By Jeline Malasig, June 29, 2022, Interaksyon.philstar.com
The revocation also applies to Rappler Holdings Corporation, its parent organization.
The hashtag “#DefendPressFreedom” landed on local Twitter’s trending list as entities and individuals expressed support for news company Rappler, Inc. following an affirmation of a 2018 decision to revoke its certificates.
This was announced by Rappler chief executive officer Maria Ressa at the East West Center conference in Hawaii on Wednesday.
She said that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) “affirmed its earlier decision to revoke the certificates of incorporation of Rappler Inc. and Rappler Holdings Corporation (RHC).”
“We were notified by our lawyers of this ruling that effectively confirmed the shut down of Rappler,” the veteran journalist added.
The order is dated June 28.
Ressa said they would appeal the decision, especially since the “proceedings were highly irregular.”
“We have existing legal remedies all the way up to the highest court of the land. It is business as usual for us since, in our view, this is not immediately executory without court approval,” she added.
The case stems from the SEC’s order to cancel the certificate of incorporation of the online news site’s operator and Omidyar Network‘s Philippine Depositary Receipts (PDR) in January 2018.
PDR is a financial instrument that gives foreign investors passive economic interest in a Philippine company, while Omidyar is a “philanthropic investment firm” founded by French-born Iranian-American billionaire Pierre Omidyar.
The SEC said that the company allegedly violated the constitutional and statutory Foreign Equity Restriction in Mass Media.
Rappler appealed this to the Court of Appeals, which ordered the regulatory body to look into the effects of Omidyar’s donation.
Rappler lawyer Francis Lim in November 2021 said that the SEC “submitted a report to the Court of Appeals saying it [donation] has no effect without giving us the opportunity to comment on the effect.”
The regulatory body stood by its findings in February 2021. Rappler then filed a motion for reconsideration.
The SEC’s latest order, the news company said, is its response to the motion.
Following the news, messages of support poured in for the media outlet on Twitter Philippines through the hashtag “#DefendPressFreedom.”
“We stand with @rapplerdotcom and other media groups in these times and at all times. #DefendPressFreedom #HoldTheLine #StopTheAttacks,” De La Salle University professor David Michael San Juan tweeted.
“Journalists are more than just deliverers of the truth. They stand against the most horrifying of things to get the story to the people. I stand with @rapplerdotcom and all journalists in this fight. May the truth be in our favor… #CourageOn #DefendPressFreedom,” another Twitter user wrote.
“The truth dies in darkness. I stand with Rappler. #DefendPressFreedom #HoldTheLine #CourageOn,” a different online user said.
The Youth Advocates for Climate Action Philippines also posted the hashtag and said it “condemns the ongoing and relentless offensive against press freedom” in the country.
“Effective climate action relies on critical journalism that documents and exposes destructive projects, problematic policies, and other issues related to the climate crisis, even if publishing these stories supposedly goes against the politically powerful,” it said.
“We youth climate activists join the calls to #StandWithRappler and #DefendPressFreedom in light of these attacks!” the group added.
The National Union of Journalists of the Philippines also said it stands “together against all attempts to silence us.”
“Throughout the six years of the Duterte administration, we have seen lawsuits and regulatory processes used as tools to muzzle the press and these, as much as the touted infrastructure projects, form part of the Duterte legacy,” the group said in a statement.
“It is clear now, if it had not been clear before, that the journalism community and the communities that we report about and for must stand together against government moves to harass, restrict and silence any of us to keep the press free for all of us,” it added.
Families, human rights groups, and other stakeholders bank on the ICC to bring justice to thousands of victims, as domestic mechanisms prove to be ineffective in the quest for accountability in the Philippines
MANILA, Philippines – Developments continue to unfold at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in relation to the killings under the violent war on drugs, a key policy under outgoing President Rodrigo Duterte.
Government data shows that at least 6,252 people have died at the hands of the police during anti-illegal drug operations as of May 31, 2022. This tally does not include victims of vigilante-style killings, which human rights groups estimate to pull the number up to around 30,000.
Documents obtained by Rappler, however, show that the Philippine National Police (PNP) already recorded 7,884 deaths between July 1, 2016 to August 31, 2020.
Families, human rights groups, and other stakeholders bank on the ICC to bring justice to the thousands of victims, as domestic mechanisms prove to be ineffective in what appears to be a futile quest for accountability.
The Commission on Human Rights (CHR), mandated by the 1987 Philippine Constitution to investigate state abuses, was stonewalled by the Duterte government in its own probes – a recurring treatment even among other groups that try to assist families of victims.
What has happened with the ICC proceedings so far? Rappler lists key events involving the ICC and Duterte’s war on drugs. We will update this timeline as new information comes in.
OCTOBER 13, 2016
Then-ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda says her office is keeping an eye on the incidents in the Philippines as the number of deaths in drug war operations continues to rise almost four months into the Duterte administration.
In a statement, she says her office “will be closely following the developments… and record any instance of incitement or resort to violence with a view to assessing whether a preliminary examination into the situation of the Philippines needs to be opened.”
Without naming any official, Bensouda also warns that “any person in the Philippines who incites or engages in acts of mass violence including by ordering, requesting, encouraging or contributing, in any other manner, to the commission of crimes within the jurisdiction of the ICC is potentially liable to prosecution before the Court.”
NOVEMBER 17, 2016
Duterte threatens to withdraw the Philippines from being a member-state of the ICC.
He calls the international court useless, saying it really is unable to help small countries. This would be the first of many instances when the President would publicly threaten and insult the ICC, including its officials.
APRIL 24, 2017
Filipino lawyer Jude Sabio files a communication before the ICC over the “repeatedly, unchangingly, and continuously” mass murder in the Philippines.
He requests the court to “commit [Duterte] and his senior government officials to the Trial Chamber for trial and that the Trial Chamber in turn, after trial, convict them and sentence them to corresponding prison sentence or life imprisonment.”
Sabio was the lawyer of self-confessed Davao Death Squad (DDS) member Edgar Matobato, who was the first to publicly come out to accuse Duterte of being behind the killings in Davao City as mayor.
In the documents filed, Sabio says he has “direct proof beyond reasonable doubt” that Duterte continued these killings at the national level.
Sabio would later “withdraw” his communication in January 2020, but experts point out this will not affect the ongoing proceedings. He dies on April 12, 2021 due to cardiac arrest.
Duterte threatens to withdraw the Philippines from being a member-state of the ICC.
He calls the international court useless, saying it really is unable to help small countries. This would be the first of many instances when the President would publicly threaten and insult the ICC, including its officials.
APRIL 24, 2017
Filipino lawyer Jude Sabio files a communication before the ICC over the “repeatedly, unchangingly, and continuously” mass murder in the Philippines.
He requests the court to “commit [Duterte] and his senior government officials to the Trial Chamber for trial and that the Trial Chamber in turn, after trial, convict them and sentence them to corresponding prison sentence or life imprisonment.”
Sabio was the lawyer of self-confessed Davao Death Squad (DDS) member Edgar Matobato, who was the first to publicly come out to accuse Duterte of being behind the killings in Davao City as mayor.
