Media - We love Lucio

PCIJ January to March 1999
M E D I A — W E L O V E L U C I O

BUT MORE visible and effective than ownership or an intimate relationship with the press is the clout Lucio Tan wields by practically subsidizing the media, thanks to the numerous ad placements of his companies. Tan’s firms are among the country’s top advertisers. In 1996 alone, his top three companies—Asia Brewery, Tanduay Distillery and Fortune Tobacco—altogether plunked down almost a billion pesos in media advertising. A year later, just when the economic crisis began, the figure jumped to P1.621 billion.

The bulk of Tan’s advertising money is spent on radio and television, the media most relied upon to reach the targets of his consumer products, the masa. For airing commercials of Hope, Winston, Champion, More and Mark cigarettes, Fortune Tobacco paid the television industry nearly P600 million in 1997, and the radio industry almost P400 million. In contrast, Fortune spent only P17.55 million for print ads.

Tan’s ad money is spread out to various television and radio stations, and following industry practice, is placed in programs which are most watched by consumers. His managers are said to report directly to a committee—chaired by Tan himself—which has made it a policy to underwrite only programs considered Tan-friendly.

These managers deal directly with the sales departments of broadcast stations, the units that sell airtime to clients. The managers also monitor whether the advertisements come out and whether the program over which it is aired did not make any derogatory remark about the product or the client himself, i.e. Tan. Hence, when Korina Sanchez read aloud that Lucio Tan was a tax evader in 1996, Fortune Tobacco executives immediately pulled their ads out of her program. Sanchez can only call it “pure blackmail and harassment.”

Unlike other networks, the giant ABS-CBN could probably afford to let go of the Tan account because several others are waiting in line to fill its slot. But it’s a sizable account nonetheless; in 1998, the network earned P98 million from advertisements placed by Tan-owned companies in Channel 2 alone, not counting radio station DZMM.

It really isn’t the big companies like ABS-CBN that are most affected by pressure from advertisers, but rather the smaller broadcast stations and outfits that jostle for the advertising crumbs thrown away by the big boys. But even the mid-size stations are bound not to pass up any advertising revenue, especially in times of crisis.

A major broadcast network has developed a modus vivendi as far as Lucio Tan is concerned. “There are stories about Lucio Tan you really can’t kill,” says a TV news executive connected with the network. But rather than get annoying calls from Tan’s minions, the station has come up with the policy that “if we’re running a story on Lucio Tan, we pull out his advertisement from that program and put it elsewhere.”

“Mr. Tan has all the right to withdraw his sponsorship of a program if he’s being attacked! ” Mison declares. “Can you imagine listening to a news program that calls Mr. Tan a tax cheat, then it’s brought to you by Tanduay Rhum? You’re paying for that program and then you’re being attacked in that program! Hindi tama (It’s not right)!”

To be fair, there are other advertisers who would not hesitate to use their business clout to whip the media into line. For years, the weekly magazine show ‘The Probe Team’ earned considerable income producing “The Good News,” a regular segment on successful entrepreneurs sponsored by another major broadcast advertiser, Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co. (PLDT). But when ‘Probe’ producers did a story on rival Bayantel and the sorry state of phone services in the country, PLDT immediately withdrew its ads from ‘Probe.’ The PLDT account was small but substantial enough for an independent outfit like Probe, which competes with the established and station-produced programs for revenue. But that was three years ago and time seems to have healed the rift. ‘Probe’ will soon be producing “The Good News” for PLDT again.

Lessons like this teach broadcast journalists especially to be shallow and sensationalistic. Rather than make insightful inquiries into the country’s economic problems and consumer woes that might offend advertisers, television and radio news programs encourage safer stories that deal with sex, crime and entertainment. Many years ago, Fortune Tobacco took ABC Channel 5 to task for airing, on a Fortune-sponsored news bulletin, a story on the harmful effects of smoking. Nowadays, the company would rather subsidize “harmless” ventures like sports news or late night movies than serious news programs.

Pressure from advertisers has also fostered self-censorship among broadcast journalists. A managing editor in an AM radio station says it’s not uncommon for reporters to first check with bosses before covering touchy stories involving big advertisers. Once they hear the advice, “Pare, may account yan (That one has an account)!” they retreat.

In television news and public affairs, executives warn correspondents to stay away from stories that might offend patrons. A story on the cattle industry and the country’s beef supply, no matter how harmless, might anger a major fast-food chain. A report on bottled water may irk a water company, or even the water utility. And the worries go on.

Offending advertisers—any advertiser, really—could be costly. In Lucio Tan’s case, the flight of Fortune Tobacco could mean millions of pesos in potential revenue, plus triple jeopardy. Not one but at least two other major Tan account could go down with it.

Now with Tan rumored on a buying binge—he is supposedly interested in acquiring businesses that include Meralco and Mimosa, PNB and Petron—there may be even less room for journalists to maneuver. Big Brother may truly have arrived.

There’s a postscript to this report. Sometimes, sensitive stories have a way of turning up in the most unexpected places, no matter how hard a reporter avoids it.

As the rest of the country greeted 1999 with fireworks, ABS-CBN reporter Mike Cohen was seated on the steps of the Guesthouse in Malacañang, waiting for a story to take home for his early morning program, ‘Alas Singko Y Medya.’ Earlier, he had gotten clearance from Palace guards and staff to be there for a story about a presidential son who had just moved into Malacañang. Upon arriving there, he was told the First Family was having New Year’s eve dinner with the closest of the president’s friends—the inner circle. And so Cohen and his crew waited.

The party apparently broke up shortly past 2:00 am of January 1, and the First Family was seeing its guests to the door. Who would appear but Lucio Tan with a tipsy President Joseph Estrada whom Cohen overheard telling the tycoon: “Pare, don’t worry about your problems. This year will be better.”

Cohen had no idea what those problems were and probably couldn’t care less. For moments later, his thoughts were on trying to get out of the place fast. The president had seen Cohen and his camera crew recording the whole thing. Estrada’s amiable countenance changed, recalls Cohen, and after Tan left, the visibly furious president demanded that they turn over the tape to him at once. “He was really upset,” says Cohen. “My only thought was on getting out of there alive. What if he hit me?”

Estrada reached down to yank the tape out of the camera himself, and he may be the only one who knows what Cohen and his crew caught on camera that New Year’s morning. But it sent yet another message to media: taipan Tan’s clout goes all the way to the top.

Now you know why no bad press for this Yellow Economic Lucifer? The media is at his mercy, ignoring their sworn role in our society as reporter of truth!