About a week before the 49th anniversary of Martial Law, the streets of social media lit up when “multimedia” personality Toni Gonzaga released an interview with dictator namesake and now presidential candidate Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., on her YouTube channel.
The interview, which was part of Gonzaga’s “Toni Talks” segment, quickly generated a lot of reactions—albeit the polarizing kind. On one side, there were people praising Gonzaga for arranging such an “insightful” discussion with Bongbong. On the other, there were those accusing the actress of whitewashing the atrocities of Martial Law. It is also worth noting that the episode is titled, “The Greatest Lesson Bongbong Marcos Learned from His Father.”
But perhaps what’s alarming is that there were also those people who believed that Gonzaga was doing a journalist’s job—an even better one at that with no hidden agendas, as some commenters claimed. But is Gonzaga really a journalist? Does she even consider herself one for that matter? To the ordinary viewer, she would probably check out. After all, Gonzaga does somehow present the qualities of a journalist conducting an interview. However, what she devastatingly lacks is the greatest and single most important thing any journalism professional strives towards: the truth.
The truth, or the burden thereof, has always been journalism’s raison d’être. Don’t call it journalism if it doesn’t present the truth bias-free and without context. Likewise, don’t call them journalists if they don’t present the truth in that manner. The problem is that digitalization, especially the dawn of social media, has practically opened the gates for everyone and anyone to enter the journalism field. While there is such a phenomenon called citizen journalism, which has helped reporters in the past get a bigger, more grounded picture of events, especially during calamities, stories that fall under this category are tested and verified against journalistic standards before they are published. They also have the intention of presenting the truth or at least the most available version of it at that time.
The downside is that there are those individuals that weaponize these digital platforms for their own and especially political gain, and often they don’t possess the entire truthful picture. Fake news, mis- and dis-information are all by-products of this open media environment. So, how can we segregate the truth-tellers from the propagandists?
Journalism scholar Jane B. Singer identifies certain norms that not only serve as “identity markers of the professional news worker,” but also as “boundary markers” distinguishing the media professional from the multimedia star. The first distinction lies in the ethical practice of verification or “getting information right.” Gonzaga’s show isn’t necessarily privy to this regard as the interview is structured as a sort of candid talk show with no time to actually backtrack and verify what has been said by Bongbong.
Next is the principle of independence or “serving the public vs. serving commercial or other vested interests.” Bongbong is the wedding ninong of Gonzaga, a crucial bit of fact that was ironically never brought up in the episode, and that could ultimately compromise Gonzaga’s credibility as a so-called “journalist.”
Lastly, there is the promise of accountability. Gonzaga’s great failure with this interview is that she neglected her being accountable for the consequences of her actions. Actions that could threaten to erase the horrific memories and faces of Martial Law from the Filipino consciousness. And she has the power to do that because she is an “influencer,” a role that fits her more appropriately and that the general public should identify her with.
In Gonzaga’s defense, she can do whatever the heck she wants with her show. But something must be said of being accountable and responsible to the truth; of speaking the truth of our history as a Filipino nation even if it hurts doing so.
As the journalist and activist Hernando J. Abaya once said, it is that “voice of anguish … alone that can rouse the conscience of our smug society from its agelong slumber and guide it onto the road to change—and greatness.”
