Regulating the fourth estate

THE Presidential Task Force for Media Security, in all its wisdom and intelligence, is pushing for a “Magna Carta” for media workers supposedly to uplift the living conditions of journalists in the country.

Its main stooge, Undersecretary Joel Egco, is set to consult “various legitimate media partners.”

Under the proposed Magna Carta, media personalities will have to take an exam every six months to calibrate their qualification of whether the practitioner belongs to a managerial position or to a corresponding salary level or grade equivalent to that of government.

“Question is, would this be automatic once passed? This would still depend on private media owners but with the qualifying exam, journalist can now be qualified as a level 1, 2 or 3 journalists and depending on the vacant position to be applied, the journalist can now, for example, apply for a reportorial position which is level 2 while obtaining a level 1 qualification,” A Baguio-based news daily quoted Egco as saying last Thursday.

The Philippine Press Institute’s executive director Ariel Sebellino is opposing Magna Carta for media workers.

“Levelling has nothing to do with the quality of journalism. We should care for the following:  Welfare and protection, ethical practice, and truth-telling,” he posted on his wall.

The supposed Magna Carta for media workers is nothing more than government meddling into the independence of the press.

I urge these former journalists and news readers who are now in government service to address the media killings rather than regulating the industry it clearly doesn’t have an inkling on.

The other night, the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines has not only gave a flat no, it enjoins other media entities to join it in opposing this threat to the independence of the fourth state and freedom of expression in general.

I would like to share with you NUJP’s statement in full here. Please do read on.

NUJP rejects PTFOMS proposal to regulate press through ‘Magna Carta’ (July 22, 2018)

The National Union of Journalists of the Philippines rejects outright the proposal of the Presidential Task Force on Media Security to regulate the profession in the guise of a “Magna Carta” and urge all colleagues as well as media owners to unite in opposing this clear threat to freedom of the press and of expression.

(A Baguio daily) quoted PTFOMS Executive Director Joel Egco as saying the proposed measure would seek to professionalize journalism through qualifying and classifying exams.

“If you want to become a media personality, you will have to take an exam every six months to assess your qualification which would set either a managerial position or a corresponding salary level or grade equivalent to that of government,” Egco was quoted as saying.

This is, in fact, not the first time the idea of regulating, even licensing, journalists have been proposed. And the NUJP, along with other media and free expression advocates, has consistently opposed and thwarted all such attempts.

We do not question the intent of Usec Egco, himself a former colleague.

But the proposed “Magna Carta,” which goes so far as to set salary grades depending on “competency,” is fraught with danger, not least of all allowing government to determine who can or cannot be a journalist, which is totally anathema to a profession that can thrive only in independence.

We maintain that journalism is an extension of freedom of expression and serves the people’s sacrosanct right to the information they need to make decisions about their individual and collective lives.

The Magna Carta would also infringe on the rights of media owners and managers to determine who to employ.

We cannot allow the government – this or any other – the opportunity to meddle in any way not only in the profession that serves as the people’s watchdog against official abuse but in any other matter that may endanger freedom of the press and of expression, and the people’s sacred right to know.

National Directorate, hotline: +639175155991

Doggone year

“Dogs lick their balls because they can.” -Bill Burr, You people are all the same

SINCE it is the year of the dog, I think it’s only fitting that my first My Wit’s End will discuss the dogs of war, hound politicians, and its loyal mutts barking in their respective home fronts.

This is going to be a fun blind item article because I don’t even have to give you a clue who these people are in this administration. Somehow, you’ll supply your own in your head. They are that prevalent in this administration.

To be fair to Digong Dada though, these kinds of people were also present in the past administrations, even during the Commonwealth days of what would be the Republic now. So much so, that after at least a full year under his administration, I am wondering about the change he promised.

All the bluster during the campaign of eradicating drugs and corruption now appear to be just an intestinal gas from a publicity hound.

Let’s start dissecting these kinds of characters with a sort of glossary. The fun part will be, you, my dear readers, supplying who specifically these people are in your head. Whether they are the same people I have in mind does not really matter.

These characters: dogs of war, hound politicians, and their mutts can be collectively called pimps. However, there are certain subtleties or nuances, if you will, in how they operate.

The phrase “dogs of war” was first spoken by Mark Antony in Act 3, Scene 1, line 273 of William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar. “Cry ‘Havoc!’ and let slip the dogs of war.”