In the documents filed, Sabio says he has “direct proof beyond reasonable doubt” that Duterte continued these killings at the national level.
Sabio would later “withdraw” his communication in January 2020, but experts point out this will not affect the ongoing proceedings. He dies on April 12, 2021 due to cardiac arrest.
FEBRUARY 8, 2018
The ICC Office of the Prosecutor announces that it has initiated a preliminary examination to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to establish that the case falls under the court’s jurisdiction.
In a statement, Bensouda says her office has decided to pursue this move “following a careful, independent, and impartial review of communications and reports documenting alleged crimes.”
Then-presidential spokesperson Harry Roque says Duterte welcomes this move “because he is sick and tired of being accused of the commission of crimes against humanity.”
MARCH 14, 2018
Duterte announces that the Philippines will withdraw as a member-state of the ICC. In a written statement, the President says he is “withdrawing [the country’s] ratification of the Rome Statute effective immediately.”
But the Rome Statute, the ICC’s founding document, explicitly states that withdrawal shall only take effect “one year after the date of receipt of the notification.” Ceasing to be a member-state will also not affect criminal investigations and proceedings that have been started before the withdrawal came into effect.
MARCH 16, 2018
The Philippine government formally submits to the United Nations its written notice of withdrawal from the ICC. In the letter, the government says its decision to withdraw reflects the country’s “principled stand against those who politicize and weaponize human rights.”
The transmission of the letter officially triggers the one-year waiting period before the withdrawal takes effect.
AUGUST 28, 2018
Families of drug war victims, through another submitted communication, urge then-ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda to indict and eventually convict Duterte.
The families, convened under the Rise Up for Life and for Rights network, “call for an end to madness and for [Duterte], who has likened himself to one of the most evil men in history, to be brought before the ICC and be held to account for crimes against humanity.”
The human rights abuses under his administration “threaten the core principles of humanity itself, subsuming individual victim experiences, and even state borders,” the families add.
MARCH 17, 2019
The Philippines officially ceases to be a member-state of the ICC, a year after the Duterte government first gave notice of its withdrawal as signatory to the Rome Statute.
While withdrawing does not hinder the ICC from moving forward with possible proceedings, it will most likely make things difficult for investigators, especially in terms of getting cooperation from the Philippine government.
DECEMBER 5, 2019
Then-ICC prosecutor Bensouda says she aims to finalize her preliminary examination by 2020 so her office can “reach a decision on whether to seek [authorization] to open an investigation into the situation in the Philippines.”
In a report, Bensouda says her office “significantly advanced its assessment” since 2018, adding that they continue to monitor the situation, including reports of threats and harassment against human rights defenders.
NOVEMBER 11, 2020
Arturo Lascañas, former Davao City top cop and self-confessed DDS hitman, signs a Third Agreement on Limited Use of Information with the ICC. The document shows that the ICC Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) will not use as evidence against Lascañas his confessions about carrying out killings ordered by Duterte himself.
This is unprecedented and considered a first in Philippine history. International human rights lawyer Ruben Carranza says this move is a form of use immunity, while former ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo says the document means that the OTP is treating the witness as an insider, although he could also be a suspect.
This development, however, only becomes public in November 2021, as part of Rappler’s investigation into Duterte and the Davao Death Squad.
DECEMBER 15, 2020
Bensouda says there is “reasonable basis to believe that crimes against humanity” were committed in the Philippines in connection with Duterte’s war on drugs. These incidents, she points out in a report, occurred at least between July 1, 2016 to March 16, 2019 – a day before the Philippines’ withdrawal from the ICC took effect.
Her office, however, is yet to reach a decision on whether to seek permission to open a formal investigation, given the challenges brought about by restrictions related to the coronavirus pandemic.
JANUARY 22, 2021
Families of drug war victims call on the ICC to hold Duterte accountable for allegedly impeding justice, including instances when he repeatedly threatened Bensouda and the court.
In a supplemental pleading submitted to Bensouda, mothers represented by the National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers say Duterte “should be held accountable for his blatant attempt to pervert the course of justice by intimidating and retaliating against the officials of the [ICC].”
MARCH 16, 2021
The Supreme Court junks a petition questioning the validity of Duterte’s withdrawal from the ICC, including whether he is legally required to get the concurrence of the Senate in doing such act.
The High Court, voting unanimously, dismisses the petition because it has become moot and academic.
It, however, says the government is obliged to cooperate with the ICC even if it has already withdrawn, according to the full document released months after on July 21, 2021. Despite this, Malacañang remains firm in its decision not to cooperate.
JUNE 14, 2021
Then-ICC prosecutor Bensouda applies for authorization with the pre-trial chamber to open an investigation into the killings committed during the war on drugs and in Davao City from 2011 to 2016.
Bensouda, in a report, says “extrajudicial killings, perpetrated across the Philippines, appear to have been committed pursuant to an official State policy of the Philippine government.”
This move comes a day before Bensouda, who has been publicly threatened by Duterte, retires from the ICC on June 15. She is replaced by Karim Khan, who has extensive experience working in international criminal tribunals.
Families of drug war victims earlier call on Bensouda to “issue a warrant of arrest against President Rodrigo Duterte and hold him while trial is ongoing.”
SEPTEMBER 15, 2021
The ICC’s pre-trial chamber greenlights the investigation into Duterte’s war on drugs and killings in Davao City between 2011 and 2016.
In the decision, ICC judges conclude that “there is a reasonable basis for the Prosecutor to proceed with an investigation, in the sense that the crime against humanity of murder appears to have been committed.”
The chamber also observes that “it is also apparent” that killings took place “pursuant or in furtherance of a state policy.”
COOPERATION. ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan urges the Philippine government to cooperate. Photo from ICC website.
OCTOBER 7, 2021
New ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan, who succeeded Bensouda, urges the Duterte government to cooperate with his office in the conduct of an investigation into the killings under the war on drugs, as well as those committed in Davao City between 2011 and 2016.
In a statement, Khan says he remains “willing to constructively engage with national authorities in accordance with the principle of complementarity and our obligations under the Statute.”
The investigation, he adds, seeks “to uncover the truth and aims to ensure accountability,” as well as focus their efforts to ensure a “successful, independent, and impartial investigation.”
NOVEMBER 10, 2021
The Duterte government formally requests the ICC to stop the ongoing investigation into the Philippine situation.
Through a letter signed by Philippine Ambassador to the Netherlands J. Eduardo Malaya, the government avails of an option available under the Rome Statute which allows it to ask the Prosecutor to defer the probe and recognize working domestic mechanisms.
NOVEMBER 19, 2021
ICC Prosecutor Khan announces that his office will temporarily suspend its investigation into the drug war killings in the Philippines but assures the public they will “continue its analysis of information already in its possession as well as new information it may receive.” This move to pause the probe is a matter of procedure.
NOVEMBER 24, 2021
ICC Prosecutor Khan says they will ask the Duterte administration for proof that it is genuinely investigating the killings under the violent war on drugs.
In a statement, he says that “such information must consist of tangible evidence, of probative value and a sufficient degree of specificity, demonstrating that concrete and progressive investigative steps have been or are currently being undertaken to ascertain the responsibility of persons for alleged conduct falling within the scope of the authorized ICC investigation.”
