They start early, don’t they? (updated with a statement from the UP MassComm graduation committee)
Fabia alerted me to this item in the Lowdown column in the Manila Standard.
Some students belonging to this year’s graduating class of the University of the Philippines’ College of Mass Communications have hit upon a novel idea to make some money, get free stuff and subsidize their numerous parties. The students in charge of the yearbook (which will be paid for by the college’s graduating class) discovered that some photography and printing suppliers will do almost anything to get their business—and that’s where their entrepreneurial instincts kicked in.
The students in charge of the yearbook decided to “bid out” the production and printing deal to potential suppliers. But it’s only a bidding in the rigged sense of that word, because the students weren’t really looking for the lowest and best bid, as people who bid out contracts are supposed to do.
These MassComm students were more interested in awarding the deal to the supplier who could promise them the best “under the table” deals, who would wine them and dine them and who would take all the “test shots” of their faces that they wanted. In the end, one losing bidder told us, they ended up awarding the contract to someone who reportedly promised them a car, apart from what all the other bidders gave them—free booze, food and endless studio pictures of themselves in various poses. . .
Did this really happen? Is this what they learned from their elders? After all we live in a society where people are admired for how much they can get away with.
Tell us this isn’t true. Someone, anyone, please.
* * * * *
Official Statement of the University of the Philippines College of Mass Communication Graduation Committee 2011 (UP CMC GradCom 2011) on the Manila Standard Today column “Convincing Noynoy” by Jojo A. Robles (Jan. 28, 2011)
31 January 2011
To All Concerned:
This official statement is in response to the Manila Standard Today column of Jojo A. Robles entitled “Convincing Noynoy” (http://bit.ly/fpqbZ6) published last Friday, Jan. 28, which the Committee believes to be a defamation of the College of Mass Communication, its students, and its Graduation Committee for 2011. We demand that the Manila Standard Today publish this statement in its entirety.
No actual bidding process, in the strictest sense of the word, took place for the batch’s yearbook photo studio selection. The graduating batch selected its yearbook photo studio of choice between two candidate studios. This number was determined through Committee meet-ups, as well as reasonable and meritorious consideration of objective feedback from the studios’ own clients, previous and current. The Committee declined certain studios because of their failure to meet certain deadlines and standards (professionalism: deliveries, deadlines, accessibility, quality of output) that were set to ensure efficient Committee operations.
As an ad hoc committee organized for the duration of a single academic year, the Committee reserves the right to implement its own guidelines, in this case by presenting prospective studios to the graduating batch for all students to vote upon. Although the Committee considered these studios’ packages, it was primarily negative feedback from their clients that drove the Committee to decline them. The Committee feels these are reasonable and fair standards grounded in the fundamental goal of achieving what is best for the graduating batch in the most transparent and efficient manner possible.
Moreover, the Committee did not engage in such unscrupulous deals similar to the ones it is being accused of. The closest the Committee has gotten to “wining” and “dining” are food and beverage orders that are typical in client-customer meetings and have no bearing whatsoever in the yearbook selection process. “Test shoots” are a necessary privilege, in this case, when one wants to ensure concrete basis of judgment in sealing a yearbook photo studio contract.
The assertion that the Committee excessively abused these test shoots to suit its members’ personal whims and fancies are false. The Committee only participated in three (3) test shoots, necessary to provide the graduating batch ample basis for its choice via a democratic election.
Finally, no studio has promised a car, liquor, food, or any other photo package privileges apart from those stipulated in their respective contracts of agreement that the Committee has vigilantly reviewed.
The Committee is offended by this column and believes it to be a malicious, unwarranted attack on its reputation and integrity. In light of this, the Committee, on behalf of the College of Mass Communication, demands a full published apology and retraction from Mr. Robles, no more, no less.
THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF MASS COMMUNICATION
GRADUATION COMMITTEE 2011
Answers to questions you might be asking, unless you wandered onto this site purely by accident >>>
January 31st, 2011 at 00:46
This is sad, although I’m from UP Baguio. Franz Dela Fuente from UP CMC had this to say:
Baseless accusations. GradCom is discussing this very seriously and as Secretariat of the Committee, we shall release a public statement on this matter not later than tomorrow. Thank you.
January 31st, 2011 at 02:09
I find it hard to believe that the potential profit in winning a yearbook contract from the UP CMC would be enough to convince a supplier to “invest” a car plus other freebies. Maybe for an enormous college like the College of Engineering, but Mass Comm? I doubt it.
Conspiracy theory time: Maybe this sleazy bidder actually has no plans of producing a yearbook, and is only planning to run away with the students’ yearbook payments? It happened to my batch (UP College of Arts and Letters Batch 09), so it’s very possible.
January 31st, 2011 at 02:20
“endless studio pictures of themselves in various poses. . .”
kasalanan ni Big Kuya yan.
January 31st, 2011 at 10:14
(Pls use this comment instead)
I graduated from UP in ’05 and was part of the college student council that made arrangements for yearbook photoshoots in my last two years.