For the Trekkies, the exact same Shakespearean line was uttered by the character of Odo played by Rene Auberjonois in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.

Since the term was used first by a British bard, it is only fair that we start with how the English Oxford dictionary defines the phrase.

“The dogs of war (phrase), literary: The destruction accompanying military conflict.”

However, we are not using this phrase in a literary context. For the purpose of this article, we are using this phrase as a type of language that is more common in speech than writing and more specifically restricted to a particular context. Hence, we will use the English dictionary of Slangs.

Online Urban Dictionary defines dogs of war as “A somewhat derogation term used for mercenaries, or soldiers for hire. Generally describes ex-soldiers or combat experts that offer either direct service or military training in exchange for money.”

I know what you’re thinking right after you read that preceding paragraph. You are probably thinking “Marawi City.” The supposed liberation of Marawi City was P3 billion to P4 billion easy. I didn’t pull this figure out of thin air. This figure is based on actual pronouncements of people in government.

This administration’s penchant for waging “wars” on almost anything the dogs of war cannot help it.

Now, where do you think the commission of all those purchases of bullets, ordnance, rockets, bombs, the fuel for tanks and fighter jets, to name a few, go? Katching!

Let’s go to the next character, the hound politicians.

Merriam-Webster defines a hound politician as “a mean despicable person.” While Online Urban Dictionary defines it as “a man-whore, pimp, or player.”

Anent to the hound politicians is that they are, for the most part, also publicity hounds which are a slang for someone who seeks to have the attention of the public constantly focused on him or herself, typically by means of attracting media coverage. A hound politician is also a compulsive womanizer, an inveterate schemer, and thinks only for its own agenda.

Now, I wonder who could these people be? There are so many people in Barong nowadays seeking public approbation without practically anything to back it up (read: the war on drugs and corruption).

These people are usually in the limelight of national polity. That leaves us with the last character in our list — the hound politicians’ mutts.

Again, using the Online Urban Dictionary, a mutt is an informal noun. It is defined as “humorous derogatory or a person regarded as stupid or incompetent.”

My late father Emilio used to define these people as “persons who are too big for their britches.”

Now, I need not name names here but we see these people on TV, hear them on the radio, and see and hear them online.

These are the apologists. The supposed “translators” of what their hound politicians’ pronouncements actually mean, like we are the stupids in this equation.

I have a deep connection with these politicians’ mutts. For those who are following me on social media platforms, you can see them expertly hounding almost anything I post. They screen capture it and put their own twist on what I posted. These people are not your average garden-variety trolls, mind you. These mutts employ trolls. In a way, they are slightly further up the leash of command.

There you go. The characters that will regale us with their antics and stunts during this dog show of a year. They may not be pedigree but still, I regard these people as wayward souls who had pathetic pasts and are only making the most of what these recent doggone years could offer.

So, here’s to the dogs of war, hound politicians, and mutts: Raise the woof!

Vendetta, not accountability (2)

“The past can’t hurt you anymore unless you let it.” -Alan Moore, V for Vendetta

THE following are the other characters in this charade of justice called the impeachment complaint against Supreme Court Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno.

If you were watching the same impeachment hearing on television last week, I would not blame you if you feel like it’s a déjà vu. It has been as fast as the congressional inquiry against Sen. Leila de Lima.

So far, we have mentioned two of the characters behind this show. The bruised lawyer and the architect predicated the complaint. Now let’s dig deeper into the cast and characters.

The Pork-Loving Butterfly

The chairman of the House committee on justice is in charge of facilitating the deliberation on the impeachment complaint against Sereno. He is none other than Oriental Mindoro 2nd District Rep. Reynaldo Umali.

What is his beef against Sereno, you ask?

To be fair, he may have a grudge against all the justices who ruled that the Priority Development Assistance Funds unconstitutional or pork barrel.

In September 2013, he was accused of funneling P10 million into a non-government organization allegedly owned by the alleged pork barrel queen herself, Janet Lim-Napoles. In his defense, Umali claimed that the money did not come from his pork barrel but from the then Agriculture Secretary Presco Alcala’s Priority Development Fund.

In December 2013, Umali revealed that he was working on impeachment cases against as many as three Supreme Court justices for flip-flopping on their decisions on the PDAF.

You must remember that Sereno was already the chief justice when the High Tribunal ruled the PDAF unconstitutional.

Let’s not also forget that Umali first belonged to the Liberal Party. That’s right, the “dilawan.” He skittered on to the now ruling party, PDP-Laban, just as the so-called supermajority was forming in the Lower House.

