It has become instinctive to describe the Middle East as “magulo” in Filipino conversations here and abroad. The word comes easily, suggesting disorder, inevitability, and unpredictability. Yet, like many labels we repeat often enough, it obscures more than it reveals.
To call that region “magulo” is to silently absolve ourselves from the responsibility of understanding the situation.
This is, in a sense, what historical theorist Hayden White warned against in the latter part of his work. Moving beyond his earlier concern with the structure of historical writing, he turned to the “practical past” which are the ways narratives are mobilized to serve present purposes. From this followed an insistence on the “ethics of narrative’: that how we frame events conditions not only how they are understood, but what responses to them appear justified.
White illustrates this with a striking irony in the so-called War on Drugs of the 1970s. Framed as a moral crusade, it could just as plausibly be read, he suggests, as a campaign “against youth, against pleasure,” and in favor of an expanding military-police apparatus already taking shape in the shadow of the Vietnam War.
The “war” narrative did not only describe a “problem” but also reorganized political life around it, legitimizing a broader “war machine’s expanding investment in military adventures.”
The resonance with more recent experience like the anti-drug campaign under former Philippine leader Rodrigo Duterte is hard to ignore. The same sensitivity to narrative and its limits can be found in the reflections two Sundays ago of Randy David in “America’s war, everyone’s problem.” Looking back on his years hosting a television forum, he recalls a time when public discussion, however contentious, can still be edited, framed, and refined. There was room for reflection, for reconsideration, for responsibility in how issues were presented.
But war offers no such space. Once it starts, there is no editing its consequences; only the irreversible unfolding of events that extend far beyond their point of origin.
My own encounters with the Middle East, shaped by years of experience there and later engagement with international relations and communications scholarship, point to the danger of careless narratives. The region is not simply chaotic. It is complex, shaped by the interplay of internal conflicts and external interventions.
The Iraq War and the Syrian Civil War are not aberrations but emblematic cases. They reveal how local dynamics become entangled with the strategic interests of global powers US, Russia, and Iran, while China tries to avoid laughing.
To limit all this to “magulo” is not only analytically thin, but also ethically fraught. For such language flattens complexity and, in doing so, risks normalizing intervention. It invites the view that disorder is inherent; therefore, that external force is necessary and justified. In an interconnected world, the consequences of these framings travel widely. Disruptions in critical chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz reverberate across economies, raising fuel prices and straining everyday life in places far removed from the conflict itself including our country ironically..
David observes that the decisions that trigger these cascading effects remain concentrated in the hands of a few. And his recollection becomes instructive. If mediated discourse once allowed for editing and for the careful shaping of meaning, global politics today often unfolds in a space where action precedes reflection. Narratives follow decisions, not the other way around.
Thus moving beyond “magulo” matters. It is about accountability in narration, not language precision. For every description carries within it an orientation: Rather than saying “pabago-bago at ang gulo-gulo ni Duterte,” we should highlight certain causes, obscure others, slowly but surely and silently distribute responsibility.
White and David recognize that narratives do not simply mirror the world. Narratives lead to meaningful deliberation, authorize actions, and legitimize policies; in fact, they render violence thinkable.
So the question is not only how we understand the Middle East or how we conceptualize its alternative name, but how our ways of telling its story shape the future we are willing to accept.
DevCom meets HealthCom
(Taken from my speech delivered before students, professors, and administrators of the University of Perpetual Help System Manila on April 15, 2026)
Take note that health communication is within development communication, not the other way around. There’s a PGH ward that is not the patient’s original ward. There are scenes of patient transfer: The nurse is pushing the bedridden patient. We cannot observe the patient pushing the bedridden nurse. So HealthCom is within DevCom.
The scope of DevCom is as wide as possible: social and economic development (poverty, education, health) as well as peace and order (armed conflict, peace-keeping, peace talks, maintenance of order). Are we maintaining chaos? We are still blessed in the Philippines. In the Middle East where Jesus Christ was born, grew up, traveled and gave his life for people, there are groups whose only job is to sow terror. We’re not that chaotic here in the Philippines in particular and Southeast Asia in general.