JUNE 24, 2022
Khan files a request before the ICC pre-trial chamber seeking to resume his office’s investigation into the killings under Duterte’s war on drugs and those committed in Davao City between 2011 and 2016. In a 53-page document, Khan says information collated by his office “does not demonstrate that concrete and progressive steps have been taken or are being taken by the competent national authorities.”
He adds that the government failed to show that any individual has been probed “for ordering, planning, or instigating” the killings. He also says there is no indication that “domestic authorities are investigating the alleged systematic nature of these and other killings.”
Khan also says the inter-agency drug war review panel “does not appear to possess powers or authority independent of the [Department of Justice] or have any specific investigative function.” What the DOJ-led panel did appears to be a mere “desk review” that “by itself does not constitute investigative activity.”
JUNE 26, 2022
In response, Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra says he respects Khan’s view but that “he should have waited for our efforts to bear some fruit.”
He added: “An investigation of this magnitude and complexity cannot be finished in a few months.” – Rappler.com
MANILA, Philippines — Six years after four policemen burst into her Manila slum shack and shot dead her husband and teenage son, Mary Ann Bonifacio fears for her own life as she fights for justice.
Bonifacio is pursuing the men in court in the hope of proving they unlawfully killed her loved ones — a rare example of officers tasked with carrying out Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte’s drug war facing trial.
Official data show more than 6,200 people have died in police anti-narcotics operations since Duterte swept to power in 2016 promising to rid the country of drugs.
But rights groups estimate tens of thousands of mostly poor men have been killed by officers and vigilantes, even without proof they were linked to drugs.
While the crackdown has been widely condemned and sparked an international investigation, only three policemen have been convicted for killing a drug suspect.
Lawyers say most families are too scared to go after their relatives’ killers or do not have the money or time to pursue a case in the Philippines’ creaky judicial system.
For Bonifacio, who has five other children, the decision to take legal action meant giving up a normal life.
Fearing the officers, who are on bail, or their supporters could go after her and her family, Bonifacio has moved house several times and is always looking over her shoulder.
“There is that possibility (of being killed),” she said, appearing older than her 48 years.
Bonifacio, who washes clothes and cleans houses to make ends meet, added: “I also have to think about my children’s safety.”
She filed a criminal complaint for murder in 2017, insisting her husband Luis, an unemployed decorator, and son Gabriel, a waiter, were not involved in drugs and were unarmed when police opened fire.
But it took the Ombudsman four years to bring the lesser charge of homicide against the policemen after finding their actions “went beyond the call of (self-) preservation”.
The officers said they acted in “self-defence” after the men shot at them, and have asked the court to dismiss the case for lack of evidence.
In court, Bonifacio sits next to the accused killers due to a lack of space. The men are set to give evidence on August 9.
“I do not wish them dead. I want to make them understand that what they did was wrong and ensure they will not do it to other people again,” Bonifacio said.
But accessing evidence held by the police, the same institution that prosecutes the drug war, is a major stumbling block, Bonifacio’s lawyer Kristina Conti said.
“For these kinds of crimes, the burden of accountability cannot simply fall upon the victims or survivors,” Conti added.
Raquel Fortun, one of only two forensic pathologists in the Philippines, has been working with a Catholic priest and families to gather evidence she hopes could be used in court.
She has been examining some of the exhumed remains of drug war victims whose bodies are being removed from temporary burial sites and cremated.
Her findings cast doubt on the most common police claim that suspects “fought back”.
“I’m seeing some cases where you’ve got gunshot wounds on the wrists, on the forearms, on the hands, and these are what we would typically call defence-type injuries,” she told AFP.
“So instinctively that individual must have put up an arm, a hand. So how can that person have fought back?”
At the height of the drug war, Bonifacio said killings happened almost “every night” in her hardscrabble neighbourhood.
Her traumatised youngest son, now 13, often wakes up crying from nightmares about being chased by police trying to kill him.
He turns off the television when Duterte appears, and runs away when he sees an officer.
The family lock their front door from early evening, get off a bus if a man resembling a policeman boards, and makes only brief visits to the cemetery in case someone attacks them.
Bonifacio said the policemen who shot her husband and son should have followed “the proper process” in what the authorities described as a drug sting operation.
But she also blames Duterte for ordering them to kill suspects.
“I think he should go to jail as well,” she said.
Duterte, who will lose his protection from prosecution when he steps down as president on Thursday, openly ordered the police to kill drug suspects if officers’ lives were in danger.
He has said he hopes his successor, Ferdinand Marcos Jr, will pursue the crackdown that Duterte admits failed to wipe out drugs.
“We continue to suffer the drug problem. It won’t go away because of the lure of billions for traffickers,” the outgoing leader said recently.
Duterte has refused to cooperate with an International Criminal Court probe into the crackdown.
Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra told the United Nations Human Rights Council in March that his office had reviewed around 300 cases of drug war operations that led to deaths.
So far charges have been filed in five of them, he told AFP Thursday.
Bonifacio is determined to continue her own quest for justice, if only to prevent another family from experiencing her anguish.
Marcos controlled people’s access and the kind of information they got and made sure he has the final say on his so-called truth
When the late ousted dictator Ferdinand Marcos imposed Martial Law on September 21, 1972 via Proclamation 1081, the first casualty was the country’s free press and mass media.
A free press is a key feature of a functioning democracy, where media serves as a government watchdog and source of information for citizens.
Marcos knew the pivotal role of the media and made sure to remove all their powers and privileges the moment he declared Martial Law.
Marcos controlled people’s access and the kind of information they got. He also stifled public criticism and ensured he had the final say on what he claimed was the truth.
Here were the ways Marcos attacked press freedom during his dictatorship:
1. Shutdown, takeover of private media
On September 22, 1972, Marcos issued Letter of Instruction No. 1, authorizing the military to take over the assets of major media outlets nationwide.
Marcos justified the order by saying it was done to prevent the use of privately-owned mass media against the government.
“[I]n order to prevent the use of privately owned newspapers, magazines, radio and television facilities and all other media of communications, for propaganda purposes against the government and its duly constituted authorities or for any purpose that tends to undermine the faith and confidence of the people in our government and aggravate the present national emergency, you are hereby ordered forthwith to take over and control or cause the taking over and control of all….for the duration of the present national emergency or until otherwise ordered by me or by my duly designated representative.”
On September 28, Marcos issued Letter of Instruction No. 1-A, ordering the military to specifically sequester facilities of ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation and Associated Broadcasting Corporation.
ABC facilities included:
radio stations DZMT, DZTM and DZWS
sister radio stations in Davao City, Cebu City, Laoag City and Dagupan City
Channel 5 and its sister TV stations in the cities of Davao and Cebu
Marcos linked the networks to a conspiracy with the communist party. He said the owners and officers of ABS-CBN and ABC “are engaged in subversive activities against the government” and are “participants in a conspiracy to overthrow the government”
Marcos’ order said the networks have “actively engaged in” or “allowed the use of its facilities and manpower in the broadcast and dissemination of subversive materials,” as well as “slanted,” “overly exaggerated news stories and commentaries,” “false, vile, foul and scurrilous statements and utterances.”