The Bypassed Justice

One male Supreme Court Justice has been poised to be the next chief justice. At least, that’s what he has allegedly been saying to the SC staff for the longest time.

According to reports from SC staff, he makes frequent proclamations that he will be the next chief justice and his wife will be the next presiding justice of the Court of Appeals.

So, you can just imagine his dismay when the then President Benigno Simeon Aquino III chose Sereno over him as the next chief justice. This decision, however, was not entirely a vindictive move on the part of PNoy.

Talk has it that he deliberately did not submit an application during the process of discernment for appointing the next chief justice. He felt that he was a shoo-in for the position and his regular visits to Malacañang have given him that assurance (of sorts).

The Meme Girl

A meme, with the picture of another SC justice on it, has been going around on social media platforms with the caption: “I-tag mo ang ka opisina mo na backstabber.”

Insiders at SC claim she went the rounds to seek the support of other justices against Sereno. To quote: “She does her rounds with judges on a mission to spread gossip about the Chief Justice.”

However, Sereno still supported her in her bid as head of the Women’s Judges Association of which she still heads to this day.

In 2011, she was accused of misusing funds. The World Bank told her that the SC will have to return the US$199 thousand (P8.6 million) of the US$21-million loan which was meant for judicial reform but was instead used for projects not covered by the loan agreement.

In July this year, the Justice allegedly circulated a memorandum to the other SC justices containing the very same three objections in lawyer Lorenzo Gadon’s 27-allegation complaint against Sereno.

So, there. That cast of characters complete the Sereno impeachment circus. If your suspects behind this circus aren’t listed in this two-part series, then chances are you are more inquisitive than I am. Please do contact me, electronically or personally, so we can add those to my next My Wit’s End.

However, you have to back it up with facts. We don’t just whip up something out of thin air. Don’t be afraid because you’ll also be covered by the Sotto Law.

Also referred to as the Press Freedom Law (RA 53), the Sotto Law protects the publisher, editor, columnist or duly accredited reporter of any newspaper, magazine or periodical of general circulation. It protects the journalist from being compelled to name his news source.

Yesterday, Digong Dada submitted his proposal for the extension of martial rule in Mindanao. So let’s maximize the rights and civil liberties we have now while we still can.

Vendetta, not accountability

“Behind this mask is an idea and ideas are bulletproof.” — Alan Moore, V for Vendetta

NOW it can be told. Now the rogues in barongs have been unmasked. The cast and characters behind the impeachment complaint against Supreme Court Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno are out for vengeance and are not exactly out to exact accountability from the head of the High Tribunal.

Out for Vengeance

The 27-allegation complaint against Sereno filed by lawyer Lorenzo Gadon before the Lower House’s committee on justice would lead us to believe that Sereno has been committing crimes against the people and so, she should be impeached.

However, political analyst Ramon Casiple, during a forum of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines on Oct. 12, told the audience that Gadon personally told him that the latter filed the impeachment complaint about three reasons:

(1) To avenge Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo;

(2) To avenge the impeachment of the late Chief Justice Renato Corona; and

(3) To ensure that Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. gets the vice presidency.

The Architect

Before Gadon filed the complaint, it can be recalled that the Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez started the impeachment buzz against Sereno in the Lower House. He was the one who made public that 25 representatives have endorsed the impeachment complaint.

Alvarez’ mettle with Sereno dates back to when the two were embroiled in the cases involving Philippine International Air Terminals Company Inc (Piatco).

Acting then as Manila International Airport Authority assistant manager and, later, Department of Transport and Communications secretary, Alvarez allegedly funneled millions of pesos into his and his friends’ pockets while working on Ninoy Aquino International Airport Terminal 3. This was done through alleged under-the-table deals, bloating declared budget, and allegedly sub-contracting the construction firm owned by his wife.

However, Sereno, one of the hired counsels of the Office of the Secretary-General, foiled the alleged money-making operations of an arbitral tribunal which caused the Piatco Group to lose them in two arbitration cases.

So as it appears now, he seemed to have designed the impeachment complaint and make it appear that they are pushing the Duterte administration’s no-nonsense stand against corrupt government officials.

Ad for the wishy-washy

“Maybahay, ******** ko 13 oras – Garantisado: buong gabi ligaya.” – www.borsa.ru

CALL it what you will but because of the kind of vibes this administration emanates, its spin doctors and apologists often never fail to follow suit — with “funny” repercussions, if I may add.

