Media's Discursive Influence on the Philippines' War on Drugs
-
Upload
mark-raygan-garcia -
Category
Education
-
view
50 -
download
1
Transcript of Media's Discursive Influence on the Philippines' War on Drugs
Philippines In Focus
Media’s Discursive Influence (The War on Drugs)
By Mark Raygan E. Garcia MPPG Student, The Education University of Hong Kong
Governing Arguments Media’s discursive influence rides strongest on conflict and scandal news elements; its catalytic impact is dependent on the extent to which key actors continue to trust it
Media’s discursive influence on “selective social reality” appeals more to those in the upper segments of society; rooted more in its being a “Fourth Estate” but capitalizes on familiar representations of authority and collective pursuit of social justice
High public regard for government — sustained by consistent core messages that humanize governance and demystify leadership —buffers off potential reputational risks from media’s discursive influence
Perception vs Reality• “Perception is reality”
• “Identity” and “image” interchangeably used — but different (“identity” — what you know about yourself; “image” — what others think about you)
• Challenge: bridging the gap: aligning “image” with “identity”
• Role of media — facilitative, directive; yet potentially selective (“slant”)
News Elements • Proximity
• Prominence
• Timeliness
• Oddity
• Consequence
• Human Interest
• Conflict
• Scandal What sells?
Parallelism: Directing Discourse
+ =
Crime Scene Revered Scene in Catholic Religion:Mary carrying Jesus after crucification
?
Shifting Discourse
Murder
Issue projected: Human rights violation
Rape
Abandonment
• Increases consciousness; heightens vigilance
• Inspires reforms • Bolsters citizenship
(legitimacy / authority) • Builds up international
presence
• Shifts debate from “guilt” to “innocence”
• Displaces public attention from crimes resulting from drugs
• (Potentially) Undermines positive initiatives
Pros Cons
But: What about?
Discourse Influence FrameworkMedia Coverage
| Slant
Civil Society | Rights Groups
Culture | Religion | Values
System
Communication Breakdown
Consistent focus on the issue (i.e. HR violation)
CHR, UN condemning act; tagging the same as HR
violation
Adherence to due process, despite gravity of crime; “band wagon” mentality
Lapses and inconsistencies in official statements;
brute, abrasive statements
Discourse Media Coverage
| Slant
Civil Society | Rights Groups
Culture | Religion | Values
System
Communication Breakdown
Right not absolute.
Effective warning.
Martial Law is back!
Human rights violation!
Abuse of power!
Iron fist — what we need.
Discourse’s Impact (?)Political
• Senate committee investigations on extrajudicial killings
• CHR investigations
• International bodies conducting on investigation
• Civil society, church, academe - statements condemning war on drugs; signature campaigns
• Undermines legislative branch / judiciary functions
Social
• Investments being pulled out for fear of lawlessness
• Reduced tourist influx
• Restrictive/Conditional aid packages
Economic
Trust Rating Satisfaction Rating
Massifying Discourse
A representation of the “normality” of life — what connects (to) people.
Reinforces credibility/sincerity in core messages.
Media’s Grip on Government• Unrelenting pursuit of truth;
retaliatory; unfazed
• Escalating attention to international community; network mobilization
• Creating leads; instigating investigations; providing impetus for policy review and discussions
• Selective capitalization on issues (who speaks loudest [and sells] gains mileage)
Populist Grip on Media• From causing to question to
being questioned
• Influence remains strong, but trustworthiness compromised by user-generated content in social media (“alternative truth”?) & populist government casting doubt on its objectivity
• News becoming a subject of rebuttal, attack; instead of source of information
• Media outfits being revealed as “colored”, interest-oriented