The dictator also said that these networks “had been used as indispensable instruments in the assassination attempt against the President of the Republic of the Philippines by maligning him.”
Almost 10,000 people lost their jobs, according to Filipino author E. San Juan Jr, citing reports from the International Press Institute and the Press Foundation of Asia.
It was the first time ABS-CBN was shut down. Almost 48 years later, it would again encounter a similar fate under President Rodrigo Duterte after the network failed to secure a franchise renewal.
2. Arrest of journalists, media owners
According to San Juan’s 1978 article, which was published in the award-winning magazine Index of Censorship: “On the eve of the proclamation of martial law, leading mass-circulation dailies, weekly magazines and journals, radio and television stations, were shut down by soldiers in full combat gear. Thousands of journalists, editors, radio and television personnel were arrested and thrown into jail without due process.”
Teodoro Locsin Sr., publisher of the Philippines Free Press, was arrested and imprisoned on the first week of Martial Law.
Manila Times publisher Chino Roces and several journalists including Luis Beltran, Maximo Soliven, Amando Doronila, and Juan Mercado were also arrested.
ABS-CBN owner, Eugenio Lopez Jr, was also arrested and imprisoned in Fort Bonifacio.
More journalists were harassed or imprisoned during the regime.
3. Blanket censorship, regulation
On September 25, the Department of Public Information issued Department Order No. 1, which prescribed policies and guidelines for the news media, strictly defining the kind of reporting they should do.
According to San Juan, the order said there was a need for “news reports of positive national value” to assist the administration of martial law.
He added that the order prohibited media from carrying “any editorial opinion, commentary, comments or asides” or any material critical of the military or law enforcement agencies.
The order also required news agencies to get clearance from the agency before publishing or airing any content. This extended to all foreign dispatches and cables.
4. Only Marcos-controlled media were allowed
At the time, only Marcos-controlled media, operated by his cronies, were allowed to operate. The Banahaw Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), owned by Marcos crony Roberto Benedicto, took over ABS-CBN. The National Media Production Center (NMPC) under the Ministry of Information took over Channel 4, which became the government’s official TV station. The Kanlaon Broadcasting System (KBS), another Benedicto-owned television station, took over the provincial stations to serve as platforms for government’s mass media peace-and-order campaigns.
Other Marcos-controlled media included Radio Philippines Network, the Voice of the Philippines, Philippines Broadcasting System, and the Daily Express.
With mass media becoming a propaganda tool for Marcos, people created an underground media, with activists establishing community papers and Filipino journalists writing for the so-called mosquito press in the 1980s.
5. Even religious publications weren’t able to escape Marcos’ order
In December 1976, Marcos ordered the closure of two church publications, the last free publications left, according to San Juan. This included the Signs of the Times, a mimeographed weekly put out by the Association of Major Religious Superiors of the Philippines, the largest Catholic organization, and The Communicator, a weekly newsletter published by the Jesuits.
Marcos also shut down two church-operated radio stations in Tagum, Davao and Malaybalay, Bukidnon in Mindanao. Catholic bishops were the fiercest critics of the martial law regime in the areas.
6. Expulsion of, visa rejections for foreign journalists
In 1976, Marcos expelled foreign journalist Arnold Zeitlin, bureau chief of the Associated Press, after accusing him of “malicious, false reporting” of the Jolo fighting.
In 1977, the government also denied the visa application of Bernard Wideman, correspondent for the Hong Kong-based Far Eastern Economic Review and The Washington Post, but later on rescinded the order. – Rappler.com
(UPDATED) UP professor Ela Atienza says the move signals an attempt at continuity and flexing of muscles on the part of the NTF-ELCAC, anti-terror, and anti-insurgency groups within the Duterte administration
MANILA, Philippines – Less than two weeks before the new administration takes over, the National Telecommunications Commission, upon the request of National Security Adviser (NSA) Hermogenes Esperon Jr., ordered the blocking of the websites of news organizations Bulatlat and Pinoy Weekly.
The move has legal infirmities, lawyers, including former Supreme Court senior associate justice Antonio Carpio, have pointed out, but Esperon pushed for it anyway. What does this indicate?
administration
MANILA, Philippines – Less than two weeks before the new administration takes over, the National Telecommunications Commission, upon the request of National Security Adviser (NSA) Hermogenes Esperon Jr., ordered the blocking of the websites of news organizations Bulatlat and Pinoy Weekly.
The move has legal infirmities, lawyers, including former Supreme Court senior associate justice Antonio Carpio, have pointed out, but Esperon pushed for it anyway. What does this indicate?
What did Esperon say?
In his statement on Wednesday, June 22, Esperon justified the blocking of the sites by citing excerpts from two stories published by news site Pinoy Weekly which supposedly mentioned armed struggle and the communist insurgency. He did not cite any excerpt from Bulatlat.
In Pinoy Weekly’s “Limang Katwiran ng Armadong Pakikibaka,” Esperon highlighted the line: “Marami pang ibang ehemplo sa mundo. Pero ang malinaw: Isang paraan ang armadong pakikibaka para radikal na mabago ang lipunan.” (There are other examples in the world. But one thing is clear: The armed struggle is one of the ways to radically change society.)
In Pinoy Weekly’s “NPA at Masa, ‘di Matitinag,” the NSA noted the line, “Sa huli, inatasan naman ng CPP (Communist Party of the Philippines) ang NPA (New People’s Army) na palakasin ang pagrerekrut at pagsasanay…(In the end, the CPP instructed the NPA to strengthen recruitment and training).
Esperon claimed that the excerpts fall under Section 9 and 10 of the anti-terror law. Section 9 of the anti-terror law does not define terrorism and only explains inciting to terrorism. It is section 4 of the law that defines terrorism.
Pinoy Weekly’s reply
In an editorial published on Thursday, June 23, Pinoy Weekly explained the excerpts chosen by Esperon.
Pinoy Weekly said that in the first story, they simply cited historical facts and knowledge: “Sa maraming pagkakataon sa kasaysayan ng mundo, pinili ng mga mamamayan na mag-aklas para baguhin ang kanilang lipunan. Walang matinong tao ang mag-iisip na pag-iindorso na ito sa New People’s Army (NPA) o paghihikayat na ito sa mga Pilipino na mag-aklas at sumapi sa NPA. Paghahayag lang ito ng historikal na kaalaman,” Pinoy Weekly said.
(In many instances in the history of the world, citizens chose to take up arms to change their society. There are no persons in their right minds who will think that this is an endorsement of the NPA or recruiting Filipinos to take up arms and join the NPA. This is just stating historical knowledge.)
In the second story that Esperon had also cited as justification, Pinoy Weekly said their writer simply quoted the statement of the CPP. “Malinaw pa sa sikat ng araw na sinisipi lang ng manunulat ang opisyal na pahayag ng CPP. Hindi niya pahayag iyan. Ngayon, bawal na bang sumipi? Bawal nang ikober ang armadong paglaban ng NPA? Hindi na puwedeng interbyuhin ang mga rebelde, kasi anumang pahayag nila, magagamit laban sa mga mamamahayag na puwedeng kasuhan ng pagsuporta sa ‘terorismo’? Ulitin natin: Grabeng kahibangan ito.”
