sense of ownership

we were having our council GA. we've been laughing for quite some time becuase of "his" crazy ideas for the RIPADA and Cris Mendez campaign. the chairperson and vice-chairperson of the College of Music Student Council came and greeted him.

"Hey, this is my council."

we all looked at each other and bursted into laughter.

"Your council?"

"Since when did we become your council?"

** funny as it may sound, grabe na lang ang sense of ownership sa council. i knew it. it's all about him and not the students.

batch interview

kung tutuusin, hindi naman talaga ako nagtataray sa mga ganitong interviews. ni hindi ko nga kayang panindigan ang ganoong klaseng pamamaraan. pero alam ko sa sarili ko na kung walang ibang gagawa, kung walang ibang maggigiit nang ganoong klaseng kahigpitan, ako na lang ang gagawa. kung sa bagay, dahil ko rin naman talaga kayang magsungit hanggang sa dulo, sa tingin ko kapani-paniwala naman akong hindi talaga ako ganon.

nakakabigla lang ang mga nangyari kagabi.

nung una pa lamang, medyo nagaalangan na kami nila weng sa mga aplikante ngayong semestre, dahil stand up sila. hindi naman sa ayaw ko sa kanila. naniniwala lang ako na kahit pareho sa prinsipyo ang dalawa, malaki pa rin ang pagkakaiba ng ujp at ng stand up lalo na kung paguusapan ang mga kaparaanan. kung papasok sila sa isang academic org, ano kayang magiging implikasyon nito?

pero sige, mahal ko ang stand up. hayaan na natin sila.

mula sa sampung aplikante, apat na lamang silang humarap sa amin para sa batch interview, at dalawa sa kanila ay stand up.

sa totoo lang, nakakatamad ang interview kagabi. tanungin mo ng preamble, hindi kabisado. tanungin mo ng constitution, ni hindi nabasa. tingnan mo ang sigsheet, kulang-kulang. tanungin mo ng prinsipyo at ideyolohiya ng org, beauty pageant answers ang binibigay. hello! aplikante kayo??? di nga???

natural lang na mainis kami di ba, pero sige, sigaw sigaw lang ng kaunti. wala namang personal na atake.

aba, pagkatapos ng lahat, nasabihan pa kami na ang mismong pagsigaw-sigaw namin sa kanila ay isa nang pagkilala san pyudal na sistema. ito ay balikwas sa aming laban sa pyudal na sistemang nananaig sa lipunan.

a, hello? mass org kami??? hindi di ba. wala naman kaming sinabing mass org kami e.

kung pyudal na sistema lang ang ating pag-uusapan, di ba sa umpisa pa lang, dapat wala nang application process dahil ito mismo ay nagpapatong ng kapangyarihan sa mga miyembro higit sa aplikante.

sori ha. academic org pa rin kasi kami, may political stands lang. hindi ibig sabihin no'n kelangan na namin bitawan ang mga natutunan namin sa peryodismo.

ayoko man sanang mainis sa pagmamahal ko na lang sa stand up, pero nakikita ko na lang ang sarili ko na lumalayo ang loob ko sa kanila.

ACLE

I must say, this is the most tiring, emotionally disturbing day in my whole life. and for the first time, i am actually feeling tired of ranting and whining.

Classes were suspended this afternoon to make way for the Alternative Classroom Learning Experience (ACLE). One of my orgs, Union of Journalists of the Philippines - UP Diliman, chose to show one of Howie Severino's documentaries titled "Huling Hala Bira" which talked about a squatters' area literally located under train rails that crosses over Pasig River. We also had the chance to actually have Howie Severino for a mini-forum after the viewing.

With Howie Severino coming, everybody seemed to be focused too much on his coming, nobody cared about the event itself.

One. The younger members had problems looking for an LCD projector saying that all the projectors in the Journalism Department are already taken and reserved for someone else. It's actually impossible, with the Department having three projectors. Weng and I couldn't take that answer. When Weng talked to Ate Raquel, we were able to get one without any effort.

And, god, projector set-up. Nobody knew how to do it.

Two. No registration sheets. Someone forgot to print one and so they had to resort to blank pink papers manually writing the details needed, which by the way will be given to the University Student Council. You're kidding me on this one, right? I went to the Department, asked if I can type and print a page for the org.

