Follow me on Facebook

Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts

Monday, January 13, 2020

NPC cracks crackling

THE second-oldest press club in the country, National Press Club, has been bombarded with flak late recently after declaring Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. as the Republic’s real vice president.
Worse, its vice president — the one who introduced the late strongman’s son as the real veep — issued a statement defending his pronouncement as just “basic courtesy.”
Last Friday, Paul Gutierrez introduced Marcos at its media forum as the person who should be the country’s rightful vice president.
“Because of the ‘magic’ that happened in the previous election … we all probably know that means, that he should be the sitting Vice President of the country, one position away from the position achieved by her [sic] father,” the Philippine Daily Inquirer quoted Gutierrez as saying.
Anybody worth their salt can see through that introduction as a tacit endorsement, the wrong pronoun notwithstanding.
Later that same day, Gutierrez issued a statement of “clarification,” which painted what he did more opaque than clearer if you ask me.
In the name of public service, I would like to post two points from his statement and my corresponding comments, if only to point out his skewed reasoning.
“This is farthest from the truth as the NPC remains an APOLITICAL media organisation. My repeated calling him as ‘VP’ is simply a show of basic courtesy to him, as a visitor to the NPC, a courtesy we extend to any politician or candidate seeking an office and whom we also address based on the position he/she is seeking.”
This is lame. “Sir” or “ma’am” (if he wanted to continue with his wrong pronoun for the former senator) would have been the more appropriate address if he really wanted to project the NPC as an apolitical media organization.
Social media activist Gang Capati best articulated this point on her tweet after the supposed forum: “The poll protest has been ongoing, three areas identified for (a) recount by Bongbong Marcos and in those three areas he still lost. You’re the National Press Club, use words like, ‘VP candidate presently protesting.’ Lots of ways not (to) be charged with untruth.”
Gutierrez further said that had “Ms. Lenny Robredo been our guest at the NPC, she would also be addressed as VP.”
Methinks that it is highly inappropriate to call the late strongman’s son as veep when he is still gunning after the position via an electoral protest. Please, humor me with this hypothetical situation. If Mar Roxas contested the presidency after the 2016 polls, would Gutierrez then — in the spirit of “basic courtesy” and being “apolitical” — address Roxas as “President” should he guest in one of NPC’s fora?
Also, Gutierrez addressing the elected veep as “Miss” in his statement betrays his own point. Like, c’mon, man! We were not born three minutes ago. The repeated mention of Marcos as the veep throughout the forum was anything but “basic courtesy.” If anything, it was a blatant display of boot-licking.
“In common media language, we call this ‘tsitsaron’ (to ‘tickle) to put the mind of our guests at ease; I believed that the majority of those present readily acknowledged this and never put any malice on it.”
No, sir, that is not a common media language. What do cracklings have to do with putting a guest’s mind at ease? Have you heard how cracklings sound when eaten? It’s noisy and doesn’t put anybody’s mind at ease. That sound of cracklings crackling is actually intended to trigger the hunger urge and make you crave for more of the same. If anybody put “malice” on the way Gutierrez introduced his guest, it was himself.
Gutierrez, by the way, titled his statement as “Huwag tayong masyadong malisyoso.” That title tickled me. Journalists, by nature, are “malisyoso.” That is part of being a watchdog. “Malisyoso” in the context of being critical and not “malice” in the context of libel laws.
That’s the reason why exactitude is important because we cannot afford to be painted as paid hacks. We do not take anybody’s word hook, line, and sinker. That’s the reason why we employ multiple sourcing on everything we print or broadcast.
Here’s the clincher: At the same forum, Marcos announced his bid for national office in the 2022 polls albeit not mentioning what specific elected position.
I say clincher because now we see the real reason for the supposed forum. It was nothing but an advance teaser for Marcos’s return to the hall of power in the Republic.
I offer one question to Gutierrez before ending this column: Was it all worth it, sir? Pfft.