(It’s clearer than the day that the writer is just quoting the official statement of the CPP. It’s not his personal statement. Now, is quoting prohibited? Is it illegal to cover the NPA’s armed struggle? We cannot interview the rebels because whatever they say can be used against journalists who can be accused of supporting “terrorism?” Let us reiterate: This is a different level of foolishness.)
Is it illegal to write about social ills?
Bulatlat and Pinoy Weekly, as alternative media, publish reports that focus on social problems. They often highlight the plight of the vulnerable and disadvantaged in their reports. There is nothing illegal about this under the anti-terror law.
Former Supreme Court spokesperson Ted Te said, “Writing about social ills does not fall under section 4 or section 9.”
A line, explained Te, in section 4 of the draconian law distinguishes advocacy and dissent from terrorism: “That,terrorism as defined in this section shall not include advocacy, protest, dissent, stoppage of work, industrial or mass action, and other similar exercises of civil and political rights.”
The National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) also explained that critical reporting should not be equated with affiliation with communist groups: “Bulatlat and Pinoy Weekly have existed for years and have built a track record of reporting on people’s issues. Sometimes, that reporting has been critical of the government and its policies, but it is dangerous to equate this with affiliation or support that the government now claims.”
Making sense of Esperon’s move
Edre Olalia, president of the National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers, said Esperon’s move appears to be an overreach of the anti-terror law: “They are non-sequitur as they were stretched to fit into a prejudged mindset. The faulty leaps in inference and conclusory claims to justify the blocking also appear to be an overreach application as well as a circumvention of the anti-terrorism act.”
Limited powers. Under the anti-terror law, the anti-terror council, which includes Esperon, has the following limitations, according to Olalia: a) they only have the power to designate, to proscribe, or to file cases; b) they have no power to label, and c) they should not label anyone or any organization.
Probable cause. The designation powers of the anti-terror council are defined in section 25 of the anti-terror law. But, before designating an individual or groups as terrorists, the anti-terror council must first establish probable cause.
Maria Ela Atienza, professor at the University of the Philippines (UP)-Diliman and former chairperson of the UP Diliman political science department said Esperon’s move may be part of “flexing muscles” and signaling continuity in policies since they will be leaving office in a few days.
Flexing muscles. “Of course, we don’t know what’s going on inside and in the transition between the outgoing administration and the Bongbong Marcos administration…But it may be the flexing of the muscles of the NTF-ELCAC (National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict) and the anti-terrorism, and the anti-insurgency groups within the Duterte administration.”
Continuity of repressive policies. According to Atienza, it also sends a signal of “continuity” that the current administration’s programs will be maintained by the next administration: “Others will say this is [a] last ditch effort on the part of the outgoing administration but I think this signals continuity. Continuity of the red-tagging. At the same time, the repression of traditional media, as well as progressive sectors.”
Endorsement. Incoming president Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. was technically the continuity candidate of Duterte. Even though Duterte did not endorse Marcos Jr., his party, the ruling party PDP-Laban endorsed the dictator’s son. Duterte’s daughter and incoming vice president Sara Duterte also ran with Marcos Jr.
Same defense chief. Among the key security officials who will be appointed by Marcos is retired General Jose Faustino Jr., who served as Philippine Army commanding general and Armed Forces of the Philippines chief of staff under Duterte. He will be the next defense chief.
Marcos has named retired political science professor Clarita Carlos as Esperon’s successor – the first woman to hold the post. Will she continue Esperon’s initiatives, given her stated opposition to red-tagging? – Rappler.com
MANILA, Philippines — Human Rights Watch (HRW) denounced on Wednesday the order of the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) to block websites alleged by the government to be affiliated with or supportive of the communist movement.
“The National Security Council’s blocking of media and civil society websites is yet another dimension to the government’s outrageous, rights abusing efforts to red-tag and harass civil society actors, including journalists and activists,” Phil Robertson, HRW deputy director for Asia, said in a statement.
“This is nothing less than a brazen attempt to undermine them and censor these media outlets and groups,” he said.
HRW is an international group based in New York City that investigates rights abuses.
The NTC issued the order on June 8 at the request of NSC Director General Hermogenes Esperon Jr. It directed internet service providers to block the website of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), its armed wing New People’s Army, and the umbrella organization National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP), and 26 other supposed communist-linked websites.
In reaction, the CPP said only seven websites were actually affiliated with the CPP and NDFP.
The six are websites of local cause-oriented groups, three for alternative news, two for progressive journalists and academics, two for international organizations, two for international alternative news and a news blog, and a blog of Indian activists.
Robertson stressed that the government “has offered no solid evidence whatsoever to back up its claims that these groups work with the communists, let alone are preparing to bear arms against the government.”
“The NSC instead falls back on vague, catch-all weasel words, using descriptions like ‘affiliates’ of the insurgents, to throw a blanket over these civil society groups,” he said.
Robertson urged the NTC to refuse the NSC request.
“The NTC should make sure that press freedom and freedom of expression online is upheld and respected,” he said.
Marcos’ disinformation machinery – which was years in the making – was complemented by his alliance with Duterte and the disinformation that the President enabled at the state level
MANILA, Philippines – On social media, Ferdinand Marcos Jr. needed to have all pieces in place to stage a Malacañang comeback: he had a network of propagandist assets, popular myths that justified his family’s obscene wealth, and narratives that distorted the horrors of his father’s rule.
He had even asked Cambridge Analytica to rebrand his family’s image.
The living component among these pieces was Rodrigo Duterte – an ally who, when elected president, normalized Marcos’ machinery, painting over a picture of murders and plunder to show glory and heroism instead.
“I think that really, if we are to make a metaphor [to] describe the role of Duterte to Marcos’ win, it’s really Duterte being the sponsor or a ninong to Marcos Jr…. I think Duterte ultimately is the godfather of this all,” said Fatima Gaw, assistant professor at the University of the Philippines (UP) Diliman.
The alliance
Marcos’ disinformation machinery that was years in the making was complemented by his longtime ties to the Duterte family. Before “Uniteam,” there was “AlDub” or Alyansang Duterte-Bongbong. Marcos courted Rodrigo Duterte in 2015, but Duterte chose Alan Peter Cayetano to be his running mate. Even then, calls for a Duterte-Marcos tandem persisted.
Gaw said Duterte played a part in driving interest for Marcos-related social media content and making it profitable. The first milestone for this interest, according to Gaw, was when Marcos filed his certificate of candidacy for vice president in 2015. They saw an influx of search demand for Marcos history on Google.
“There’s interest already back then but it was amplified and magnified by the alliance with Duterte. So every time there’s a pronouncement from Duterte about, for example, the burial of Marcos Sr. in the Libingan ng mga Bayani, that also spiked interest, and that interest is actually cumulative, it’s not like it’s a one-off thing,” Gaw said in a June interview with Rappler.
Using CrowdTangle, Rappler scanned posts in 2016 with the keyword “Marcos,” yielding over 62,000 results from pages with admins based in the Philippines. Spikes can be seen during key events like the EDSA anniversary, the Pilipinas 2016 debate, election day, and instances after Duterte’s moves to bury the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani.