I call it the steamy and macho kind of vibes.

Last week, one of the outspoken (which most of whom usually are) apologists of Digong Dada, La Salle political science Prof. Antonio P. Contreras, posted a public rant of sorts on his Facebook wall.

“Rappler complains about the ethics of a broadcaster allegedly threatening one of its reporters, but it doesn’t even bother choosing the kind of ads it allows to be published on its page. Horribly disgusting! John Nery must be furious at this obscenity,” he first posted.

The rant was about a story of Rappler reporting about yet another Digong drummer boy RJ Nieto goading Palace spokesperson Harry Roque to throw hollow blocks at Rappler journalist Pia Ranada on live talk radio over DwIZ 882AM. The quote I cited at the beginning of this column is the exact wording of the ad Contreras pointed out as “horribly disgusting.”

As to why the great Contreras singularly called out Kagay-anon John Nery, I still cannot connect. Nery is the editor-in-chief of Philippine Daily Inquirer’s Internet content and is in no way connected or involved with Rappler’s website. You can even call the two news organizations competitors.

Moving on, naturally, the public post went viral. Most of those who shared (me included), pointed out that the ad that appeared below the Rappler article was a result of Google Adsense’s logarithm. To break it down, the ads that appear on certain parts of any website that avails this ad logarithm depends on the kind of websites you usually browse. It is like an artificial intelligence of sorts. Google Adsense profiles the user according to his or her browsing history.

So, based on that particular ad, the algorithm of Google Adsense profiled the user to be a sex-craving middle-aged male with a limp member. I posted this explanation with Contreras’ public rant and most of the others who shared the “hard” post of Contreras, as well.

Before you judge, it is not a pornographic ad. As I understand it, it is an ad for a sex-performance enhancement drug. In short, it’s anti-erectile dysfunction medicine. Except for the one vulgar word in the ad, I say its totally natural to be able to “get up” when an occasion “rises” for it.  The ad is not “horribly disgusting” to me.

However, exactly eight minutes after his second edit of this post, Contreras added this “disclaimer”: “Note: This photo was only shared to me by a friend.

“Update:

“So, it looks like Google Ads played a cruel game on Rappler on this one. I just learned that ads like the one that appears below (are) driven by the preferences of the reader. On this case, the one who originally took a photo of this and shared it.

“In any case, legitimate and so-called decent and morally upright pages, like what Rappler purports to be, should now really think hard before availing of this facility of Google to avoid embarrassing optics like this one. As parties who claim to be paragons of virtue, knowing that Google randomly loads ads like this, and for Rappler to earn money from it, is somewhat problematic.”

My Facebook friends opened the same Rappler link in their respective browsers to point out what the great Contreras cannot seem to grasp. In a fraternal cousin’s browser, the same ad spot displayed a website that offers “quirky and stylish” home decors. In another distant relative’s try, a website selling ready-to-wear apparels. Mine? Well, it was just a “boring” in-house ad of Rappler calling for its consumers to uphold press freedom and advocate for fearless journalism.

Contreras, ser, a different ad appears depending on what a user regularly browses. Rappler (which didn’t claim to be a paragon of virtue, bitidub) cannot possibly filter what appears on its Google Adsense spot. Do you even know how many active users are on the Internet? Each of those users will see a different ad on the same spot that you riled about.

To those who do not know Contreras, he specializes on political theory and analysis, cultural theory and politics, and the politics of everyday lives. It is safe to say Contreras is a smart noodle (no pun intended). However, I cannot wrap around the fact that a smart guy like him still doesn’t get how Internet AI works.

If you want lewd, sexist, and vulgar language, you only need to listen to the President, Martin Andanar, Salvador Panelo, RJ Nieto, and other functionaries of this administration, Mr. Contreras. Now, those people have said an appalling amount of vulgarity on live TV and radio.

Plus, “maybahay” is vernacular for a wife. What is so vulgar about finding food supplements online just so you can satisfy your spouse in bed? Vulgar would be a city mayor saying he should be the first to fornicate with a corpse so that her beauty won’t be wasted is, Contreras.

Let’s go back to the Contreras’ hard stand yet limp reasoning. You don’t have to be ashamed of what you browse on the Internet. The Internet has been the best thing there is since the invention of the loin clothe.

