Of course, Nanay Dionesia deserves to get some space and airtime as she shares the glamor her son, Manny Pacquiao‘s victory.
Lately, media attention to Nanay Dionesia has become nonsense.
I can forgive if reporters observe and report Nanay Dionesia’s camera-sought-after facial expressions during Manny’s fight but I am disgusted with post-fight reports about Manny’s mother. There are even invitation, accordingly, to Nanay Dionesia, for TV program, movie, and product promotion.
Some reporters report rumor about Nanay Dionesia’s involvement to her DI (Dance Instructor).
There are talks about her outfit, Nanay Dionesia’s jewels, makeup, among others.
In summary, all are trivial, less important, and simply entertaining.
But why do Nanay Dionesia seemed happy with this extra-ordinary and annoying news coverage about her?
Until now, the Philippine press and most desk editors are still tightly embracing ‘news sensationalism’ rather than synthesize various issues and publishing more heavy concerns of the society.
I understand that mass media managers are also looking into the business side of news gathering and news reporting. And of course ‘man-bites-dog’ story sells more than ‘dog-bites-man’ story. I will agree if I will be given lectures that audience preference also counts.
However, I would insist that mass media, with the power they wield, can take some role in the transformation of the society. The focus should be on issues, not on personalities.
In Nanay Dionesia’s case, if not of her catchy facial expressions, regional accent, and funny actions, will she given bigger space and airtime?
It hurts that the funny side of the story is a meaty business.
This would give us some hints on how election coverage for 2010 be carried out. Unless mass media impose change and redefine roles, we continue to get overdosed with cheesy and trivial stories. It’s sad because with such stories, we risk our democracy.
Blog authored by batang buotan: (Link opens in new window)