Mass media is undoubtedly one of the most powerful agents of socialization; it can influence, change or reinforce not only opinions and ideas, but behavior as well. Numerous accounts in Philippine history show how political and social upheavals have been triggered by exposés of injustice or corruption in radio, TV and newspapers – a testament that media is indeed such a powerful and ubiquitous force, which by no means should be underestimated. For example, radio was best dramatized during the 1986 People Power Revolution . Jaime Cardinal Sin’s appeal to the Filipino people through the Catholic radio station Radio Veritas moved millions to gather in EDSA with the hopes of overthrowing the Marcos regime.

Radio and TV are arguably the most common and far-reaching means of relaying messages to the public. The influence of these outweighs the ownership. This is especially seen in rural areas, wherein electricity constraints limit the use and ownership of radio and TV sets, as opposed to Metropolitan areas, wherein ownership of the said appliances are densest. In rural areas, however, the proximity of the households to each other allows these forms of media to be seen and heard by more people, eventually influencing them .

In the Philippine context – which is considered to be a highly stratified society – radio, TV and newspapers, are further differentiated according to their target market. Cable TV for example, caters to the upper socio-economic brackets, so do broadsheets written in English. What is clearly evident across these forms of mass media is that the language used is a common distinguishing factor as to the target market (i.e. English for those of the AB to upper C socio-economic brackets, and Filipino for those of the lower socio-economic brackets).

Zooming into radio: most, if not all, AM radio stations are broadcasted in Filipino, making it more accessible to the masses. Aside from the language, the content and format reinforce radio as the masses’ medium of choice; aside from news and commentary, AM radio also consists of soap operas, talk shows, and the ever-popular showbiz gossip or tsismis . Radio is also acknowledged as the primary, most pervasive and most persuasive source of news, reaching 85 to 90 percent of the Philippine population .
With regard to the language being used in the plain, simple and objective (though some may argue that news is rarely objective per se) reporting of the news in AM radio, it can be said that the news anchors take on a more formal tone of the Filipino language – the type of language not used for normal or daily conversations. Anchors such as Joel Reyes Zobel, Arnold Clavio and Mike Enriquez of DZBB 594, for example exhibit impeccable use of the Filipino language. On the other hand, when it comes to commentary, we see a shift from a rather formal use of the Filipino language to a more casual and relatable tone. This is especially distinguishable when there are two or more anchors, and the commentary takes on a more conversational format, as though the listener himself could engage in an exchange with the anchors. In DZMM 630’s program Dos Por Dos, for example, which is hosted by Gerry Baja and Anthony Taberna, the two anchors engage in such a dialogue with a very casual tone, at times even humorous.

The themes that these anchors carry are very mass-oriented. One can sense an air of solidarity when listening to AM radio commentaries. This is especially clear when there is devastating news of disaster, calamity or loss, the commentators assume a tone of reaching out, trying their best to convey hope to the affected parties. An example of this would be the panawagan, which is no stranger to AM radio; chosen listeners would call the show, asking for help in finding a missing relative, appealing for donations for a life-threatening health condition, and the like. Commentators also often condemn policies that are oppressive or go against the interests of the masses. Aside from this, they suggest more plausible alternatives to the said policies that would be more equitable for the masses. For example, in the program Dos Por Dos, Baja and Taberna fearlessly critiqued the conditional cash transfer (CCT) program, saying that the coverage must be wider, and that those who are most in need of aid are not necessarily the ones being prioritized. They also questioned President Aquino’s statement in his recent midterm State of the Nation Address (SONA) regarding the supposedly excellent condition of the economy; Baja and Taberna contested that if it were so, then economic growth would be felt by the poorest in society – which is definitely not the case. Pieces of news and information are incorporated into the living condition and experiences of the target listeners – that is, those of the lower to middle socio-economic brackets. The commentators assume, of course, that their listeners come from the said background. This also goes hand in hand with the assumption that these listeners are more often than not deprived of an avenue to be heard, which is why commentators often take their side – or at least try to. It is a prevailing fact, of course, that the masses are less represented and frequently unheard in general – whether it be in the political, social, or economic sphere of life.

Politically, it is rare that we see a person coming from the masses having a position of leadership or power; those who are in power usually come from the same backgrounds – those with power, education, financial capabilities, and/or influence. Regardless if the one in power promises to represent the masses, it is a barely visible reality that the masses are indeed given equal representation; if they were, then why is it so that those in power are unjustly enriched? Socially, it is an evident reality that there is a wide gap between those of the upper and lower classes – which has been the case in Philippine society for the longest time. There are different TV shows, radio programs, malls, residential areas, etc. that cater to specific socio-economic brackets. It is as if society affirms and maintains the gap, and avoids all possible means of interaction between the upper and lower classes. In the economic environment, the same pattern persists; the ones with access to means of production, financial resources, educational and employment opportunities are most of the time, if not always, those of the upper socio-economic brackets. What this creates is a vicious cycle that fails to put an end, and even worsens the already wide gap between the rich and the poor.

The genuineness, however, of the viewpoints of these AM radio commentators is rather questionable. First, we must take into consideration the background of the said commentators. It is quite unlikely that they come from the same background as their listeners. Becoming a journalist or a radio announcer requires more than mere ability to speak; it requires a higher command of the language used, along with the analytical capabilities needed to critique pieces of news. More often than not, these are mastered through higher education in reputable schools, and although it is an unfortunate reality, this is a privilege that the masses do not usually have access to. Second, it also must be noted that more than 90 percent of AM radio stations are commercial in nature, thus profit-oriented. To generate higher revenues, these radio stations compete for higher ratings; the higher the ratings, the higher advertisers willing to pay . It is, therefore, worth asking if AM radio’s solidarity with the masses is truly sincere, or just a mere ploy to garner ratings from the said target market.

Perception does of course evolve into reality; thus, even if it is a mere illusion of the masses that commentators in AM radio sympathize with them and voice out their issues, the fact that it is broadcasted through such a powerful medium makes it such a great influencer of the target, that it influences opinions, ideas and eventually, one’s behavior as well. After all, as Marshall McLuhan said, “the medium is the message.”

Bibliography

Grabow, Karsten, Karl-Rudolf Korte, Bernhard Vogel, and Kristina Weissenbach. "PHILIPPINES." In Media and democracy: the KAS democracy report 2008. Berlin: Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, 2008. 82-93.

"The ICT Environment and Infrastructure." In Philippines: Communication Tools as Social Binders in Public and Private Sphere. Manila: Isis International Manila, 2007. 125-150.

Tuazon, Ramon. "Radio as a Way of Life." National Commission for Culture and the Arts. http://www.ncca.gov.ph/about-culture-and-arts/articles-on-c-n-a/article.php?igm=3&i=222 (accessed July 26, 2013).