In closing, I’d like to give you an unrequited advice, Mr. Contreras. Don’t just thrust away in your keyboard looking for “hard” drugs for your “friend’s” limp biscuit problem. As you have shown quite eloquently, one cannot trust everything that is on the Internet. I mean, guaranteed “13 hours”? I cannot imagine the chaffing involved in that.

Try lots of sibuyas bombay (bulb onion) in your diet. If that fails, try banging your “friend’s” limp appendage with your front door.

‘Rebolusyon sa inyong baga’

“There is no natural, spontaneous process to prevent destabilizing, inegalitarian forces from prevailing permanently.” – Thomas Piketty, The New Yorker

THIS administration and its minions have been bandying about lately the word “revolution” and its adjective form “revolutionary” like it is some kind of magic wand which will waive away all the horrific transgressions it is committing to the very people who brought them to power.

Please permit me a slight digression before I continue. I’d like to give a shout out to Fr. Brennan, SJ (apologies because for the life of me I can’t remember his first name) for teaching us basic Latin in high school. He taught us that if we learn Latin we could virtually be walking dictionaries.

Now back to the point I was making.

The Middle English word “revolution” is derived from the Latin revolutio which means a turnaround. Merriam Webster defines it as “a fundamental change in political power or organizational structures that takes place in a relatively short period of time when the population rises up in revolt against the current authorities.”

Dictionary.com defines revolution as “an overthrow or repudiation and the thorough replacement of an established government or political system by the people governed.”

In sociology, revolution is “a radical and pervasive change in society and the social structure, especially one made suddenly and often accompanied by violence.”

So, there. From the definitions alone, you can pretty much see how unnerving it is to hear people in power spouting such platitude. In the definitions, it is clear that the overthrowing variable is the population or the people governed or the ruled class.

What do this administration’s minions expect? Like, do they honestly believe Digong Dada will overthrow his own bloody rule? especially now that he has tasted intoxicating power, which possibly is only equaled by the dose of Fentanyl he has been taking?

This may come as a shock to you but what actually happened in Edsa 31 years ago was nowhere near a revolution. At best, it was a revolt of the middle class. Look where it has led the Filipino people too. It has dumbed down the collective understanding of what a revolution actually is.

It has been pointed out to me by a kuya-kumpare, no less, that a revolution isn’t necessarily a violent event. Methinks this kind of thinking is revisionist in nature — strongman Marcos’ “green revolution” comes to mind.

But if we revisited the true meaning of the word, how can an overthrow or replacement of an established system be anything peaceful or benign?

You have to realize that the system being replaced or overthrown has people (read: human beings) behind it. Do you honestly believe these people will just up and leave because they will be replaced by another paradigm?

Do you honestly believe that the P6.4 billion worth of shabu that breezed through the Bureau of Customs — thanks to the Davao Group — will end and will not happen again once this administration’s version of “revolutionary government” comes to power?

These people have been making a butt-load of money out of this sweet arrangement they have right now. Do you think they will just give this largesse for an altruistic goal of “uniting” the Filipino people?

Revolutions are always ugly, violent, and messy — always. The national democratic revolution that has been raging for the past four decades is a testament to that.

This administration threatening that it will establish a “revolutionary government” is like it says it respects human rights, due process, and rule of law. It is simply not true to what it is doing to our nation.

You cannot push a “threat” of a revolutionary government when most Filipinos have been living it for decades.

You see, revolutions are not threats. It is a lifestyle and the ruled class is living it.

The ruling class, to put it bluntly, is neither in the position nor have the moral ascendancy to call for a revolutionary government. The ruled class is the proper variable in the equation to complete a revolution, Einstein!

Jeez! Did all these “smart and brightest” flunk world history?

Rants of an irate driver

I HAVE only been a motorist for a short time in the early ’90s. But as a long time commuter, I commiserate with them as far as the traffic situation in the city is concerned. So, when an irate long-time driver complains, I listen intently as I have never shunned from a learning opportunity.

His rant on the traffic situation in the city is three-part, so please bear with me.

The first part of his rant is of traffic lights. Like him, I would also want to know the schedule when the Road and Traffic Administration switches these on. Is there an actual schedule or are these just defective? If defective, then when will city hall allot a budget for the repair?

There is this traffic light at the junction in Cogon. Like the irate driver, I have observed this particular traffic light because my boss and I pass by this junction when going to the newsroom most of the time. The damned thing is off most of the time with only the yellow light blinking like crazy.