Three. Since Jam had to leave and pick up Howie at GMA, everybody was just waiting for her. The event was to start at 1pm, but it was until 1:45pm when a talk on the UP situation started. Why? Nobody felt the urge to act or at least be concerned of the people inside the room waiting for something to happen.

And so I had to ask, do we have any instructions? No. So what do we do? Wait for them? We don't know. What do we have in our program? We don't have any program. Ah, ok. That's nice.

We had to think of something. Since Jem had been planning on a UP Situation discussion, fine, have her start. Apparently she needed some visual aids when she didn't have one. We had to look for someone who had a copy of that specific powerpoint. After ten years, funny, we didn't find the one we needed but rather an older version.

Four. Token for Howie. A recycled box filled with mamon. Not that I hate mamon, or I have some issues against being thrifty, but seriously, I will never give such gifts even to student speakers. Please, a little sense of decency here. What we give him will reflect the org's name. Mamon doesn't set a good impression. Sorry.

We volunteered to buy the token as originally planned however, MJ decided that she be the one to go. We gave Howie a bottle of wine. Hapi.

So ok. The ACLE was rather good. We even had music majors as audience, which is quite interesting actually. What I didn't like about the discussion actually was that we all found Howie playing the safe take on media, that he doesn't have any advocacy since it connotes propaganda, that the audience are intelligent enough to interpret and elicit their own forms of actions, and that he didn't answer when asked of his struggles while doing the documentary (pertaining to government restrictions or a bigger issue than just a simple housing and relocation).

Five. When Howie left, everybody left. Only three of us decided to clean the room, arrange the chairs, return the projector to the Department.

I'm sorry but I have to say it but by event organizing standards, this ACLE flops.

that gag show

Bubble Gang has once more proven to be a critical gag show as it attempted to criticize the Gloria Administration when it impersonated a joint session of the Congress, this time to the tune of Itaktak Mo.

According to the joke, GMA was to hear out the congressmen and department secretaries' ideas for priority subjects. Since everyone seem to want to be heard for the sake of hearing, she decided to have a game show instead, much like Eat Bulaga's Itaktak Mo, Tatakbo, to determine whose project will be given priority.

questions as well as answers are as follows:

1) Anong "G" ang namamahala sa ating bansa?
contestant's answer: graft and corruption
correct answer: Gloria

2) Anong "B" ang ginagawa ng mga congressman?
contestant's answer: basura
correct answer: bill. electric bill, water bill, etc.

3) Anong "G" ang nagbabantay ng balota pag eleksyon?
correct answer: gwardya

4) Anong ibig sabihin ng "B" sa BIR?
contestant's answer: binubulsa
correct answer: binabangko

And they say television shows reflect audience interests and sentiments.

an accident

Part of the requirements for my EDSP122 class is to observe three Montessori schools and one non-Montessori school to assess its method on early childhood education.

This afternoon, Mhira and I went to Mayfield Montessori Academy in UP Village. After an hour observing children, we took a red tricycle to bring us back to Philcoa.

On the way...

Another tricycle was in front of us. It drove almost near the sidewalk to let the passenger down. When our tricycle driver saw this, he moved a bit towards the middle so that we can pass. However, in just a few seconds, the other tricycle was moving again and thus, we were almost side by side each other.

As this was happening, a van attempted to overtake the two tricycles by crossing the other lane. However, another car was coming towards the van and so, to save itself, it hit the tricycle where we were in, dragged us slightly forward that we hit the other tricycle and slided until the two tricycles hit the sidewalk and both came into a stop.

The driver from the van stepped down, checked if there was any damage on his car, looked straight at the tricycle driver and left. Other tricycle drivers came and asked what happened. One wrote down the plate number, while another hurriedly followed the van. The tricycle driver was still in the state of shock.

"Kuya, dito na lang po kami. Habulin nyo na lang po yung van," we kept telling the tricycle driver but he insisted to take us where he was suppose to.

Mhira felt a little pain in her right arm; I on my left leg since we hit both sides of the tricycle when the van and the other tricycle hit us. When we got off, much to our surprise, his hands and leg were wounded. The driver had blood on his left hand.

"Ok lang ako," the driver told us.

As we were walking away the tricycle terminal, we realized if it weren't for the other tricycle that we hit, we would have gone off the road and much damage would have happened.

a culture of indifference

This afternoon, I happen to read a blogpost by a journalism student. This certain post talked about the current state of the Philippine Collegian (Kule). He narrated that when he was asked by the publisher of the Philippine Daily Inquirer how the Kule was, his first reaction was to say that the publication is "too progressive".

