Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 42 no. 3 (2025)

Today’s Media in Focus: How Politics Influence Media Practitioners

Saimehen Lloid Iluis | Khristine Marie Concepcion

Discipline: media studies

 

Abstract:

This study explored the lived experiences of media practitioners in the Davao Region to understand how political influence shapes their professional roles and how they strive to maintain objectivity under pressure. In a context marked by political patronage, media ownership by public officials, and threats such as red-tagging and harassment, the research addresses the challenges faced by regional journalists in the Philippines. Anchored on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions), the study examined how media practitioners perceive, navigate, and respond to political interference while upholding ethical standards vital for inclusive and just societies. Using a descriptive phenomenological design, twelve purposively selected reporters, writers, editors, and broadcasters were interviewed through semi-structured guides. Colaizzi’s method revealed themes reflecting tensions between political power and journalistic practice. Participants shared strategies to balance professionalism with personal safety, resist editorial pressures, and sustain credibility amid public scrutiny. Despite risks, they demonstrated strong commitments to truth-telling, fairness, and transparency—values that promote press freedom and democratic discourse. The findings offer insights for enhancing ethical journalism through training, protective policies, and institutional support, emphasizing the need for resilient media systems aligned with SDGs.



References:

  1. Baker, S. E., & Edwards, R. (2012). How many qualitative interviews is enough? National Centre for Research Methods Review Paper.
  2. Bliss, D. (2016). Phenomenology and the meaning of human experience. University Press of America.
  3. Bourdieu, P. (2005). The political field, the social science field, and the journalistic field. In R. Benson & E. Neveu (Eds.), Bourdieu and the journalistic field (pp. 29–47). Polity Press.
  4. Boyce, C., & Neale, P. (2006). Conducting in-depth interviews: A guide for designing and conducting in-depth interviews for evaluation input. Pathfinder International.
  5. Campbell, J. L. (2011). Institutional change and globalization. Princeton University Press.
  6. Carlson, M. (2017). Journalistic authority: Legitimating news in the digital era. Columbia University Press.
  7. Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility. (2025). Press freedom under pressure: Monitoring report on media attacks. https://cmfr-phil.org
  8. Chinni, D., & Bronston, R. (2017). Americans’ views on the media’s watchdog role. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org
  9. Christians, C. G., Glasser, T. L., McQuail, D., Nordenstreng, K., & White, R. A. (2009). Normative theories of the media: Journalism in democratic societies. University of Illinois Press.
  10. Connelly, L. M. (2016). Trustworthiness in qualitative research. Medsurg Nursing, 25(6), 435–436.
  11. Coronel, S. S. (2001). The media, the market and democracy: The political economy of the Philippine media. In P. N. Thomas & Z. Nain (Eds.), Who owns the media? Global trends and local resistances (pp. 39–60). Southbound.
  12. Costa, A. P., Araújo, A., Moreira, A., & Matos, P. (2016). WebQDA in research practices: The case of education and training sciences. In A. P. Costa & L. P. Reis (Eds.), Computer Supported Qualitative Research (pp. 35–49). Springer.
  13. Cottle, S. (2000). Media research and ethnographic practice: Where are the boundaries? European Journal of Communication, 15(3), 311–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323100015003002
  14. Craft, S., & Vos, T. P. (2017). The ethics of journalism: Individual, institutional, and cultural influences. Routledge.
  15. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
  16. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
  17. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
  18. Creswell, J. W., & Cresswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches(5th ed.). Sage Publications.
  19. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
  20. De Jesus, M. (2023). PCIJ reports on media intimidation from 2022 to 2023. Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism. https://pcij.org/
  21. De Jesus, M. (2023). Attacks against press in Duterte and Marcos years. Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism.
  22. Delve & Limpaecher. (2021). Thematic analysis in qualitative research. Delve Tool. https://delvetool.com
  23. Deuze, M. (2005). What is journalism? Professional identity and ideology of journalists reconsidered. Journalism, 6(4), 442–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884905056815
  24. DeVault, G. (2017). Establishing trustworthiness in qualitative research. The Balance Careers. https://www.thebalancemoney.com
  25. Djankov, L., Gurevitch, M., & Hadwiger, R. (2003). Media ownership and political influence: Impacts on press freedom and democracy in transitional societies. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 27(4), 351–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/0196859903258300
  26. Entman, R. M. (2003). Cascading activation: Contesting the White House’s frame after 9/11. Political Communication, 20(4), 415–432. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600390244176
  27. EU Election Observation Mission. (2025). Preliminary statement: Philippines national and local elections 2025.
  28. Fink, A. (2020). Conducting research literature reviews: From the internet to paper (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
  29. Francisco, B. (2022, May 8). Election 2022: Hotspots in Mindanao. Rappler. https://www.rappler.com
  30. George, C. (2013). Freedom from the press: Journalism and state power in Singapore. Asian Studies Review, 37(3), 374–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/10357823.2013.816198
  31. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.
