While old generals fade away, “old” reporters just keep coming back for more, so signed off an industry icon.
I’ve fought in those trenches four years as a student, and have since retired–or rather, was forced to. I just had to see how the new troops were faring.
It was unoriginal as far as elections go. But at the student level, it was innovative. And with blogs and social networks gaining ground, opportune.
As UP pubs released irregular issues and campus radio tapped a tiny audience, our team from Tinig ng Plaridel (TNP) decided to partner with other student media and focus on where its print counterparts did not.
First on the Web
TNP first posted online the lists of the university and College of Mass Communication (CMC) council candidates who won in 2008, the last these polls saw a manual count that lasted till after midnight.
Editors working with dzUP radio also went on the air first with the results from various colleges.
It made a mark that Months after, the other major UP papers imitated applied the real-time format to cover the first instance Iskos voted on the fate of the next Student Regent.
TNP then combined forces with these pubs for “Halalan sa Diliman ’09,”
hoping to coincide UP’s first automated polls with faster, wider, and meatier reporting.
The coverage highlighted the limitations of UP student media. Of 20 plus colleges, only a handful had active publications for want of funds, support, volunteers, or interest.
They still delivered–but thanks more to the papers’ attempts to step up their own news gathering over each other rather than deliberately contributing to the joint project.
This year we who experienced it feared its happening again. It did.
Coverage case studies
Much like the national one, covering elections in UP Diliman tests a novice’s skill and highlights the veteran’s expertise.
Election reporters battle time, distance, competition, academics, inaccuracy, mobile signals, and laptop batteries to break news first.
The eight newbies of TNP’s 2010 staff–in place for only two months–were said to have been left on their own too early to face those factors. Their output supposedly turned out half-baked, despite all-out and commendable efforts.
Each pub again fared on its own, TNP and the Philippine Collegian working full time. Plus, few bothered or succeeded in putting out deeper, more provoking content. Nothing improved from last year.
Such pieces that asked and tried to answer how and why went out online, but through FactCheck UP Diliman, a month-old Multiply blog.
It broke “exclusives” on party activities, asked “the crucial questions” on issues, and added comment. An anonymous group professing various party biases and colleges sourced stories from unidentified students.
They did cause a stir, much for highlighting issues the campus papers either forgot or bypassed.
These traits that made the site stand out were its liabilities. Being produced incognito and fading out soon after the vote, it seemed its sole purpose was to add ferment to the polls.
FactCheck’s success is still a slap or comment on the publications supposed to do that job.
The culprit, then and now, was lack of planning. Money was never an object since the battle was waged online. The pubs waited for each other to initiate plans and then failed to follow through.
Few reporters were trained to cover the campaign or oriented on UP elections and politics. And few noted or addressed the issues that matter in UP’s changing student landscape.
For 2011, pubs please learn and pioneer ways of telling stories and delivering news.
Look back. Provide more background on matters like voting histories, party stands and performances. Feel the students’ pulse, and then guide it.
Make partnership deals early. Involve more students a la Boto Mo iPatrol Mo.
Wars, indeed, merit intensive training.
Things now are stirring in a bigger field I will be deployed to in May. Let’s see if my skirmishes in college prepared me to cover the elections that will determine the fate of the nation.