When we bid out for these services we also took into consideration the “rebate” (which would range between 5-10% of total gross receipts, if I remember correctly) that the winning supplier would give us. Said rebate went to the council funds and the general student population knew about this too (voting was done by them anyway). Test shots are part of the process – although during my time, no one wanted to be the test shot subject (imagine your smiley faces being put up in the college halls and being scrutinized by people for weeks – “Ano ba yan mukha siyang bakla dito”, etc)
I wouldn’t be too surprised to hear that the kids are now asking for all sorts of x-deals and that suppliers are biting. I’ve also heard of stories where some orgs and councils will solicit donations from corporations and individuals for non-existent events (this one org got stuck with a bunch of plastic pails and dippers cause the company thought they could give the entire sponsorship amount in products – said org eventually sold the products and made a bit of cash anyway).
I think that the story about the car bribe is exaggerated though– the Mass Comm population isn’t large enough for the supplier to earn enough margins to subsidize a car and these yearbook and photoshoot contracts do not normally span more than a year anyway. Plus, who among those council members will get to keep the car eventually?
You’ve heard of the cheating scandal at the school of economics a few years back?
January 31st, 2011 at 13:51
“When you consider that these students will soon become print and broadcast journalists, you have to wonder what else they learned in school apart from soliciting favors from bidders.”, so goes the killer ending of the article.
I mean, yeah, yeah, come on, tell me all about it.
January 31st, 2011 at 20:17
Official Statement of the University of the Philippines College of Mass Communication Graduation Committee 2011 (UP CMC GradCom 2011) on the Manila Standard Today column “Convincing Noynoy” by Jojo A. Robles (Jan. 28, 2011)
31 January 2011
To All Concerned:
This official statement is in response to the Manila Standard Today column of Jojo A. Robles entitled “Convincing Noynoy” (http://bit.ly/fpqbZ6) published last Friday, Jan. 28, which the Committee believes to be a defamation of the College of Mass Communication, its students, and its Graduation Committee for 2011. We demand that the Manila Standard Today publish this statement in its entirety.
No actual bidding process, in the strictest sense of the word, took place for the batch’s yearbook photo studio selection. The graduating batch selected its yearbook photo studio of choice between two candidate studios. This number was determined through Committee meet-ups, as well as reasonable and meritorious consideration of objective feedback from the studios’ own clients, previous and current. The Committee declined certain studios because of their failure to meet certain deadlines and standards (professionalism: deliveries, deadlines, accessibility, quality of output) that were set to ensure efficient Committee operations.
As an ad hoc committee organized for the duration of a single academic year, the Committee reserves the right to implement its own guidelines, in this case by presenting prospective studios to the graduating batch for all students to vote upon. Although the Committee considered these studios’ packages, it was primarily negative feedback from their clients that drove the Committee to decline them. The Committee feels these are reasonable and fair standards grounded in the fundamental goal of achieving what is best for the graduating batch in the most transparent and efficient manner possible.
Moreover, the Committee did not engage in such unscrupulous deals similar to the ones it is being accused of. The closest the Committee has gotten to “wining” and “dining” are food and beverage orders that are typical in client-customer meetings and have no bearing whatsoever in the yearbook selection process. “Test shoots” are a necessary privilege, in this case, when one wants to ensure concrete basis of judgment in sealing a yearbook photo studio contract.
The assertion that the Committee excessively abused these test shoots to suit its members’ personal whims and fancies are false. The Committee only participated in three (3) test shoots, necessary to provide the graduating batch ample basis for its choice via a democratic election.
Finally, no studio has promised a car, liquor, food, or any other photo package privileges apart from those stipulated in their respective contracts of agreement that the Committee has vigilantly reviewed.
The Committee is offended by this column and believes it to be a malicious, unwarranted attack on its reputation and integrity. In light of this, the Committee, on behalf of the College of Mass Communication, demands a full published apology and retraction from Mr. Robles, no more, no less.
THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF MASS COMMUNICATION
GRADUATION COMMITTEE 2011
February 1st, 2011 at 18:09
I don’t believe this. I highly doubt a multimedia company would go the whole nine impossible yards just to win a yearbook deal. Maybe if this project were as big the ZTE broadband deal…
February 2nd, 2011 at 11:21
Pare-pareho naman taon-taon ang mga studios na nagbi-bid para sa mga ‘yan. Sinastandardize ng mga graduating committee yung packages na iaalok sa mga estudyante. Sa mga presyo nalang usually nagkakatalo. Kapag nananalo ang mas mahal na studio, yun ay dahil magaling yung pagkaka-edit, kaya nagmumukhang fresh na fresh yung mga nag-modelo.
Hindi naman binanggit ng column kung sinong studio ‘yan. Kung hindi ito paninira lang, sana merong nagbigay ng statement.
Baka yung studio ito na palaging hindi napipili kasi pangit yung labas ng pictures nila. :p
February 5th, 2011 at 09:07
i was part of the grad pic committee back in UP and i remember almost all the studios we met up with said something about another college in UP (can’t remember if it was CMC) with an “under the table” deal. the college yearbook committee pretends to bid out the yearbook deal, let the studios treat them and offer them amenities but they keep on picking the same studio every year allegedly because of the “amenities” that this particular studio provides to the committee.