I have been on a European TV series/movie binge on Netflix lately owing to the fact that there’s a limited number of good programs to watch on HBO Max and Amazon Prime lately. The other reason is the delay in update of episodes. Let us face it, streaming has made binge-watching possible and the producers cannot catch up. There is a lot of time, effort and expense which goes into producing a an episode between 30 – 40 minutes long.
The first European series I watched on Netflix was Occupied. It is produced in Norway with subtitles. The premise of the show was Russia waging low intensity conflict against Norway for its oil in the North Sea. It gives the viewer a good look at how life is in the Scandinavian countries which are the most liberal in Europe and are prime examples of demorcracy at its finest. It has run for three seasons but there is no word about a fourth season.
Borgen’s fourth season was just released on Netflix. The first three seasons were about the rise of Birgitte Nyborg to become Denmark’s first female Prime Minister. The show revolves around the lives of the actors on Denmark’s political stage; the individuals, the political parties and the media, particularly state-run TV1 and how the events impact the lives of Danes.
It is an honest look into the political and social issues affecting a developed country and how it copes through its leaders in the political structure. It is a realistic look at politics and power. There is some idealism to it but there is also shades of the ugly side politics but nothing of the House of Cards kind. It is more of The West Wing type of political intrigue.
The program is produced by state-owned DR or Danish Broadcasting Corporation. The broadcast media in Denmark is state-owned until 1988 when privately-owned TV2 was established. The same is referenced in Borgen where the editors and anchors of TV1 play their parts in the story arcs throughout Season 1 to Season 4.
TV1 plays the role of the Fourth Estate, holding government officials accountable in behalf of the public they serve. They take it upon themselves as not only their duty but also the ethical practice of their profession, journalism.
Borgen is not all about idealism and how everything is hunky-dory in Denmark as a first-world country. Realism is the tone of the show with conflicts of interest galore among the principal characters as their lives inevitably intersect between those doing the coverage of the principal state actors. It also takes into account different political ideologies and how these ideologies form the core of the political parties in parliament since they have a following among the people who form their constituencies.
Season 4 of Borgen takes into account the role of social media in society, how it impacts politicians and media organizations and how all the actors must navigate it in the pursuit of their own agendas.
Not all politicians are adept at social media. The same is true with mainstream media organizations which have no other choice but to be where the public’s eyes are. This is why social media is both a boon and a bane to society.
Season 1 to 3 puts extensive focus on what is referred to in the show as the spin doctor or one who is really the political affairs adviser or chief of staff who is responsible for messaging and communications. Borgen exposes how government officials also use media to their advantage specially when targeting political enemies. The goal is always to influence public opinion to hew to the line that is favorable to them.
Given the recent debates over the closure of ABS-CBN and the isssue of bloggers/vloggers being accredited by the PCOO, Borgen gives us insights as to the pitfalls and benefits of state-controlled media.
During the time of Marcos Sr., the state-owned Channel 4 produced quality programs and had excellent anchors with a production organization, the National Media Production Center, backing it up. Since 1986, PTV-4 has slid down to being the prime example of mediocrity. The head of the PCOO, Martin Andanar, has not done much in achieving the goals he set forth when he was appointed in 2016.
It remains to be seen what will be the direction of the new PCOO head since there is a vagueness to the title which the Marcos camp appears to be confused about. The reference to Press Secretary vis-a-vis PCOO Secretary. It has been a vague organizational structure since this was revamped during the Aquino administration by Edwin Lacierda and Manolo Quezon. We will just have to wait and see what happens after June 30.
Another distinct revelation in Borgen is the need for a competent government bureaucracy. The different ministries are all headed by a Permanent Secretary who is a career civil servant. In short, whatever political developments cause a transfer of power from one party to the other, the ministries continue to function effectively and efficiently.
This is in stark contrast to our political system where a bevy of political appointments are made to Cabinet posts and agency’s throughout the government bureaucracy which are co-terminous with the President. This is true for both the national and local level and is one of the main reasons why no bureaucratic reform program has ever succeeded. The practice itself promotes and condones political patronage which is the reason why there is an utter lack of professionalism in the bureaucracy and disregards the purpose of the civil service examination.
This calls to mind the efforts of Marcos Sr. to improve the quality and competence of civil servants by giving the task to Onofre D. Corpuz who established the Development Academy of the Philippines. Since 1986, the civil service and the bureaucracy have been descending into the depths of mediocrity and it is further aggravated by the rise of political patronage. These are serious issues which Marcos Jr. should address.
Borgen itself is an example of how a state-run broadcaster can be critical of the very system it operates in without being biased in its favor. It also gives us useful insights on how a government under a Constitutional Monarchy operates. The debates about the welfare state are particularly insightful in light of the present environment since the pandemic broke out in 2020.
At this point, we can only wish and dream of a political system which actually works. The challenge is really on the Marcos administration to deliver what it promised to the Filipino people.
Comments