Boon or bane

TV 5 is now one of the most competitive television stations in the Philippines; providing quality programs of entertainment and information, and even finding its way to be on top like the two big networks: ABS-CBN and GMA. It surprises the viewers continuously with the network’s star studded shows, as a matter of fact a lot of stars from the two mentioned big networks seem to use TV 5 as their fallback station.

Truly, it is opening a big passage way of opportunities and an excellent venue for exposure, being shown on T. V. makes a lot of difference for the people right now. Exposure”, this is what television networks like TV 5 is offering; the limelight is aimed at you, you are given the chance to prove and show yourself off. But the big issue here is not just the popularity or reputation you could be gaining, it is the mere fact that “ Too much exposure will somehow do no good at all”. The Alternative Classroom Learning Experience or the ACLE conducted last August 25, has provided a lot of choices for the students to enrich their awareness and knowledge of the things that seem to be disregarded, sugar-coated or hidden- the things and issues that deserve to be uncovered and pondered.

I chose to attend the Broadcast Associations’ (BroadAss) forum/debate on TV 5’s controversial show, Face to Face with the theme “ Sawsawan na! ”. This is a really timely issue and very much appropriate to discuss especially for students like me who prepares to be a future media practitioner. The debate was all about the issues that Face to Face is encountering right now and the many criticisms being thrown to it, this was facilitated by the BroadAss members and the debaters were the members of the Debate Society.

It was absolutely interesting, the debate was heated up every single moment; of course there are two sides, one side approves it and the other vehemently rejects it. They have raised a lot of issues regarding Face to Face and I myself have been raising these from the time I heard about the said show. Even though I never had the chance to watch a complete episode, the commercials seem to say it all, making me more enthusiastic to criticize it. One concern is the issue on Face to Face being a venue for expressing or exposing grievances resulting to violence.

In a positive way, we can say that the show is somehow a means for ordinary people to be acknowledged especially with regards to their complaints; as it is elaborated by a debater, instead of conducting such “ fights” on the road or anywhere Face to Face serves as a venue for taboo issues to be resolved especially because in the said show there is a Panel to moderate the whole situation. In my own vantage point, I have to say that from the very beginning I am definitely on the “ reject” side.

As a future media practitioner, I believe that this is not the right venue to expose such personal grievances like those already shown on Face to Face; the violence being portrayed as a result of the opposing parties’ intense feelings and emotions is not the right way to express a gripe with the whole country as your audience. For most and for me, this is not a means to inspire people to resolve their conflicts, but to just merely entertain them, and in fact to give them the idea that “ simple” quarrels can be settled with “ televised violence”.

I can’t even seem to classify Face to Face as a show, is it a public affairs show for their aim is to help people resolve their issues? Is it a reality show because it portrays the empirical in the eyes of an ordinary person? Or is it a “ show” literally just a “ show”? Another interesting issue is on the shallowness of the problems being brought by the opposing parties involved. There is seriously this petty neighbor fight because of a stolen “ tortang talong”, it later aggravated into a complicated issue because a lot of concerns are brought up, there are also issues on “ third parties” and in-law conflicts.

Some of those issues are supposed to be kept personal and a lot are better be resolved at home or around the neighborhood without the participation of the cameras. Technically, these problems are given the chance to be aired and feasted by the eyes of the viewers; problems that they say will open the eyes of the public to what is really happening, but like what a debater said sometimes awareness is not always a value. I consider that issues like those on Face to Face do not deserve the exposure that they are receiving right now, those are precisely too superficial and are of the personal responsibility of those who are involved.

Let’s face it, there are a lot of bigger problems in the country that need to be exposed and make the public aware of instead of those petty ones. The last concern in the debate is the issue on scripted resolutions, as it was brought up in the debate, Face to Face is part of a business, people involved in this show as well as the opposing parties are being paid. There is a big room for manipulation. Who knows, maybe those issues are just being sensationalized and are entirely carried out according to a script, in the first place one of the aims of every show is to entertain, “ What show will intend and choose to upset its viewers”?

Face to Face may have been overstressing everything this whole time. As to conclude, this Acle has provided criticality that feeds the mind. The controversy on the show Face to Face is just another topic that need not to be disregarded, this is not just the concern of media practitioners but of all students and television viewers. No matter what the stand of others will be, the most important thing is we are provided every chance to be exposed to reliable sources of knowledge, and it is up to us on how we will make use of them.