Monday, February 26, 2018

Hunting fake news redux

“We have to shame these f****** ignorant bastards.” – Herbie Gomez, editor-in-chief, Gold Star Daily, on how to deal with purveyors of fake news
THERE has a resurgence, of sorts, of fake news posts lately. I say “of sorts” because I have already an app that filters this digital garbage off my browser. If you’re interested, you can download this app at https://fakeblok.com/.
There are zero fake news website and posts on my social media account because of this app, except for an occasional post of friends who want their online friends to know that these are propaganda websites.
Lately, however, an undersecretary of the Department of Energy has been sharing fake news and has even admonished his online friends to be like UK’s Queen Elizabeth who supposedly praised Digong Dada based on a “news” article (false) published on altervista. The account has since been taken down by Google.
What concerns me is that high ranking government executives have been sharing this propaganda website on social media lately. There’s Mayor Richard Gomez who shared the same fake news the DOE undersecretary shared.
As a public service, I screen captured the website and pointed to the features lacking for a legitimate news website. Yesterday, I checked that particular post again and saw that it has been shared 136 times. Now, that has encouraged me since it tells me that many people have grown tired of the lies and propaganda that are passed off as news on social media platforms.
Hence, I will share again the tips I’ve learned on how to hunt these propaganda websites.
So how can we scrutinize a news website or a post on social media platforms in particular and the Internet in general? Here are some tips:
  1. Check if the uniform resource locator (URL). URLs are the web addresses of the articles on the Internet. Many propagandists have intentionally made web addresses to look these are from legitimate news media organizations. Examples of these include ABCnews.com.co, Bloomberg.ma, cnn-trending.com, NBCNews.com.co, washingtonpost.com.co, etc.
Notice that most of the fake news websites have a suffix “.co.”
  1. Read beyond the headline of a news post. I, as I assume you do too, see these almost all the time on Facebook. People sharing “news articles” based on the headline but have not really read the entire article. Worse, they will caption the link with an inappropriate comment because as I said they haven’t really read the article.
  2. While you’re reading a news article, check for exaggerations. Fake news is meant to rile up or elicit strong emotions to drive web traffic and further inflamed on social media platforms. Naturally, the fake news would have exaggerations.
  3. Check if the data presented in the “news article” is corroborated or supported by experts in the particular field or other news media websites. Okay, that sounds more daunting of a task as I would have preferred. Maybe this acronym can help GIN (Google It, Numbnuts).
  4. This next tip will sound idiotic but believe me many have done this–sharing a news article without checking the date of publication. Digong Dada’s drummer boy Peter Lavina did it by posting a photo of a rape victim meant to rile up support for the war on drugs. However, the photo was from another continent, Brazil and from an entirely different timeline. So before you share, check out the date and location, huh?
  5. Always cross-check the site with other reliable sources on the web. Real news articles may differ in angling, perspective, or even syntax but these will always have the same basic accounting of the story. Like if there are two reporters of different news organizations covering a story, they might approach the story differently but they will always be, essentially, the same story.
You may find it hard to believe but there has been a deluge of fake photos on the Internet too.
You need to look at the following to spot a fake photo:
  1. Shadows. I summarize photography as the art of taming shadows and light. Look for inconsistencies in the subjects’ shadow in the photo. For example, if the shadow of a man in the photo is leaning at a 45-degree angle, everything else in the frame should have the same 45-degree angle-leaning shadows.
  2. Light source. Inversely from shadows, the light source of the whole frame should be global. The bounce of the light source on the subjects in the frame should be consistent with the shadows these set. This means the light source should be at the opposite end of the subject’s shadow.
  3. Discoloration. This usually happens when a subject introduced to a photo is a clone of a subject from a different photo. If you can see discoloration on the edges of a subject in a photo (read: inconsistent color from the main frame), chances are the photo has been manipulated with a photo editing software.
  4. Pixilation. This is akin to the presence of discoloration in a photo, except that instead of color inconsistency there’s inconsistency in pixels of the photo. This happens when the photo editor clones a subject from a different photo and placing it on a new photo without considering the image size (read: dots per inch or pixels per inch) of the photo the photo editor cloned it from.