Suffice it to say that the traffic lights in the city are on as random as your average Christmas lights.

The second part of his rant is on traffic aides. Where does traffic czar Egay Uy hire these people from? Does the RTA train these people before deploying them in the streets?

I only ask these questions because even if I’m not driving, I find their gestures confusing. You cannot tell if they’re signaling you to stop or to go. Yes, it is that confusing. There has even been a time when they direct traffic while standing on the side of the road and not at the center of the junction.

There is the issue of their visibility at night time. No, it’s not that they are not working, as in no visibility in the streets. I’m talking about their visibility to drivers at night. They don’t have reflectorized (if that’s a legit word) uniforms.

The irate driver I was talking to last week said he cannot see the traffic aide much less the gesture the aide was doing with his hands at night. Another driver-friend I know nearly bumped the poor traffic aide and it doesn’t help that their uniforms are dark, either.

The third part of his rant is the mobility of these traffic aides. He told me he once watched a traffic aide run (yes, on foot) from the badminton place in Gusa to the junction in Galaxy to apprehend an erring driver who eluded him.

My friend suggests that every team of traffic aides should have a patrol car so they could pursue erring drivers if these do not stop on their command.

I remember watching a friend traffic aide manning the junction on Velez. He flagged down an erring taxi driver but instead of stopping, the taxi driver sped off. My friend was helpless and just gave out a sigh of frustration.

So there you have it, the irate driver’s rant on traffic in the city. I felt compelled to write his rants in my column because he has been complaining out the traffic situation in the city for the longest time.

I hope, the traffic czar reads this.

Shrifts

“Is it so difficult for alleged lawyers to understand that the mandate of CHR is to check state abuses?” – Prof. Luis V. Teodoro, former dean of the University of the Philippines College of Mass Communication

THERE have been many things that unfolded last week that I have decided to adapt my late father Emilio’s column template — shrifts. Even though the incidents are all political in nature, I cannot weave them into one narrative prose. I do not have the academic smarts to pull that one through. So, here goes.

Change has come indeed.

Now, in the Philippines, when you say “you weep for the youth,” you’ll be branded by the President a pedophile or straight-out homosexual.

“You are so fixated with the death of young males, kaya nagdududa ako na pedophile kang gago ka,”Digong Dada said of Commission on Human Rights chair Chito Gascon on Saturday as reported by GMA News Online.

Using your (demented) logic, Sir, what does that make you then — somebody who is “fixated” with illegal drugs? Aren’t you also “fixated” on branding people you disagree with as gays?

***

After more than a hundred days of being held captive by Isis-inspired Maute Group, Fr. Teresito “Chito” Suganob was supposedly “rescued” by military forces.

Opapp Secretary Jesus Dureza broke the news on his Facebook wall, without any regard to what might happen to the other hostages left behind. Maybe Dureza didn’t want to be “out-scooped” by other government agencies circling around Marawi City.

Like my former editor at Mindanews, Carolyn Arguillas, I ask: “Escaped? Released? Abandoned? Rescued?” I ask the same questions because these are four vastly different scenarios. So, which is it? One might retort that the most important thing is Fr. Suganob is safe.

An assault ops on the mosque is vastly different from a rescue op for Suganob. Both have different scenario settings and different outcomes.

Still, if he escaped and you insist that you rescued him, that’s a whole different ball game, all together. That’s not information. That’s propaganda.

I could almost see another “rescue” of the rest of the hostages in the future when this administration stumbles upon, yet, another political faux pas.

My last question on this: Sirs, are you hard of herring, the red kind?

***

The Davao City Social Services and Development Office was only implementing a city ordinance that is supposed to curb human trafficking when they caused indigenes to miss their Saturday flight to join other “Lakbayanis” in Manila.

“The implementation of the Children’s Code of Davao is something that we always do (every day) and this is to protect our children from possible incidents of trafficking,” reads the statement of Malu Bermudo of Davao’s CSSDO on the incident.

The last time I checked, the Constitution trumps any city ordinance, all the time. Yes, freedom of movement and travel is guaranteed under the 1987 Constitution. More importantly, the children are not residents of Davao City. Why should they be required to secure a permit from CSSDO?

If that’s how it is in Davao City, I’m never flying out from that city whenever I have my kids in tow. Even if, say, I’m from General Santos City or Cotabato City.

And what’s with the problem of Cebu Pacific’s ground crew?

