LAST Monday at 9 p.m. on SNN 21, we caught the new show, "Newsclock," hosted by Jing Magsaysay. Like the American program "Dateline," "Newsclock" winds back the hands of time to recall the TV coverage of a major event. Last Monday, the event of choice was the July 16, 1990 earthquake that claimed 900 lives in Baguio, Dagupan and Cabanatuan.

Unlike "Dateline," however, "Newsclock" went beyond reviewing old TV-film footage and asked the field reporters who covered the quake and its aftermath to reflect on the experience and share what they had learned from it, as broadcast journalists and as persons.

One reporter did a lot of soul-searching when he was asked to recall his controversial interview of a schoolboy who was pinned down in the ruins of a school in Cabanatuan. Nine years ago, he was severely criticized for interviewing the stricken boy, who could hardly talk.

The reporter recalled that he had mixed feelings about what he did. Part of him wanted to do the interview because, as a reporter, he felt he was obliged to report on what he saw. But he was also moved by the boy's serious condition.

His thoughts today: he was traumatized by the criticism he got, and he now feels guilty about subjecting the boy to that "insensitive" interview. He now believes that it was not within the bounds of journalism-"Instead of handing the boy the microphone, I should have given my hand to him, to save him," he said.

Other reporters and their superiors observed that, nine years ago, remote coverage was greatly hampered by the exceedingly basic newsgathering and transmission technology available at the time. For live feeds, all they had was the telephone. Footage had to be brought back to the studio, where it would be telecast, hours after the event had transpired. Today, of course, everything can be telecast live from most anyplace in the country.

But good TV reportage is more than just state-of-the-art equipment. Of even greater importance is the mindset of the field reporter, a topic that other broadcast reporters interviewed on "Newsclock" were encouraged to discuss.

Most of them agreed that, even in news coverage, the conflict is between factual reportage and the itch to jazz things up to grab viewers' attention-and thus, higher ratings. But they saw the danger in "wanting to document anything, being insensitive to people's suffering, highlighting things to get ratings."

Has TV journalism changed over the years? The technology is now quite advanced, but attitudes remain pretty much the same, the reporters observed. Clearly, TV journalists have to continue discussing this problem, until their sense of responsibility becomes more acute.

Another observation: compared to the years immediately before and after the Edsa Revolution, the news scene has simmered down, there isn't as much "action," so some TV journalists have become complacent. Thus, they have to consciously remind themselves to come up with enterprising and dynamic coverages, to look for issues that are usually glossed over, but are in fact very relevant to the populace.

How can media, specifically TV journalism, grow up? The reporters interviewed agreed that they had to become more responsible, to do away with lazy work habits or "adding" to the news event to make it an even "better" story. There's that issue of responsibility again…

Next week, "Newsclock" will recall the TV coverage of the Mayon volcano's last explosion. This is a timely choice because Mt. Mayon is once more showing restive signs of volcanic activity.

Summing up, "Newsclock" is a promising program because it goes beyond mere recollection of important events, and seeks to engage the reporters who covered those events in an analysis of their work. TV journalists can benefit from this ongoing review of their attitudes and options. The more aware they are of their lapses in the past, the better they'll do in the future.