On February 19, 2016, Duterte said that if elected president, he would allow the burial of the late dictator at the Libingan ng mga Bayani. On August 7, 2016, Duterte said that Marcos deserved to be buried at the Libingan ng mga Bayani for being a soldier and a former president. The burial pushed through on November 18, 2016 and became a major event that allowed the massive whitewashing of the Martial Law period.
Related content would then gain views, prompting platforms to recommend them and make them more visible, Gaw said. In a research she conducted in 2021 with De La Salle University (DLSU) communication professor Cheryll Soriano, they found that when searching “Marcos history” on YouTube, videos made by amateur content creators or people unaffiliated with professional groups were recommended more than news, institutional, and academic sources.
“A big part of Marcos’ success online and spreading his message and propaganda is because he leveraged both his political alliances with [the] Dutertes, as the front-facing tandem and political partnership. And on the backend, whatever ecosystem that the Duterte administration has established, is something that Marcos already can tap,” Gaw said.
In an upcoming study on social media and disinformation narratives authored by Aries Arugay and Justin Baquisal, they identified four thematic disinformation narratives in the last election campaign – authoritarian nostalgia/fantasy, conspiracy theories (Tallano gold, Yamashita treasure), “strongman,” and democratic disillusionment.
Arugay, a political science professor at UP Diliman, said these four narratives were the “raw materials” for further polarization in the country.
“Para sa mga kabataan, ’yung mga 18-24, fantasy siya. Kasi naririnig natin ‘yun, ah kaya ko binoto si Bongbong Marcos kasi gusto kong maexperience ‘yung Martial Law,” Arugay said in an interview with Rappler in June.
(For the youth, those aged 18-24, it’s a fantasy. We hear that reasoning, that they voted for Bongbong Marcos because they want to experience Martial Law.)
Arugay described this as “unthinkable,” but pervasive false narratives that the Martial Law era was the golden age of Philippine economy, that no Filipino was poor during that time, that the Philippines was the richest country next to Japan, among many other claims, allowed for such a fantasy to thrive.
Institutionalizing disinformation
While traditional propaganda required money and machinery, usually from a top-down system, Gaw said Duterte co-opted and hijacked the existing systems to manipulate the news cycle and online discourse to make a name for himself.
“I think what Duterte has done…is to institutionalize disinformation at the state level,” she said.
This meant that the amplification of Duterte’s messaging became incorporated in activities of the government, perpetuated by the Presidential Communications Operations Office, the Philippine National Police, and the government’s anti-communist task force or the NTF-ELCAC, among others.
Early on, Duterte’s administration legitimized partisan vloggers by hiring some of them in government. Other vloggers served as crisis managers for the PCOO, monitoring social media, alerting the agency about sentiments that were critical of the administration, and spreading positive news about the government.
Bloggers were organized by Pebbles Duque, niece of Health Secretary Francisco Duque III, who himself was criticized over the government’s pandemic response.
Mocha Uson, one of the most infamous pro-Duterte disinformation peddlers, was appointed PCOO assistant secretary earlier in his term. (She ended up campaigning for Isko Moreno in the last election.)
Now, we’re seeing a similar turn of events – Marcos appointed pro-Duterte vlogger Trixie Cruz-Angeles as his press secretary. Under Duterte’s administration, Angeles had been a social media strategist of the PCOO.
Following the Duterte administration’s lead, they are again eyeing the accreditation of vloggers to let them cover Malacañang briefings or press conferences.
“So in the Duterte campaign, of course there were donors, supporters paying for the disinformation actors and workers. Now it’s actually us, the Filipino people, funding disinformation, because it’s now part of the state. So I think that’s the legacy of the Duterte administration and what Marcos has done, is actually to just leverage on that,” Gaw said.
Targeting critics
What pieces of disinformation are Filipinos inadvertently funding? Gaw said that police pages are some of the most popular pages to spread disinformation on Facebook, and that they don’t necessarily talk about police work but instead the various agenda of the state, such as demonizing communist groups, activist groups, and other progressive movements.
Emboldened by their chief Duterte, who would launch tirades against his critics during his speeches and insult, curse, and red-tag them, police pages and accounts spread false or misleading content that target activists and critics. They do this by posting them directly or by sharing them from dubious, anonymously-managed pages, a Rappler investigation found.
Facebook later took down a Philippine network that was linked to the military or police, for violating policies on coordinated inauthentic behavior.
The platform has also previously suspended Communications Undersecretary and NTF-ELCAC spokesperson Lorraine Badoy who has long been targeting and brazenly red-tagging individuals and organizations that are critical of the government. She faces several complaints before the Office of the Ombudsman accusing her of violating the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and the Code of Conduct for public officials.
“PCOO as an office before wasn’t really a big office, they’re not popular, but all of a sudden they become so salient and so visible in media because they’re able to understand that half of the battle of governance is not just doing the operations of it but also the PR side of it,” Gaw said.
Facebook users recirculated a post Badoy made in January 2016, wherein she talked about the murders of Boyet and Primitivo Mijares under Martial Law. In that post, just six years ago, Badoy called Bongbong an “idiot, talentless son of the dead dickhead dictator.”
Badoy has since disowned such views. In a post on May 2022, Badoy said she only “believed all those lies I was taught in UP” and quoted Joseph Meynard Keynes: “When the facts change, I change my mind.”
Angeles also said the same in June 2022 when netizens surfaced her old tweets criticizing the Marcos family. She said, “I changed my mind about it, aren’t we entitled to change our minds?”
But the facts haven’t changed. A 2003 Supreme Court decision declared $658 million worth of Marcos Swiss deposits as ill-gotten. Imelda Marcos’ motion for reconsideration was “denied with finality.” According to Amnesty International, 70,000 were imprisoned, 34,000 were tortured, and 3,240 were killed under Martial Law.
The rise of alternative news sources
RED-TAGGER. National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC) Spokesperson Lorraine Badoy at a hearing on the issue of red-tagging/red-baiting of certain celebrities, personalities, institutions, and organizations on November 24, 2020.
Outside government channels, Badoy co-hosts an SMNI program named “Laban Kasama ng Bayan” with Jeffrey “Ka Eric” Celiz – who is supposedly a former rebel – where they talk about the communist movement. SMNI is the broadcasting arm of embattled preacher Apollo Quiboloy’s Kingdom of Jesus Christ church.
SMNI has been found to be at the core of the network of online assets who red-tag government critics and attack the media. The content that vloggers and influencers produce to defend Duterte’s administration now bleeds into newscasts by organizations with franchises granted by the government.
The first report of the Digital Public Pulse, a project co-led by Gaw, found that on YouTube, leading politician and government channels, including that of Marcos, directly reach their audiences without the mediation of the media.
“This shift to subscribing to influencers and vloggers as sources of news and information, and now subscribing to nontraditional or non-mainstream sources of information that are [still considered institutional] because they have franchises and they have licenses to operate, it’s part of the trend of the growing distrust in mainstream media,” Gaw said.