I gave here the effect of “nakasuksok sa bag ng devcom.” If HealthCom’s scope easily reads like the scope of DevCom in the earlier slide, it’s too much out. Wide open. Hindi natin binabadera ang ating paglilingkod. With high impact, but low profile, you know. So it’s upside down because it’s inside the bag. OK? You still get that health communication is within Devcom. When Juan Flavier talks, everybody listens. It’s come to the point where you can’t just listen to him when he talks about medicine, public health, but also in aid of legislation, and policies, laws and bills. We voted the doctor as senator. He’s a communicator and you’re communicators and that’s not your main job but an auxiliary to your work. Tell the person next to you: “You’re a great speaker, ‘wag lalaki ang ulo.”
HealthCom focuses on information dissemination to influence healthier choices. Matindi-tinding impormasyon kagaya ng mga dahilan mong sasabihin kung bakit masama sa kalusugan ang vape at paninigarilyo. Dati nilabanan natin ang naglipanang PR campaigns for — not against but for — smoking, kesyo karapatan mong manigarilyo basta raw nasa lugar at walang tinatapakang karapatan ng iba, na kesyo sa bawat hit-hit mo, nakatutulong ka sa ekonomiya dahil sa kumokonsumo ka ng tobacco products ng producers na malalaki ang binabayarang buwis, bukod sa ika’y nagbabayad din ng buwis. Kinakailangan natin o kailangan pa nating buhayin ang kampanyang “Yosi Kadiri”? Naalala ko yung chant namin nung mga bata pa kami: “Philip kitang hinahanap, nasa Malboro (Marlboro) ka lang pala. Hope! Huwag kang tatakas. Champion ka talaga. Kalakas talaga ng mga cigarette manufacturers, ano po? At yung mga ganyang brand. Napagtagumpayan na nating tanggalin sa TV ads ang mga sigarilyong iyan.
To influence people to make healthier choices is to make HealthCom a specialized area within the overall DevCom agenda.
We have the DevCom-HealthCom Approach, with common strategies but only one approach. Common strategies are: interpersonal communication, media, and digital tools; educating community (voter education included) and building capacity; risk assessment and disease prevention. And you, your group, or your institution must go out and campaign for these two.
DevCom and HealthCom both involve partnering with stakeholders meant for community empowerment. We don’t appreciate this approach simply because it’s part of the job. We need to highlight its importance. The common strategies under that single approach entail disciplines that are very much critical in order for us to navigate complex challenges in public health — No. 1… No. 2, to guarantee that our valuable information reaches diverse urban and rural communities and people truly understand that information.
We now understand that they intersect to improve our living conditions by means of our information and communication, the focus of which is on behavioral change and societal transformation. It is true that the aim of HealthCom is to provide specific health choices. However, it is DevCom that applies communication in fighting for equalities and ending poverty. Naaalala ko ang peryodista kong tatay. You cannot eliminate poverty according to his multiple sources and when I went to college that’s what I also found out. Years thereafter, may nabago na. “Zero poverty” na talaga ang target ng mga nagkakaisang bansa sa kanilang United Nations’ SDGs or Sustainable Development Goals. Tama nga naman: Paano mo masusustain kung hindi mo buburahin sa equation ang kahirapan.
Also it is in accord with the Declaration of Principles and State Policies of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines: Quote, unquote, “The State shall free the people from poverty.” A little over 40 years have passed, it’s the same policy. Paano nga ba natin mapapalaya ang mga tao sa kahirapan? How? Still we can find the answer in the Constitution. Through policies; that the State, quote, unquote, “shall provide adequate social services, promote full employment, a rising standard of living, and an improved quality of life for all.”
Utilizing targeted communication, the DevCom strategy is one that promotes social and economic development, aims to build trust, changes behavior, and mobilizes action. For instance, when Communication Program Chair Jerome Fadriquela and his ABS-CBN TFC team received an award, this is what Commission on Filipinos Overseas Secretary Francisco Acosta said about the importance of the role of the media (Professor Fadriquela used to produce the award-winning Kabayani Talks), and I quote: “I have personally learned that our migrants abroad have three important sources of support: our government represented by migrant agencies, the Filipino organizations abroad, and of course, the media. This triangulate partnership must work hand-in-hand to consistently inform our Filipinos abroad about their rights, update them on developments in our country, and encourage political involvement in their postal place and in their homeland.”
Thought leaders the world over recognize DevCom, including the contributions of its mother Dr. Nora Quebral. She’s an honorary doctorate at the London School of Economics and Political Science.
For as long as there are politicians like Imee Marcos who was slammed a few years ago for saying that DevCom is “cute and archaic,” it will stay very relevant. We need DevCom to promote our 2028 alternative candidates. Sa komunikasyong pangkaunlaran, nagpapakatotoo lang tayo.
