Remmuel S. Santiago
Editor-in-Chief
The Torch
Dear Mr. Santiago:I am not expecting this message to be published on The Torch, but I am hoping that you read this with a mind that is open enough to accept words and/or statements that may inadvertently be offensive or against the stance of The Torch Publication. I am also hoping that you will not, after reading this, regard me as against your publication and against your very strong adherence to the idea of militancy that your publication (and perhaps the CEGP in general) advocates.
First of all, I would like to tell you that I empathize, although not completely, with Mr. Ricky Angcos regarding the content of The Torch. It has been only about a year and 2 months since I first became acquainted with the student publication of this university (you may now surmise that I am either a PNU employee who was hired just recently or, more possibly, a second year student), and, frankly speaking, I was and still am very disappointed every time I browse the sheets and find most (if not all) of the contents having the same ring to them—militant views about issues concerning PNU, especially the "ever-repressive" entity that is the PNU Administration. The Torch is indeed the official student publication of the university, and, may I quote from your column (Vol. 56 No. 2), "its main thrust is to release issues that [concern] the students and basically biased for them". However, need the aforementioned issues be always presented in such a way as what you have been doing?You have admitted to being biased, apparently for the PNU studentry, in presenting issues, but did it ever cross your mind that not all of the PNU students agree with your biased views or your ways of presenting them? If so, how can you say that you are biased for the students and not biased for yourselves? You may deduce that I am one of those who do not agree with your sense of militancy in relaying such issues. Call me one of the minority if you want to, but whenever I get hold of a copy of The Torch I am inclined to either disagree with your views and your ways of presenting them or remain passive about them. While you are correct in saying that, may I again quote from your column, “[The Torch] is not a high school campus paper where verses about the undying love… [et cetera] are published”, the idea that “[it] is an alternative media for the masses’ grueling struggle and our tussle for free, scientific and pro-masses [educational] system” is not completely acceptable in justifying the almost purely militant content of the publication. Isn’t there anything else other than lambasting the Philippine government and/or the PNU Administration and their so-called repressive policies, or blind items about people who did things to your distaste?
I believe that an official student publication should not only focus on the struggles of the students. There are other issues that may concern students but are not necessarily concerned with campus repression, issues that can be front page material. How about, for instance, the recent honor brought to our university by two of our esteemed professors in winning literary awards? Okay, you might say that the news was not able to catch up to the deadline for the publication of the July-August 2003 issue and will be included in the next issue (although that argument is questionable since you were able to come up with an article about events that happened on August 12, specifically the forum). How about the recent passing away of Prof. Domanais? There should have been a feature about her since the story of her short yet very meaningful life (especially the great struggle she underwent with highly admirable determination) can be an inspiration for every PNU student. And yet there isn’t a paragraph or even a single line mentioning such a great loss to the PNU community.
You said that you, as journalists, “are compelled to write from the perspective and interest of the students and the people”. How did you know that the perspective through which you view and present the issues is the perspective of the whole PNU studentry? Are you sure that the issues you present and the way you present them are really in line with the interest of all of the students of PNU? You are entitled to your opinion, but I deem you do not have the right to claim that the compelling force behind your writing is the interest of the PNU studentry. Have you ever asked yourselves why only a few and not a majority of the PNU students attend militancy-related forums and rallies? Does it not reflect the lack of interest, the passivity, or perhaps even the disagreement of many of the students with your perspective?
Has it also crossed your mind that by your way of presenting the issues you are not really alleviating the plight of PNU students but adding to it instead? You may argue that you are just doing your noble duty of keeping us informed about the issues, but more often than not your way of presenting them is only painting a picture darker than what really is.
You said that you “are not writing just to air [your] grievances, but as future educators and active participants in the struggle for the transformation of our society that continues to suffer from the claws of imperialism, feudalism and bureaucrat capitalism”. But has your participation by means of militant writing really brought about any contribution to the change that we all desire?
To me campus militancy in general is a very futile and impractical means of participating in the struggle for change. If we really want to change our society for the better, why don’t we as students do our best in our academics and be the best teachers that we can be? We as future educators are agents of change, and in our hands lies the future of the next generation of youth. By being competent teachers we can mold our future students to be responsible citizens who can begin the change that our society badly needs.
