WHAT WOKE REALLY MEANS IN MEDIA

It’s not what you know, it’s who you know that counts. 

There is a word in the millennial language that can actually sum up all things that a media practitioner must be in life: Woke. To be aware, to come in awareness; to be informed, or be in tune with the latest issues and be woke, is an outright necessity at work-- without it, a media man could be said in old “kasabihan”, “natutulog sa pansitan”. 

To be woke is both a sense and a skill. Many times, it requires a lot of experience and basic to thorough research to be in a state of “woke”. 

Sorry but woke may sound like another word when a letter is changed from “o” to “a”, which can relate to the opposite of being woke. 

But in practice, woke signifies that one has risen from a state of unknowing, or in simple terms to be challenged and act on that FOMO (fear of missing out mode) and thus be woke. 

 Whew, what youth speak one has to learn to be woke and provoke others’ awareness of words and issues that matter. 

In the industry, one must not presume inclusivity in circles unless you are woke of who knows who, and who knows what. 

The former refers to connections and clout. The latter can be referred to as the beat or to exposure to a certain niche that one has grown into knowing, with such skill and expertise. It cannot be understated that a media man must work independently without the influence of outsiders enough to persuade or affect his/her work. 

But in the reality of things, when one is woke, there is normalcy in not knowing the circles that your colleague may have to show preset clout and influence that can affect one’s future or work fulfillment.

Short of saying, you need to be woke to accept there is “palakasan”. 

You need to be woke to accept there is "envelopmental gifting". 

But that does not mean everyone works against the persistence and good legacy of media as an industry.

One cannot undermine that such wokeness can lead one to perceive the existence of bias among the industry naysayers, players, and game-changers. After all, an old-timer cannot derelict a duty to impose independence yet, ostracize a circle of “friends and supporters” who helped build a name from the ground up or ensure continuity of work in their current titles. 

What I am sharing is that a media worker must know there is favoritism, bias, or “priorities” in giving work assignments, positions, and titles, or in giving benefits in paper and reality. 

The media industry can do better if it does away with all its biases. And break away from its own hierarchy of clout that gives favor to the one who pays more for a name, a space, or can afford to invite an advertiser in exchange for a byline in the guise of being branded, “content-driven” or “client commissioned”. 

There is favor when one sees none of fairness in giving work to the true media practitioner/s.