"Critical of the nation's leader[s]", he criticizes the Kule for failing to give "updates on what's happening in school". Moreover, he posits that being the official publication of the university, it only represents a "small percentage of the entire UP community". He goes on further to the conclusion that the editors of three years ago are definitely a lot better, as they had at least showed "hint[s] of decency".

He ends his post by saying that "sometimes we are too immersed with ideals that we fail to see what is real" and that it is "no wonder not many journalism students are interested to join the Collegian".

Dismay is an understatement of what I felt after I had read the post.

For one thing, the Journalism Department itself teaches the students to be critical of the nation's leaders, of the policies they make, and the current situation of the country for one mere reason, it is a responsibility of journalists to the public. In simple terms, communication theories call it "watchdogs". To ask for updates, pardon me for saying, is very high school. There's a big difference between the two.

However, given that argument, I believe the Kule never failed to give updates on the current situation of the college, as it even publishes the statements of the students councils on the issues that the university is facing. It has not failed to air the eviction of tambayans in CMC. What this student might be looking for is the UP administration's side, something the Kule has attempted but the admin completely ignores.

To question idealism is to question the very principles that is taught in our department. It is this idealism that has developed ethical and news standards. It is this idealism that graduates aim for the best, for a change in the system as they see the reality in our society. It is this idealism that has taught students to look beyond the fame, the money and work on the very essence of journalism itself, a public service, a responsibility to the citizens of this nation. To question idealism is to entertain a culture of indifference, a shame in this profession.

In an interview, my uncle said, "If I had known that Journalism would be defined such as it is today, I wouldn't have entered Journalism in the first place."

At first, I didn't quite understand why he was able to say such things, as if he has lost hope of the future generation of journalists.

After reading a post written by his former students, I hate to admit that he might be right after all.

* not so convincing noh? ako rin, nahihirapan sabihin. abangan kung bakit *

y! speak on HSA

I was suppose to go with my org mates in this special edition of Y!Speak which aims to talk about the Human Security Act (HSA) of 2007. However, since I couldn't come, I watched it on television instead.

What makes this particular episode interesting is that it actually had the chair of the Anti Terror Council as one of the panelists, and god, was he grilled to his bones! However, he remained as confident and certain as he could be.

"The Bill of Rights is not absolute."

I tend to quite agree on that, I'd have to admit. However, the statement should not be taken as it is. One may argue that the HSA is just one of the many laws to safeguard such rights but in context to the HSA, it becomes more than that. Taking into account the extrajudicial killings, of every indivdual reported to be abducted by some men, with the military denying their involvement yet always justifying that this individual is a member of the New People's Army, this law is a parody and a safeguard to those seated in power.

"'mere suspicion', walang ganoong nakasulat." He also mentions that it is the USA Patriot Act of 2001 from which the HSA was actually patterned that mentions "if it appears to be intended" and can therefore be interpreted as MERE SUSPICION. The HSA never mentions nor implied such things.

Section 17 of the HSA states that "Any organization, association, or group of persons organized for the purpose of engaging in terrorism, or which, although not organized for that purpose, actually uses the acts to terrorize mentioned in this Act or to sow or create a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand..."

Truly, the HSA does not directly says such things but it is the section's vagueness which makes this law questionable.

Terrorism in its given definition is quite vague. Who qualifies a group is a terrorist group? If, by working on the phrase, "create a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace", the adminstration itself is liable for the extrajudicial killings and may also be qualified as an act of terrorism. However, by mentioning "in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand", it hides the government from any responsibility to the lives of those critical of the administration.

Because of its vagueness, it leaves too much interpretations. And by Philippine experience, vagueness of the law has been used as a form of abuse to those in power.

The greatest fault in our judicial system is that anyone can interpret the law and unless the public causes turmoil on the peculiarity of such interpretations, no action will be seen from the judicial department.

"The HSA is a criminal law and therefore applies to all."

Sure it does. Since it already leaves out some responsibility from the administration, I do not think we would have problems in line with that.

The adminstration can justify as much as they want. I, along with other students, can argue as much. But as Atom Araullo ends the show, "[HSA] posits too much questions rather than answers." The law is not made to pose questions but to answer the needs and interests, not of other government's, but of its own people. Take note of the difference.