EARTHQUAKES, SHINZO ABE AND ERAP
before i talk about the erap verdict coverage...
as of this moment (8:00 pm), cnn (on cable) has given at least an hour of airtime for the breaking news on the sumatra, indonesia 7.9 magnitude earthquake. on the other hand, bbc has reported it but not as extensive as cnn's coverage. reportage of shinzo abe's shock resignation was given equal if not more prominence (as of this moment) than the earthquake.
actually, nakakaumay na yung coverage ng cnn kasi they've devoted more than an hour on the earthquake eh wala pa silang nakukuhang concrete reports from bengkulu province (nearest the epicenter) so paulit-ulit na interviews lang from jakarta.
however, cnn's coverage probably is more beneficial to ordinary people around the indian ocean since the threat of a tsunami happening is not remote. who cares about shinzo abe's resignation over the failure of japan to send naval support to international troops in afghanistan?
as of this moment, i don't have any explanation why this is so. probably indonesia is far from the brits' consciousness. i don't know.
and oh, erap's guilty verdict barely made a blip in both news agencies.
--
i was about to eat my breakfast when our house help tuned in to abs-cbn for the sandiganbayan verdict on erap's plunder case. i was suprised that the reading of the decision was brief. my colleagues and i were expecting the coverage would last until 3 pm, given that the court secretary (is that what they call that person?) had to read at least a thousand page decision.
moving on...
karen davila strikes again. she again asked stupid questions like did so and so cry and stuff. like hell!
first off, the anchors should have asked about the details of the decision (which was not read) like what was the basis for jinggoy and serapio's acquittal or why was erap guilty of plunder only? what happened to the other crimes he supposed to have committed like perjury? these should have been discussed within the first 30 to 60 minutes of the coverage.
what was the basis for the guilty verdict? why beyond reasonable doubt?
i think those are the first and most important questions that reporters and the anchors could have asked their panelists/experts on board.
even if viewers are not lawyers, at least sana abs-cbn and gma7 could have enlightened us with the legal implications or the stellar (if any) points of the case.
but then again, the two networks might have attempted that and probably i wasn't able to watch it since i was about to leave for work.
during the first 30 minutes to an hour of the coverage, no one made a recap of the circumstances that may have brought the guilty charge like:
"Meanwhile, another accused, Charlie "Atong" Ang was sentenced March this year to up to six years in prison on charges of corruption of a public official after entering a plea bargaining agreement
He admitted delivering part of P130 million tobacco excise tax funds to Estrada's Greenhills residence and pocketing P25 million, which he would return to the government by offering his family's mansion at Corinthian Gardens in Quezon City in lieu of cash.
At least 71 prosecution witnesses were presented throughout the Estrada plunder trial which include Juetenggate whistleblower and Ilocos Sur Gov. Luis "Chavit" Singson, who testified between July and September 2002; star witness Clarissa Ocampo, who testified in November 2002 and bank officials."lifted from gmanews.tv
i don't know if it's me, just nitpicking again, or i may have missed these points again because i've already turned away from the television.
and what's the deal with conrado de quiros being one of the panelist on abc 5's coverage of the erap case? he's not a lawyer nor a political analyst by profession but a columnist so in my humble opinion he's not the best person to make a commentary on tv. or i could be wrong, since i am wrong about many things naman.
i would have welcomed legal stalwarts' and political analysts' say on the case but a columnist on an important event like this? just because he is a columnist of PDI?
don't get me wrong. i sometimes like conrado de quiros (kasi minsan nakakaumay na din yung paulit-ulit nyang GMA tirades kahit na ayoko din kay GMA) but getting him as a resource person was a little out of whack. FOR ME. i'm not saying for people in general. oh well, abc 5 may have bigger reasons why they should get a columnist.
--
it was so funny that some of our sources this afternoon were averse to giving their opinions about the verdict. it may be true that the local market may have reacted positively only because new york stock exchange closed on a positive note due to better chances that the US Feds might cut interest rates next week rather than to the erap verdict. but still...the business community may have been worried or elated over the sandiganbayan decision.
other sources have been outspoken about the issue.
then i found out that the Bossing of this people we were talking to were allegedly friendly with the erap camp. well, that was according to some of my colleagues. ah...that makes sense why they didn't want to be quoted.
Funny thing that you specifically mentioned Karen Davila. A few months before she transferred to ABS, I was one of the on-the-job trainees in the GMA7 news room. I remember her watching one of her former co-hosts in GMA attending a function of a then-hot topic/personality. She commented along the lines of her co-host's inability to ask good questions during interviews. That the co-host should take the opportunity to interrogate the personality involved.
Suffice to say, tumaas ang kilay ko and I bit my tongue which was itching to say, "Bakit, akala mo ba, magaling kang mag-interview?" :P (Comment this)
atsaka pinaghahandaan ang mga ganyang bagay, may mga line-up ka na dapat na questions pag ganyang mga sitwasyon. hindi madali ang pagiging reporter but it's your job to ask the right questions. (Comment this)