Interaksyon.com reported: “Even ground staff of Cebu Pacific, said Trenilla, ‘took a hostile attitude towards us when they learned we were attending the SOS conference, claiming that the children were only being ‘used’.”

Is it the airlines business now to know what you’re going to do when you reach your destination? Did the pilots of Cebu Pacific Flight 387 tell the passengers what they will do with the plane as it circled its way around Mt. Sumagaya back to Cagayan de Oro?

That’s right. It is none of your business. Your business is to take people where they want to go, period. Focus on that, Davao ground crew of Cebu Pacific, because I’m sure the passengers of flight 387 didn’t want to arrive at their untimely “final destination.”

Let’s kill the cats

WHILE my friend and I were shooting the breeze last Friday, I noticed our ceiling was already quite decrepit. One of the ceiling boards looked like it sagged in the middle part and was ready to fall anytime.

My friend, who repaired our stairway before, explained that the ceiling joists where the ceiling board was nailed to are already rotten. Whenever the cats walk across our ceiling, the nails could not hold the weight, and that’s why one of the ceiling boards is sagging in the middle, he added.

Before I continue, I should let you know that Crow’s Nest is really old. It was built during the “liberation” of the Philippines from the clutches of the Empire of Japan. It’s almost entirely made out of wood. Even the foundations are made of Narra unlike the houses of today which are made of concrete.

My friend offered two options to remedy my ceiling problem.

One, I could replace the whole ceiling construction with new wood for the rotten ceiling joists and replace the ceiling boards which are only 1/4” thick, with the sturdier 2” marine plywood.

Now, my friend said this will surely cost a lot. The materials and manpower, he added, could cost me at least P20 thousand. My friend also said there’s the time frame of the repairs to consider — his modest estimation was that it could take three weeks to replace the whole thing.

The problem is that I can’t spare that much money, I told my friend, plus I can’t expose my children to hazards of falling debris for three weeks.

He said there is another way. It is way cheaper and a helluva lot faster.

“You could just kill off all the cats,” my friend said with a sarcastic grin.

There was an awkward silence because we both realized we were solving my ceiling problem the way Digong Dada would with the drug problem and insurgency in the country.

If you still don’t get it, the ceiling problem is our country’s corrupted institutions, and the cats, well, it’s us, the Filipinos he swore to protect and love.

Resist state terrorism

“No one can terrorize a nation unless we are all his accomplices.” – Edward R. Murrow

I REFUSE to aid and abet this administration’s state terrorism. I have resisted the state-sponsored terrorism of past presidents of this Republic and I am not about to change that on account of the misleading chatter on social media platforms.

Yes, just as what past populist despots have done, Digong Dada has owned the new platforms of expression — thanks to enterprising online people.

State terrorism has been defined as “a form of terrorism which sometimes occurs when governments implement neoliberal policies lacking widespread support.” I dare say it’s lacking widespread support because far more Filipinos are not online. This administration’s noise on social media platforms is fake. We have uncovered them time and again since Day 1 of this administration.

The Alliance for the Advancement of People’s Rights, more popularly — or in this administration’s perspective infamously — known as Karapatan, aptly puts in its second issue of its monitor of Duterte’s first year in office.

“Duterte has become a public relations expert – spitting out arguments that drug users are less than human, strutting with public displays of apathy regarding national and international pressures, manipulating old verbal assault and threats against progressive organizations and human rights advocates who raise concern over the rights issues in the country.”

This administration can yarn every possible spin-off it could muster online but the fact remains that only 14 of every 35 Filipinos are wired online. This seemingly overwhelming “support” rhetoric on social media does not include the marginalized sectors, the sectors that have undoubtedly catapulted Digong Dada to the presidency.

I do not blame them. It is tempting, though. But I will not. These people have every right to hope for a better Philippines when Digong Dada promised it to them albeit in a brusque and curt manner. They have been manipulated and f***ed up (pardon my French) by the ruling system for so long that when Digong Dada came about, they were all too willing to pledge their allegiance to the seemingly no-nonsense talking politics.

However, his lies started unraveling from the very first day of his presidency. I don’t have to enumerate it here since it would take up most of the space for this column. I do call on readers to witness the state’s affairs with more critical lenses. Unrequited suggestion: Read up on this administration besides Facebook posts, Instagram memes and Twitter feeds.

The last thing you’d want is to be sucked into this administration’s hate rhetoric. And this hate rhetoric worsened with every engagement the president had since Day 1.