She said that given the patronage relationship that religious organizations have with politicians, alternative news sources like SMNI and NET25 don’t necessarily practice objective, accountable, or responsible journalism because their interest is different from the usual journalistic organization.
“I think that in general these two are politically tied and economically incentivized to perform the role that the administration and the incoming presidency of Marcos want them to play, and exactly, serving as an alternative source of information,” she said.
A day after he was proclaimed, Marcos held a press conference with only three reporters, who belonged to SMNI, GMA News, and NET25.
Rappler reviewed NET25’s Facebook posts and found that it has a history of attacking the press, Vice President Leni Robredo, and her supporters. The network had also released inaccurate reports that put Robredo in a bad light.
Gaw said because these alternative news channels owned by religious institutions have a mutually-benefiting relationship with the government, they are given access to government officials and to stories that other journalists might not have access to. There is thus no incentive for them to report critically and perform the role of providing checks and balances.
“They would essentially be an extension of state propaganda,” Gaw said.
For Arugay, the Marcos campaign was able to take advantage of how the state influenced the standards of journalism. “Part [of their strategy] is least exposure to unfriendlies, particularly media that’s critical. I think at the end they saw the power of critical media. And once they were able to get an opportunity, they wanted to turn things around. And this is where democracy suffers,” Arugay said.
Under Duterte, journalists and news organizations faced a slew of attacks that threatened their livelihood and freedom. Rappler was banned from covering Malacañang, faced trumped-up charges, then witnessed its CEO Maria Ressa being convicted of cyber libel. Broadcasting giant ABS-CBN was shut down. Journalist Frenchie Mae Cumpio is in her second year in jail.
While the international community lauds the courageous and critical reporting of Philippine journalists, Filipinos are shutting them out. (READ: Pro-Marcos, Duterte accounts step up attacks on journalists as 2022 polls near)
All bases covered
While Duterte mostly used a Facebook strategy to win the election, Marcos went all out in 2022, and it paid off.
“[The] strategy of the Marcos Jr. campaign became very complicated than the Duterte campaign because back then they were really, they just invested on Facebook. [That’s not the case here]…. No social media tech or platform was disregarded,” Arugay said.
At one point in 2021, YouTube became the most popular social media platform in the Philippines, beating Facebook. Whereas Facebook at least has a third-party fact-checking program, YouTube barely has any strong policies against disinformation.
“I think with the Marcos campaign, they knew Facebook was a battleground, they deployed all their efforts there as well, but they knew they had to win YouTube. Because that’s where we can build more sophisticated lies and convoluted narratives than on Facebook,” Gaw said.
A study by FEU technical consultant Justin Muyot found that Marcos had the highest number of estimated “alternative videos” – those produced by content creators – on YouTube. These videos aimed to shame candidates critical of Marcos and his supporters, endear Marcos to the public, and sow discord between the other presidential candidates.
YouTube is also where hyperpartisan channels thrive by posing as news channels. These were found to be in one major community that includes SMNI and the People’s Television Network. This legitimizes them as a “surrogate to journalistic reporting.”
“That’s why you’re able to sell historical disinformation, you’re able to [have] false narratives about the achievements of the Marcoses, or Bongbong Marcos in particular. You’re able to launch counterattacks to criticisms of Marcos in a very coherent and coordinated way because you’re able to have that space, time, and the immersion required to buy into these narratives,” Gaw said.
Apart from YouTube, Gaw said that Marcos had a “more clear understanding of a cross-platform strategy” across social media.
On Twitter, freshly-made accounts were set up to trend pro-Marcos hashtags. The platform later suspended over 300 accounts from the Marcos supporter base for violating its platform manipulation and spam policy.
Ruining Robredo was a ‘coordinated effort’
LONE WOMAN IN RACE. Vice President Leni Robredo speaks at a people’s rally in Pangasinan in April. Photo courtesy of VP Leni Media Bureau
Duterte and Marcos had a common target over the years: Robredo. She is another female who was constantly undermined by Duterte, along with Leila de Lima, a victim of character assassination who continues to suffer jail time because of it.
“It has been a coordinated effort of Duterte and Marcos to really undermine her, reap or cultivate hatred against her for whatever reason and to actually attach her to people and parties or groups who have political baggage, for example LP (Liberal Party) even if she’s not running for LP,” Gaw said.
The meta-partisan “news” ecosystem on YouTube, studied by researchers of the Philippine Media Monitoring Laboratory, was found to deliver propaganda using audio-visual and textual cues traditionally associated with broadcast news media. They revealed patterns of “extreme bias and fabricated information,” repeating falsehoods that, among others, enforce negative views on Robredo’s ties with the Liberal Party and those that make her seem stupid.
Rappler found that the top misogynistic attack words used against Robredo on Facebook posts are “bobo,” “tanga,” “boba,” and “madumb,” all labeling her as stupid.
Fact-checking initiative Tsek.PH also found Robredo to be the top victim of disinformation based on their fact checks done in January 2022.
“By building years and years of lies and basically giving her, manufacturing her political baggage along the way, that made her campaign in [2022] very hard to win, very hard to convert new people because there’s already ambivalence against her,” Gaw said.
Arugay and Gaw both said that the media, academe, and civil society failed to act until it was too late. “The election result and [and where the] political landscape is at now is a product of that neglect,” Gaw said.
There is still a lack of a systemic approach on how to engage with disinformation, said Gaw, since much of it is still untraceable and underground. To add, Arugay said tech companies are to blame for their nature of prioritizing profit.
“Just like in 2016, the disinformation network and architecture responsible for the 2022 electoral victory of Marcos Jr. will not die down. They will not fade. They will not wither away. They will just transition because the point is no longer to get him elected, the point is for him to govern or make sure that he is protected while in power,” Arugay said.
When the new administration comes in, it will be the public’s responsibility to hold elected officials accountable. But if this strategy – instilled by Duterte’s administration and continued by Marcos – continues, crucifying critics on social media and in real life, blaming past administrations and the opposition for the poor state of the country, and concocting narratives to fool Filipinos, what will reality in the Philippines look like down the line? – Rappler.com
For some journalists, election night was a nightmare possibility they tried not to dwell on, clinging to the smallest shred of hope until the possibility became certainty. As results poured in at an unprecedented speed on the evening of May 9, they watched on TV screens as it became clear that they were witnessing a democratic exercise that saw more than 31 million Filipinos choose the dictator’s son to sit in Malacañang.
“For the first time I felt really threatened,” said one reporter for an online news outlet who, like many others interviewed for this piece, opted to remain anonymous for fear of backlash. “The threat was real. I felt unsure if I still want to be a journalist moving forward.”
The perceived threat is that a Ferdinand Marcos Jr. presidency would see a repeat of the repressive media policies his father implemented during Martial Law and in the years before his ouster. Censorship. Shutdowns. Takeovers.
It’s not like Marcos Jr. would be starting from scratch. The administration of his predecessor, President Rodrigo Duterte, has relentlessly attacked independent and critical media. The Philippine Daily Inquirer has been financially weakened. Rappler has faced several court charges. ABS-CBN is gone from free TV.
The campaign trail and beyond
Then, there was Marcos Jr.’s treatment of journalists covering him during the election campaign. Access was difficult and interviews to scrutinize his plans for the country were scarce and often only done with outlets the campaign liked.
