationship of Henry Hackett and Martha, wherein throughout the film, Henry would have less and less time for her because of his work. On the other hand, another message portrayed in the film is that one person’s perception of the truth is not necessarily the real story. In the context of the two businessmen’s murders, the first story was that two African-American teenagers were the ones who were guilty. As the story progresses, Henry finds out that the story was simply a cover-up as the businessmen were involved with the mafia. Thus, Hackett is able to uncover the truth and eventually, prove that there was a bigger picture to the situation and that the teenagers were wrongly tried. This goes to show that in journalism, it is important that people remain innocent until proven guilty, and the importance of not skimming beneath the surface when it comes to finding out the truth.

One of the conflicts in the story were the financial problems that Graham Keighley, the owner of the New York Sun, faced. Due to this, there were cutbacks that needed to be set in order to salvage what remained of the paper. Money, in addition to time, is one of the essential factors that need to be taken into consideration in journalism. Money funds expeditions, travels, and resources and if a journalist were to lack it, then it would greatly hinder his or her search for the truth and his or her capability to tell the whole story. Secondly, the film also revolves around familial and personal conflicts, evident in the scene wherein Alicia’s character initially approves of the false story about the teenagers murdering the businessmen, which results in a fight between her and Henry. Fortunately though, towards the end of the film, Alicia decides to tell the printing presses to stop the initial paper and print Henry’s truth instead, “They Didn’t Do It”, which leads to them making amends with each other. Lastly, the character progression of Henry in particular, wherein he becomes so obsessed with uncovering the truth of the story, to the point of resorting to illegal activity to get information, was a major dilemma in the story. His desire to uncover the facts cost him his job offer at the Sentinel, and ultimately, this sends an important message that in journalism, there can sometimes be a blurry line between what is wrong and what is right.

In conclusion, some of the lessons that I learned about journalism in this film is that to get what you want, you need to make sacrifices. Hackett was willing to sacrifice everything - his relationship with Martha, his potential job offers, and so on, in order to piece together the truth and discover what truly happened in the murders. Due to his sacrifice, he was fortunately able to find out who really murdered the businessmen and get innocent lives out of jail. Without sacrifice, you will not be able to get far with what you desire - and not just in journalism, but in everything in life. In covering and writing a story in particular, it is important to not take every piece of information you receive at face value, as one person’s perception of the truth can be filtered with bias and underlying motives - including the fact that the original story of the teenagers being the murders was just a cover-up for the real murders. It is important to second guess information and really dig deep into what is portrayed to be real as not everyone in the journalism industry has the same motives as you. In publishing a story on the other hand, it is important for journalists to understand the consequences and impacts that their stories can have on the lives of people as well as their own. By pursuing the story, Henry saved the innocent lives of the teenagers but also placed himself in a dangerous situation as his story could implicate the mafia. Lastly, in journalism, determination is important but only in moderation - obsession is not healthy and will inevitably take a toll on your health, personal life, and relationships with people. Even though the movie portrayed that the ends justify the means, in reality, some stories, especially those involving murders, take time and patience to resolve and unfold. In essence, moderation is key in covering and publishing a story.

[mracoma]

All The President’s Men Reflection

All The President’s Men is a story about two journalists from the Washington Post, Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward investigating the Watergate scandal, a scandal which led to the fall of the presidency of Richard Nixon. One of the prevalent messages in the movie was that to be able to effectively carry out your job, you have to be willing to risk everything and persevere even in the midst of adversity. This was evident throughout the film in scenes wherein Woodward and Bernstein would be repeatedly shunned and literally have doors slammed on their faces when they would approach people in their houses or offices in order to obtain information from them. This message was effectively clear in the end when Deepthroat told Woodward that “your lives are in danger”. Despite knowing this, both journalists still decided to push through and write the story in order for justice to be served. Another message was that despite all odds, the truth will always prevail in the end. Throughout the movie, the audience experiences the struggles and challenges that both journalists faced in order to piece together information and facts, and despite all this, they were still able to figure out what really happened with the Watergate break-in and the involvement of the CIA and FBI. In relation to justice, the film also emphasizes how crucial journalism is in criminal investigations, by displaying the whole truth and the context and facts behind it, which help people understand what really happened as well as determine the consequences for the people directly involved in the crime.

Trying to get the truth out from different people was an extremely difficult process for Bernstein and Woodward. In the first few scenes, a phone call transpired between Woodward and a Latin-American character. Due to the difference in ethnicities, there was a language barrier between them, which obviously, was a problem as they could not understand each other. Hence, the journalist lost one potential lead for important information or sources. Even if there was an alternative for a translator, a phone call is something that is very fast-paced. Secondly, another conflict was that many people refused to speak to them or did not prioritize them at all. This was shown in the scene wherein Woodward waited 2 days to talk to a man who committed to giving him time, but was repeatedly denied it due to the character being “too busy”. As time is a crucial factor in every journalist’s story, he cannot waste even a second of it or else someone else could publish that same story, which in the context of the movie, could have been The New Yorker. Basically, what made it more difficult for the protagonists was that people simply did not prioritize them or even give them the time of day. Lastly, a prevalent dilemma throughout the film was that they had to go through a web of people in order to piece together every last bit of information that they could, as well as the fact that some people were very defiant in talking to them. Due to this, the potential story dragged on and on and the truth was harder to find especially in the line, “You can sit down but i’m not going to tell you anything”. This just goes to show that journalists have to be fast on their feet and figure out ways to work with what they have even if they have only limited information.

Some lessons I learned about journalism is that you have to be fast on your feet. News is irrelevant unless it is immediate, and you have to be faster than your competition in order for your story to sell. In order to be an effective journalist, you cannot just wait for stories, you need to find them and work for them. Bernstein and Woodward pursued the story despite their safety and lives being compromised, and this just shows that you need to be passionate about your work in order to be good at it. Another lesson I learned is that journalism depends greatly on external sources, so if people refuse to talk, you do not get the whole story. Although, the film also showed that ethical considerations such as consent and deception were taken into account, as the characters would always ask for permission first. Investigative reporting in general is beneficial to society because it reveals the truth objectively, and makes us aware of situations that could cause harm if it were otherwise untold - awareness and education are essential because they help individuals form their own perceptions of the world. Without journalism and stories being told, we would live our lives in ignorance, doomed to repeat the mistakes of peoples’ and our own pasts.