One of the weirdest and most worrying aspects of the relationship between the PH govt and the media is that the media no longer sets the agenda. They lost that power by covering what the government feeds bit by bit.

For those who didn't take comm/journ, this is the basic explanation of Agenda-Setting Theory. Although it is called a "theory," imo, Agenda-Setting is also a function of the media.

Imo, this function was lost because of two things: 1.) the economics aspect of media (how the media earns) and 2.) the digitalization of newsrooms (the platform used).

First, economics: basically, in order for the media to earn, they have to gain impressive numbers, usually in site visits, site visits, audience retention etc. So the more pieces/clips they publish, the better the data will look like.

This is probably why journalists cover stories like it's a basketball game. What did this party say? What did the other party say? What was the reaction on twitter? Did it trend? Which celebrities spoke up? All these build up the story and, eventually, the numbers.

Because of this style, it's much more difficult to form an independent opinion for the audience. What happens then is the personality who gets more screentime becomes the opinion leader that the audience follow.

Second is the digitalization of the news. Before, the layout of the newspaper, the arrangement of the news stories in programs, clue in the importance of the news. Now, that's gone. The algorithm will rearrange stories based on what attracts more comments/reactions/viewers.

Social media itself has gamed media institutions, and stories are usually based on what will most likely get more hits. Kaya andami palaging BREAKING NEWS or quote cards, because yun ang nakakakuha ng mas maraming engagements.

What people see on their social media feeds is dependent on the network they have. Kung mas marami kang friends/finafollow na on the political left, ganon din itsura ng feed mo. Kung mas marami on the political right, the same goes. Kaya lumalala ang polarization online.

So what can the media do? Imo, take back the agenda-setting function, first and foremost. Kung paano, ay di ko alam because it will require an undoing of many practices that /can be/ detrimental to either the economics of media or the digital platform itself.

Urgent talaga sa Pilipinas ay adaptation ng mga theories na ito sa digital media, katulad ng agenda-setting, cultivation, framing, uses and gratification, and even (sadly) hypodermic needle theory.

Noong 2011, di ko mapaniwalaan na merong hypodermic needle theory. Kasi parang... wow ganon pala kadependent ang tao sa sinasabi sa radyo noon? Naniwala silang may alien invasion dahil sinabi ni Orson Welles? Pero ngayon... I see it happening again.

This is the easiest way to examine this phenomenon. Na lazy ang journalists. Though this might be the case for some, it is more of a symptom than a cause. The rigidity of publishing in digital is very different from traditional media. https://twitter.com/lou_kas/status/1334381309976662016?s=20

Journalists and editors are also beholden by the system (economics + platform) in place. Media organizations are also companies that need to earn to sustain their overhead costs. So, for me (for me lang), I'd look at the system present more than the individuals.

So @lou_kas you are right; merong mga journalists na tamad. Pero bawat litrato kasi, may katumbas na cost. Bawat coverage, may expense din (transpo, allowance, manhours, etc.). So mas madali to just wait for what someone will say and then report it.

It's a difficult problem to solve, especially at a time when advertisers are tightening their belts due to the pandemic and the option to automize advertising exists (thru fb, google, yt, etc).