When reporters tried asking questions during campaign sorties, they were blocked, pushed and shoved by his security detail. After the elections, Marcos Jr.’s spokespersons have ignored questions and have arranged interviews exclusive to select networks.
All these have been raising doubts in the minds of some journalists. Would staying in a profession of truth telling still be worth it in the face of another administration potentially hostile to the press?
Reporters Without Borders, which monitors press freedom, notes in its 2022 fact file on the Philippines the return of “‘red-tagging’ – a practice inherited from the colonial era and the Cold War, whereby journalists who do not toe the government line are branded as ‘subversive elements’ or ‘reds’, which amounts to pointing them out to law enforcement as legitimate targets for arbitrary arrest or, worse still, summary execution.”
Others, as Regine Cabato of the Washington Post details in a recent dispatch, are swamped by a steady stream of online harassment that can get so foul that, she writes, “I’m almost relieved when someone calls me a slut or some other generic slur, because I’m always expecting something worse.”
The hostility would be a bonus on top of the long hours, low pay and threats to their physical and psychological safety that journalists have been working in for decades.
“To be a journalist in a third-world country like the Philippines, you have to admit that what you make isn’t enough. And your family also has to make sacrifices for you to live that dream and that purpose. Am I going to put them under more pressure? Am I going be more of a hassle?” said another reporter for an online news outlet.
A March 2021 survey by the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines of more than 200 media workers found that 44% of them receive just up to P15,000 monthly, 55% do not get overtime pay, half do not get holiday pay, hazard pay and insurance, and 40% do not have access to a health card.
As more journalism work shifts online, the International Federation of Journalists wrote in 2021 that “the vast majority of the new jobs being created are poorly paid, more precarious and with fewer benefits than the jobs they seek to replace.”
Journalists in the digital space — and almost all journalists are, in varying degrees — “work longer hours, have an overwhelming workload, are expected to have more skills than their colleagues but receive less training, have more health and safety problems, face a massive increase in ethical and professional issues, work with smaller budgets and fewer resources and earn less.”
Newsroom support needed
Despite the poor working conditions that many Filipino journalists face, more would be inclined to stay and soldier on in this often thankless profession — if they had the backing of their managers. However, as newsrooms come under increasing political and economic pressure, this has become difficult in many newsrooms and impossible in some.
“A lot of reporters, they’re willing to [commit to] the fight,” said one newspaper reporter. “But at the end of the day, it matters who’s with you in that fight. If reporters are the only ones fighting for this but the editors won’t back them up, the owners won’t back them up, then it’s just tiring.”
For the newspaper reporter, Marcos Jr.’s victory in the May polls was just the last straw. The reporter has seen how the press yielded inches not just to the government but to other “sacred cows” in the past six years under Duterte, leaving doubts whether journalism can mount a proper defense if it gets attacked again.
“We didn’t fight hard enough when Duterte pushed us against the wall,” said the newspaper reporter. “I don’t think newsrooms will suddenly grow a backbone just because they’re up against a more difficult opponent. If anything, they will just cower more. They will just toe the line.”
Reporters Without Borders writes that mainstream media in the Philippines has seen increasing levels of ownership concentration, and that in some corporate newsrooms journalists “have little editorial autonomy, self-censorship is the rule and respect for journalistic ethics is not guaranteed.”
“The internet and social media offer a space where many independent media can work freely but their economic viability is uncertain,” it also notes.
A senior journalist who has since left the industry had this to say: “I left journalism with a clear head, but I was frustrated. I entered the media outlet I was in because I believed in the values that it upheld, but over the years, I saw these values slowly being eroded. It became harder to stay mainly because of that, and being paid so little did not help.”
Fears of censorship, danger of irrelevance
The imagined difficulty for journalism under another Marcos administration varies from journalist to journalist. Some fear a martial law redux. Others say the press would be bogged down by battling bogus court cases. Most are grappling with the decline in trust in journalism.
“Censorship,” the former journalist said. “During the presidential campaign, stories criticizing the Marcoses were already being sanitized. Some stories would not even be published online to limit circulation. I’m certain this will get worse following Marcos’ win.”
Those moves would see even more journalists leave the profession to work in advertising, public relations and other industries “as their safety nets become fewer and less reliable,” the former journalist, who now works at a high-rise in Bonifacio Global City, said, adding “journalism being its own reward is romantic but not sustainable.”
Those that do stay will still have to convince more Filipinos to rely on them for news and information.
“The disinformation campaign has succeeded farther than our practice of truth-telling and fact-checking,” said one broadcast journalist. “What can we do if people believe more in fake news, fake information? Is it even worth it anymore? Our pay is low, harassment is a real problem, and then they won’t believe you?”
For Lian Buan, a reporter for Rappler who covered the Marcos campaign, the president-elect’s 31 million votes “is an indictment of facts and journalism as a profession” that has left the industry unsure of how to move forward.
“Maybe we’re really going into an information war more than anything else, where facts are drowned out, journalists are very discredited,” Buan said. “What purpose do journalists serve if those they serve don’t listen to them?”
The 2022 Digital News Report by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism confirms this bleak assessment. While overall trust in news among Filipinos rose by five percentage points to 37%, this is still below the global average of 42%. Trust ratings of individual news brands are falling, along with interest in news and its consumption.
Meanwhile, trust in social media influencers is on the rise. Research by communications professors Cheryll Ruth Soriano and Edson Tandoc Jr. showed that influencers achieve this by propping themselves up as everyday people in a quest to find truth that is only now coming to light because of social media — all while discrediting traditional media channels as elite and untrustworthy.
It is this that drives one newspaper reporter to continue working in the industry, despite poor work conditions and the looming threats. “We need to continue with what we’re doing,” the reporter said. “Because if we stop, if we don’t mobilize, we might get drowned by lies, by false information. That’s the scary thing that should not happen.”
To help keep that from happening, some newsrooms have ventured into unfamiliar platforms like TikTok and YouTube, hoping to combat disinformation where it is found and also meet their intended audience where they are.
These attempts to make the news more relatable and accessible do not come without dangers: There is the tension, for example, of being more engaging without losing the rigor and principles that help define journalism.
Experimenting with new formats and platforms commonly also means more work for journalists, often for no extra pay.
Acknowledge a defeat to stay in the fight
The first step to keeping the fight against disinformation going, Buan said, is for the press to acknowledge that they have lost the battle to microinfluencers and vloggers who are now dominating what she called a field that journalists were masters at.
“Every solution and every adjustment that we will think of, if not premised on the acceptance that we lost, might just be futile because we wouldn’t be able to attack it in the way that it should be addressed,” she said.
But, she said, journalists should not be the only soldiers in this battle for truth and trust, she said.
“This will be a whole-of-society approach. It can’t be just journalists anymore,” she said. “If this is a war on truth, then we need more defenders as never been needed before.”
“The power of journalism in a country [depends on] its journalists,” the former journalist, who had expected to stay in the profession until retirement age, said. “They need the unyielding support of their employers, the decent compensation to go with the profession, and the willingness of their readers to engage.” — with Jonathan de Santos