By being campus militants right now as students, you are just adding twigs to the burning house. Instead of producing responsible, conscious, and patriotic citizens in the future, you might be producing militants like you from your future students.
Regarding the issue of suppression of academic freedom and freedom of _expression, let me reiterate a fact that we must all remember: Freedom comes with responsibility. I want to frankly say that the sense of academic freedom and freedom of expression that you have been so very protective of is one that somehow neglects the idea of responsibility. While you may say that you are exercising responsible journalism because your columns and articles have valid bases, I believe that claiming your stance to be the stance of the whole PNU studentry is not being responsible. The Torch is the official student publication of the PNU, and as such it should really reflect an objective view regarding the issues that concern PNU students.
As I can see in the July-August 2003 issue, most of the articles are not really about the struggles of the general PNU student population but mostly about the struggles of the staff of The Torch and the militant groups. Martial law in PNU, as you have written, does not really exist. We weren’t even born yet during the Marcos dictatorship, how were you able to jump to the belief that what we have in PNU is martial rule? It is not proper to say that the current policies of the PNU Administration are “marcosian” (Is there really such a term?) in nature because we were inexistent during that period of history to know how it really feels to be ruled by a dictator under martial law.
Now, is it responsible in journalism to depict for the PNU students a scene of what you think is already martial rule based on repressions apparently committed to only a few people in the PNU community and on things such as heightened campus security and the revised dress code?
The Torch should embody not just the militant groups but the general PNU student population.
You inferred from Mr. Angcos’ statements that he has “the most dangerous mindset that a student could have in an academic community like PNU, the desire to kill the freedom of expression and other constitutional rights such as right to organization”. Although I do not completely agree with his ideas (as I have already mentioned), I think it is unreasonable to instantly dub him as having “the most dangerous mindset”. He was merely stating an opinion based on the legitimacy of an unaccredited organization. Perhaps you viewed his opinion as repressive of the freedom of expression, but he never categorically stated that a member of an unaccredited organization has less of a right to have his/her letter published. What he said was that the unaccredited group “does not have the right to claim their chapter [in the university]”, not a space in The Torch.
Regarding the constitutional right to organization, we all respect that right, but we should also be responsible and abide by the rules that govern the legitimacy of organizations and groups existing in the university. You may argue that the current policy of the PNU Administration is repressive because it prevents apparently leftist groups from being accredited. Let us open our minds, please. Indeed, PNU should be a bastion of academic freedom and freedom of expression, but first and foremost it is the Philippines’ premier teacher-training institution committed to the development of exemplary Filipino educators and leaders (Philosophic Goal, PNU Student Handbook p.1). I believe that PNU should produce competent, responsible, and exemplary educators more than militants and activists.
Lastly, was there really a need for you to mention Mr. Angcos’ mistakes in spelling and his grammatical errors? I believe it was much unwarranted and very petty, since you also have several grammatical errors of your own in your column and in the other columns of the July-August 2003 issue. I assure you that I can identify every one them, but I will not choose to do so just as you chose to leave Mr. Angcos’ syntactical errors to English majors. I am not saying that I am good in the application of English grammar in writing—you might find some errors here and there—but I can still identify grammatical errors whenever I see them. My point here, you may ask? Never criticize or mention derisively a person’s mistakes if you also commit the same.
Let me clarify that I am not an English major, and I do not know Mr. Angcos personally. Nor am I a staunch supporter of the PNU Administration. I have nothing to gain in defending Mr. Angcos and in siding with the PNU Administration, if that is what you may be conjuring in your mind. Let me also clarify that I am not against campus militancy. I just believe that it is a futile means in acquiring social change in the academic setting.
We are entitled to rights that should be exercised responsibly and with regard to the governing rules. They are rights and not privileges; let us always be aware of that.
Respectfully yours,
William Laurence (P.N.)
PS: If you think there is a need to have this e-mail published in an issue of The Torch, will you please leave this unedited just as you did with Mr. Angcos’ letter? Thanks a lot.
__________
As of this moment, I still haven't received any reply from the people concerned. I wrote and sent that e-mail in reaction to one of the columns in an issue of The Torch, apparently the official student publication of the Philippine Normal University.
That issue was when I was in my second year of collegiate studies. Now I am an instructor here at the PNU College of Science.
Yet no reply from The Torch Publication whatsoever.
Oh well....