Yesterday, Digong Dada gave his second State of the Nation Address. I couldn’t wait for it since our Constitution specifically stipulates this to be done starting at 1 pm and I have to submit this column by 8 am yesterday, at the latest.

I have a soft spot for satires, as you may have noticed in my past columns. That’s why I was glad when I read Professional Heckler’s parody of Digong Dada’s Sona because to be honest about it, I did not expect the President to say something new. It would have been on his war on drugs, f**k human rights defenders, f**k the European Union, etc ad nauseum. It would have been like a “folk” song — folk this and folk that.

As I have mentioned in my past columns, satire is an effective tool in exposing the untruths issue by issue and politico by politico. However, the writer should focus their satirical lens to particular policies or individuals for this to be effective because if you satirize the whole political structure, then it will give the impression that all policies are the same. This would enforce further the status quo. In this case, the state terrorist wins.

A sample of Professional Heckler’s satirical take on the President’s Sona yesterday: “Nang ako ay maging pangulo, nangako akong magbibigay ng trabaho sa ating mga kababayan. Hindi naman sa pagmamayabang, tinupad ko ang pangakong ’yan. Ngayong hapon, kasama natin dito sa Batasan ang tatlo sa pinakamasisipag kong appointees. Hindi lang sila sa office nagtatrabaho kundi pati sa mga rally laban kay Robredo. Palakpakan po natin sina Mocha Uson, Kat de Castro at Arnell Ignacio.” (Applause.)

Digong Dada’s latest verbal stunt was when he said he is willing to go to war against the communist insurgency. Adding that he has the might of the Armed Forces behind him and the Maoists only have the indigenes on their side. He said he is willing to fight this war up to the last standing communist.

Wait. How many days, nay months, did it take him to quell a singular clan in Marawi City again? How is this administration addressing the end of contractualization? What is the position of this administration on the West Philippine Sea?

More importantly, when will he really jet ski and plant a flag on Scarborough Shoal?

Of satires and lampoons

“Political satire is ridicule dedicated to exposing the difference between appearance and reality in public life.” -Robert Mankoff

THERE’S another kind of news circulating on social media platforms but it’s not fake. Far from it. It’s satire news.

However, you have to read it in order to appreciate it. You can’t appreciate satire if you’ll only read its “headline.”

I’m bringing this up in light of Sen. Joel Villanueva’s Senate Bill 1492 or “An Act Penalizing the Malicious Distribution of False News and Other Related Violations. It is a serious law.”

“The passage of this bill will encourage our citizens, especially public officers, to be more responsible and circumspect in creating, distributing and/or sharing news. Addressing national and global concerns should not be made more complicated by false news calculated to cause disunity, panic, chaos, and/or violence,” the bill’s explanatory note reads in part.

It carries a pretty heavy penalty for any thinking Pinoy (pun intended) found guilty–fines ranging from P100,000 to P5 million, and one to five years imprisonment.

Based on this proposed law, fake news is defined as “an information causing or tending to cause panic, division, chaos, violence, hate,” and those “exhibiting or tending to exhibit a propaganda to blacken or discredit one’s reputation.”

Therein lies the problem. The definition is vague. What about political satire? Can the law make that distinction? It’s like the “no bomb jokes” in terminals and airports. What if I tell a bomb poem, or a bomb limerick? Technically, it is not a bomb joke but can the security personnel make that distinction?

Merriam-Webster defines satire as “a way of using humor to show that someone or something is foolish, weak, or bad. It is humor that shows the weaknesses or bad qualities of a person, government, or society.”

Satire is like the jester speaking truth to the king and his royal court. Let me remind you we have some of the most close-minded and “pikon” people in this administration. What will happen to the likes of Professional Heckler or the Superficial Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines when Villanueva’s bill is passed into law?

The communications team of this administration, nay spinners, scares the bejeesus out of me. They have a vast mass of followers but there is no informed political discourse in their brand of punditry. They present so much information on social media and pass it off as true, and they have the money and resources behind each and every article they post. Methinks, without satire, the entire public discourse in the republic will collapse.

I can’t even understand why this administration’s supporters are not so receptive of satirical pieces when their principal is the embodiment of sarcasm–hyperbole and all.

Alison Dagnes, a political science teacher at Shippensburg University, got it spot on when she wrote: “Political (satire) is primarily the mark of the underdog. It’s essentially a complaint against oppression. It’s a complaint against the power structure.”

Satire sharpens critique.