Luisita problem not a mere journalistic issue (LTTE)

The PDI editorial “Noynoy’s albatross” (03/19/2010) criticized the recent New York Times article on the Cojuangco’s decades-old stranglehold of Hacienda Luisita, a landmark land reform and social justice issue, based merely on journalistic grounds.

The editorial pointed out that the Times article relied solely on Anakpawis Rep. Rafael “Ka Paeng” Mariano to substantiate the assertion that “most farmers’ groups, scholars and businessmen question the [agriculture] department’s figures.”

Because of this, the editorial saw the need to bring up Mariano’s background – as “ideologically opposed” to the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, as a “vigorous campaigner” against the CARP’s extension that was supported by moderates in Congress, and a “close political ally of senatorial candidates running on the slate of Aquino’s main rival.” The editorial went on to lecture the Times on the plurality of colors in the Philippine political spectrum.

We understand the paper’s effort to point out the need for journalistic fairness in reportage. But it is grossly unjust to simply use the Hacienda Luisita issue as springboard for tackling mere issues of journalistic sourcing and identification of source – issues that are the least of Luisita farmers’ concern. Instead of advancing the decades-old land reform issue into clearer view, the PDI editorial has dragged Luisita several steps back, adding journalistic spice to an issue consistently contorted by the Cojuangcos as a mere family affair.

By bringing up Rep. Mariano’s background, PDI has ironically exposed its bias on the Hacienda Luisita issue. It has done so in a manner that reduces the decades-old call for Luisita’s land distribution into a politically motivated move from Villar’s camp. Worse, it insinuates that Rep. Mariano cannot issue facts for being ideologically opposed to CARP and CARPER.

If PDI wants the truth on Luisita, why can’t it do an investigative report on the Cojuangco estate and see where it should stand?

Whether PDI intends it or not, the editorial has once again given Cojuangcos the benefit of the doubt. It has, on the other hand, placed doubt on anyone who opposes the failed program called CARP. #