  32. Hanitzsch, T., Hanusch, F., Mellado, C., Anikina, M., Berganza, R., Cangoz, I., ... & Yuen, K. W. (2011). Mapping journalism cultures across nations: A comparative study of 18 countries. Journalism Studies, 12(3), 273–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2010.512502
  33. Hanitzsch, T., & Vos, T. P. (2016). Journalism beyond democracy: A new look into journalistic roles in political and everyday life. Journalism, 19(2), 146–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884916673386
  34. Hermida, A. (2010). Twittering the news: The emergence of ambient journalism. Journalism Practice, 4(3), 297–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512781003640703
  35. Husserl, E. (1931). Ideas: General introduction to pure phenomenology (W. R. Boyce Gibson, Trans.). George Allen & Unwin. (Original work published 1913)
  36. Journalist’s Code of Ethics. (2014). Philippine Press Institute. https://www.philpressinstitute.net/code-of-ethics/
  37. Kiger, M. E., & Varpio, L. (2020). Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE Guide No. 131. Medical Teacher, 42(8), 846–854. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2020.1755030
  38. Kovach, B., & Rosenstiel, T. (2007). The elements of journalism: What newspeople should know and the public should expect (Rev. ed.). Three Rivers Press.
  39. Leavy, P. (2014). The Oxford handbook of qualitative research. Oxford University Press.
  40. Lockwood, C., Munn, Z., & Porritt, K. (2005). Qualitative research synthesis: Methodological guidance for systematic reviewers utilizing meta-aggregation. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 3(4), 179–187.
  41. McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1086/267990
  42. McMillan, J. (2019). The role of the media in democratic development. In Media and society (pp. 145–168). Oxford University Press.
  43. McQuail, D. (2010). McQuail’s mass communication theory (6th ed.). Sage Publications.
  44. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
  45. Mindich, D. T. Z. (1998). Just the facts: How “objectivity” came to define American journalism. NYU Press.
  46. Moser, A., & Korstjens, I. (2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 1: Introduction. European Journal of General Practice, 24(1), 34–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375093
  47. Morrow, R., Rodriguez, A., & King, N. (1998). Colaizzi’s descriptive phenomenological method. The Psychologist, 11(6), 643–644.
  48. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage Publications.
  49. Murugesan, R. (2019). Media ethics and responsibility in a democratic society. Journal of Media Studies, 15(2), 102–114.
  50. Murugesan, R. (2021). Catalyst for change: The evolving role of media in society. Global Media Journal, 19(36), 1–9.
  51. Newton, K. (2006). May the weak force be with you: The power of the mass media in modern politics. European Journal of Political Research, 45(2), 209–234. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2006.00296.x
  52. Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
  53. Nygren, G., & Johansson, B. (2021). Media logic and political logic in journalism: Strategies for balancing between professional norms and political pressures. Journalism Studies, 22(3), 367–383.
  54. Owen, D. (2018). The new media’s role in politics: Changing the political landscape. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.609
  55. Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544.
  56. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
  57. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
  58. Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism. (2025). Attacks and threats against the press: July 2022 to April 2025. https://pcij.org
  59. Philippine Press Institute. (2014). Journalist’s Code of Ethics. https://www.philpressinstitute.net/code-of-ethics/
  60. Plaisance, P. L. (2009). Media ethics: Key principles for responsible practice. Sage Publications.
  61. Political Influence on Media. (n.d.). In Media, Democracy, and Society. https://www.media-democracy.org/
  62. Reporters Without Borders. (2023). World Press Freedom Index 2023. https://rsf.org/en/index
  63. Sampang, D. (2025). Philippine elections under threat: Media and democracy in crisis. Philippine Daily Inquirer.
  64. Schudson, M. (2008). Why democracies need an unlovable press. Polity Press.
  65. Schulz, W. (2014). Medien und politische Kommunikation. Springer VS.
  66. Siebert, F. S., Peterson, T., & Schramm, W. (1956). Four theories of the press: The authoritarian, libertarian, social responsibility, and Soviet communist concepts of what the press should be and do. University of Illinois Press.
  67. Singer, J. B. (2014). User-generated visibility: Secondary gatekeeping in a shared media space. New Media & Society, 16(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813477833
  68. Speziale, H. J. S., & Carpenter, D. R. (2007). Qualitative research in nursing: Advancing the humanistic imperative (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
  69. Stahl, G. M., & King, K. (2020). Ensuring rigor in qualitative research: Using Lincoln and Guba’s criteria. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 10(1), 23–31. https://doi.org/10.5590/JERAP.2020.10.1.02
  70. Taylor & Francis, as cited in Moser, A., & Korstjens, I. (2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. European Journal of General Practice, 24(1), 34–39.
  71. UNESCO. (2018). World trends in freedom of expression and media development: Global report 2017/2018. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000265825
  72. Voltmer, K. (2013). The media in transitional democracies. Polity Press.
  73. Ward, S. J. A. (2022). Ethics and the media: An introduction (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  74. Waisbord, S. (2013). Reinventing professionalism: Journalism and news in global perspective. Polity Press.
  75. Willis, D. G. (2007). Foundations of qualitative research: Interpretive and critical approaches. Sage Publications.
  76. Wirihana, L., Welch, A., Williamson, M., Christensen, M., Bakon, S., & Craft, J. (2018). Using Colaizzi’s method of data analysis to explore the experiences of nurse academics teaching on satellite campuses. Nurse Researcher, 25(4), 30–34.

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic