Where are ‘those reporters’?

“Reporters thrive on the world's misfortune. For this reason they often take an indecent pleasure in events that dismay the rest of humanity.”

—Russell Baker

 

By Alex P. Vidal 

 

WE are aware that fellow media workers who pen the articles or broadcast the news or commentaries that earn the ire of onion-skinned public officials and despotic leaders should be hailed as the real heroes and martyrs, not necessarily their publishers or station managers who have nothing to do with the genesis of the litigation. 

Heroes if they are hauled into court for libel or cyber-libel, or jailed for exposing anomalies in government.

Martyrs if they are killed in line of duty.

Publishers and station managers themselves become heroes and martyrs if they are jailed or murdered also “in line of duty.”

When a newspaper or a radio station is slapped with a libel case by government authorities—elected and appointed officials, the police, the military—the source or sources of the purported libelous items are normally the reporters, columnists, and anchormen.

But the aggrieved party files the case (libel and cyber-libel are criminal cases in the Philippines; libel is a civil case in the United States) against the reporter as the author, the editor, the publisher, and the circulation officer for the print media.

The aggrieved party sues the anchorman or reporter and the station manager for the broadcast media (there were few cases in the past when the network president was included in the case).

Television networks face the same dilemma with their radio counterparts.

The “fad” nowadays is cyber-libel, which applies primarily to offenders in the Internet and online journalism and the social media. 

 

-o0o-

 

We write this subject matter amid the COVID-19 pandemic after we came across a very interesting story written most recently about Rappler CEO Maria Ressa in the National Public Radio (NPR), which ostensibly immortalized the 56-year-old Filipino-American journalist.  

In that article entitled, “Philippine Journalist Maria Ressa: 'Journalism Is Activism'”, Ressa was quoted as saying: "In a battle for facts, in a battle for truth, journalism is activism.”

The article read: “Ressa, who is internationally known and lauded for standing up to Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte's escalating attacks on the press, tells NPR that circumstances in the Philippines have forced her to evolve as a journalist.”

It added: “Her news organization's battles against online disinformation and Duterte's administration are the focus of A Thousand Cuts, a documentary that debuted in January at the Sundance Film Festival and will be released virtually in the U.S. this Friday (August 7).”

The articles narrated that “Ressa and Rappler, the Manila-based news site she runs, first drew the ire of the Duterte administration soon after he took office in 2016. Rappler started critically covering the president's brutal war against drugs and has remained in Duterte's crosshairs as his crackdown on the press has intensified.”

 

-o0o-

 

“Over the years, Ressa has seen her reporters expelled from the presidential palace, endured near-constant attacks by pro-Duterte trolls and navigated a slew of lawsuits.

“She tells NPR it was her arrest on charges of cyber libel in February 2019 that changed her thinking about her role. Ressa realized her detention was an abuse of power. On posting bail, she says, "I just started speaking in a way that I would probably not have done," given her traditional journalistic training.

“Almost immediately after her release, Ressa began to speak more openly against abuse of power and the "weaponization" of Philippine law against journalists and government critics, and appealed for others to do the same.

She tells NPR that becoming part of the story has been a "challenge” but  “when your own rights have been abused and you have evidence of that abuse of power, why should you not speak, especially if the data backs it?" 

 

-o0o-

 

IT appears that Ressa, a media boss who apparently never wrote an article against President Duterte, has become press freedom’s accidental heroine; she became an overnight sensation, a symbol of media oppression, and hailed as a fighter for the victims of harassment and attempt by authoritarian rulers to curtail the press.      

As a CEO of Rappler, a social news network, Ressa is equivalent to a publisher in the publication, or a radio and TV station manager.

Publishers don’t (or seldom) write libelous items, or articles that enrage public officials and bad elements in society.

The public may be interested to know “those reporters” who have been “expelled from presidential palace (and) endured near-constant attacks by pro-Duterte trolls and navigated a slew of lawsuits.”

Those reporters, or their articles, must be the reasons why Mr. Duterte became so enraged at Rappler; those reporters could be the sources of the president’s enmity toward that particular media entity; why he was up in arms—until somebody, a private person, “picked up the cudgels” and sued Ressa, et al for cyber-libel that resulted in their conviction in the trial court.

Strangely, in all the accolades and tiaras heaped upon Ressa internationally and in the Philippines, “those reporters” have been obscured if not recognized.

In fact, “those reporters” should be the ones to be hailed as real heroes of press freedom; “those reporters” should have been Ressa’s Time Magazine co-“Persons of the Year in 2018”. 

It’s good to be a paragon of press freedom, but let’s also give credit where credit is due.

(The author, who is now based in New York City, used to be the editor of two local dailies in Iloilo)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A Babel once again

“If it had been possible to build the Tower of Babel without climbing it, it would have been permitted.”

—Franz Kafka

By Alex P. Vidal

WE have now become a Babel, or a story about a city in Shinar where the building of a tower is held in Genesis to have been halted by the confusion of tongues.

What’s happening in the Philippines is actually like a scene of noise or confusion.

While things are apparently quite in the local front, the country is on the brink of chaos once again what with so many opinions clashing whether the anti-terror bill will violate the human rights of the Filipinos, or save them from home-grown terrorists like those who authored the mayhem in Marawi City three years ago. 

It’s now up for President Rodrigo Roa Duterte to turn it into law. 

There are strong indications the proponents will have the last laugh on the furor.

Hardly had the duel of opinions on anti-terror bill simmered down in the streets and in the media fora, another wave of controversy distracted the nation from its uproarious battle against the COVID-19.

The conviction of Rappler’s Maria Ressa and Reynaldo Santos Jr. by the trial court for “cyberlibel” on June 16 has placed the Philippines in the global radar once more.

-o0o-

This double whammy came in quick succession as the President was worrying where to get the next stimulus fund for the families sidelined and “impoverished” by the pandemic-initiated lockdown.

People were again divided whether the Manila court verdict was “a portent of things to come” for the freedom of the press and expression or “it should serve as a wake up call” for journalists to be more responsible and accountable when criticizing people who don’t belong in government.

Others have condemned the verdict as setting “an extraordinarily damaging precedent.”

The ruling was issued by a court in Manila, where attendance was limited due to coronavirus prevention measures. The news website Rappler, Ressa, its executive editor, and former researcher and writer  Santos Jr were accused of cyberlibel over a story that alleged links between a businessman and a top judge.

-o0o-

Rappler was found to have no liability, but both Ressa and Santos were found guilty. 

The court ruled that they are entitled to post-conviction bail, and can appeal against the verdict. The convicted journalists have been ordered to pay P200,000 in moral damages and another P200,000 in exemplary damages.

Rappler and its officers and staff have faced at least 11 investigations and court cases even as press freedom advocates decry that media freedom in the Philippines has deteriorated severely under the Duterte administration.

Out of 180 countries, the Philippines now ranks 136th on the Reporters Without Borders (RSF) World Press Freedom Index. 

It was reported that journalists have been targeted through judicial harassment, online campaigns waged by pro-Duterte troll armies, and violence. 

Local politicians, it warned, “can have reporters silenced with complete impunity”.

Earlier in May, ABS-CBN, was forced off air by a cease-and-desist order that press freedom advocates condemned as a brazen attempt to silence the press. 

Soon after, the new anti-terrorism act has been passed in congress that allows warrantless arrests, weeks of detention without charge and other powers that rights groups fear could be used against government critics.

(The author, who is now based in New York City, used to be the editor of two local dailies in Iloilo)

      

   

We suffered worst than Rappler's Maria Ressa

"When the public's right to know is threatened, and when the rights of free speech and free press are at risk, all of the other liberties we hold dear are endangered."
-- Christopher Dodd

By Alex P. Vidal

NEW YORK CITY -- Rappler's Maria Ressa and her writer Reynaldo Santos Jr. have posted a bail of P100,000 each before the Manila Regional Trial Court for their temporary liberty in a cyber libel case the Department of Justice (DOJ) had "revived" for an on-line article written in 2012 that "maligned" businessman Wilfredo Keng.
In Iloilo City in the Philippines in 1999 or 20 years ago, I posted a total bail of P380,000 for the incredible 38 counts of libel cases filed by former Councilor Ramon Cua Locsin and the late Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) revenue district officer Godofredo San Jose Jr.
Our late publisher Marcos "Mark" Villalon and columnist Wenceslao Mateo Jr., my co-accused, posted the same amount each.
The libel cases first stemmed from an article written by Mr. Mateo in Sun.Star Iloilo Daily about Locsin's purported "conflict of interest" in relation to the purchase of a lot for the relocation of several displaced squatters in Brgy. So-oc, Molo district.
In Mr. Mateo's analysis, Locsin's firm appeared to gain benefit once the purchase would materialize.
Instead of disputing Mr. Mateo or writing a "letter-to-the editor" like what other forlorn public officials normally do in a similar situation, Locsin filed a libel case.

-o0o-

Like Ressa, who did not write the story about Keng, publisher Villalon and this writer were included in the charge sheet as publisher and editor-in-chief, respectively.
Reporters Ednalyn Belonio, Ruby Silubrico, and Lorelie Panes were initially included in the first wave of the case, but they were dropped in the succeeding cases, which arrived like a torrent of hurricane in an unprecedented volume.
Mr. San Jose entered the picture after Silubrico wrote a story about an incident in the jampacked SM City food court, where he was accused of tossing a P500 bill on a table occupied by several reporters, including this writer, who were there to cover the BIR's official receipts raffle promo.
I ordered two of the reporters, Fernando "Kapid" Gabio and Francis Terania, to immediately return the money to Mr. San Jose. We also reported the incident in the Mandurriao Police Station.
Mr. San Jose, who was frequently visited by reporters in his BIR office, according to him, was infuriated. He insisted one of the reporters who sat on the table was the one who demanded money from him earlier. When ribbed, he couldn't identify the reporter.

-o0o-

Then Bombo Radyo "Zona Libre" anchor and now Aksyon Radyo station manager John Paul Tia arranged a one-on-one joust between Mr. San Jose and this writer in his night program, where I politely reminded Mr. San Jose the SM City food court incident was the first time I ever met him personally; I went there to honor his invitation in a letter sent to our office a week earlier.
Mr. San Jose's libel case had been knocked out in the prosecutor's office.
Interestingy--and scandalously, all of the libel cases filed by Councilor Locsin had been "whisked" with mind-boggling alacrity and dispatch by the prosecutor's office to the trial court!
To add insult and mystery, most of the "libelous" articles were blind items written by different authors. Could malice, a main ingredient in a libel case, be proven in blind items? Whoa.
While the cases were in progress, we endured the hate and insult from our adversaries and their allies who couldn't bring us down to our knees.
It took five years since the cases were raffled off for trial to the different branches in the Hall of Justice from 1999 to 2004 when all the cases were finally dismissed: 38-0!
More than the triumph for press freedom, the episode exposed the inherent incompetence and corruption behind the characters responsible for elevating the cases to the trial court when they should have been dismissed in the prosecution level for being insubstantial and infirm in nature.

-o0o-

Ressa and Santos will be arraigned next month. They both have received tremendous moral support and otherwise from various media organizations in the Philippines and abroad.
Their supporters think Ressa and Santos, especially Rappler, are being "persecuted" owing to their rift with President Rodrigo R. Duterte.
Most of their colleagues and sympathizers view DOJ's filing of the case and the subsequent NBI arrest to be an act to stifle the freedom of the press and expression.
There were those who argue, especially President Duterte's allies, that the president had nothing to do with the case filed by Keng, who is a private businessman
As long as democracy is alive and won't be raped by a despotic rule, Ressa, Santos, and the Rappler will be able to surmount this crisis.

Ilonggo journalists fight hard to decriminalize libel

“If you call your opponent a politician, it's grounds for libel.”
--Mark Russell

By Alex P. Vidal

NEW YORK CITY -- In a democratic state like the Philippines, onion-skinned politicians and other known enemies of press freedom use the libel case to harass and intimidate practicing journalists.
They are aware that libel is a criminal offense, thus punishable by fine and imprisonment under the Philippine jurisprudence.
They aren’t actually after the fine.
Most of them want to see the journalists who have “offended” or “defamed” them go to jail.
That’s the bone of their contention; that’s what they want to happen.
Most of them think sending a journalist to jail via the libel case is already tantamount to “avenging” against the journalist’s critical newspaper articles and commentaries.
No normal human being, including a journalist, would want to go to jail.
However, we prefer being charged in court (which they refer to as “the proper forum”) than being murdered.
The Philippines, after all, is the most dangerous country in Asia for journalists, according to the media watchdogs.
It’s actually the biggest cemetery in the world for members of the Fourth Estate based on statistics on media killings.

-o0o-

Going to jail for a libel case filed by a public official, so far, hasn’t caused any iota of fear and embarrassment to any journalist who is merely doing his job.
When we are arrested and manacled, it’s not because we committed a heinous crime or stole a neighbor’s wallet.
It’s because we made somebody, who has very poor understanding and appreciation of the nature of our profession, mad.
It’s because somebody doesn’t have the delicadeza misusing the public funds, using public office for advancement of his whims and caprices, and for engaging in transactions and activities inimical to public interest.
After being charged for libel and spending a few hours or days in jail, a Filipino journalist, in many cases, becomes a celebrity and hailed as a hero of press freedom; he gets invitations left and right to speak about the hazards of his profession in universities and other gatherings.
The politicians who filed the libel case become the objects of derision and public contempt.
If a public official’s attention is being called over a possible impropriety while in public office, he must submit to the critical news or commentary however bombastic may be the method used by the press, as long as it doesn’t breach the public official’s private life.
This hinges on the principle that a public office is a public trust.

-o0o-

It’s because of the libel case’s imprisonment clause why we, the Ilonggo community journalists, as well as our colleagues in other parts of the Philippines, have been in the front-line campaigning since after the EDSA Revolution or during the time of President Corazon Aquino to decriminalize libel.
Our campaign in the period between 1989 until 1998 and most recently, included regularly pressing during chance “ambush” interviews and press conferences former senators Joey Lina, the late Leticia Ramos-Shahani, Nikki Coseteng, the late Raul Roco, among other national legislators to pass a bill in congress to make a drastic change for libel law in the Philippine penal code.
No political figure has publicly said no and they all promised to initiate steps to decriminalize libel.
Until now, however, their promises have remained a promise.
Until our colleague, Maria Ressa, chief executive officer of the confrontational Rappler, was recently arrested by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) in Manila for cyber libel case, another libel dog with a different collar.
We are confident Ms Ressa will be able to survive this latest attempt to gag and muzzle the press in the Philippines.
No matter how they try to camouflage the issue, it’s a clear case of harassment and intimidation.
We shall continue to advocate for the change of the libel law in the Philippines, and to vigorously fight for press freedom even under a despotic regime with low regard for freedom of the press and expression.