Another month calls for another dystopian arc in the Philippines.
Controversial lawyer and vlogger Trixie Cruz-Angeles is the country’s next Presidential Communications Operations Office (PCCO) secretary, who was appointed by a dictator’s son and president-elect Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. She, along with the current administration, already flicked their trump card: aiming to institutionalize bloggers and vloggers to cover presidential and other governmental coverages, like the Duterte administration.
But that’s not even their cherry on top. As of writing, the Pro-Marcos vloggers formed the United Vloggers and Influencers of the Philippines (UVIP), which is currently in the process of drafting their own code of ethics and constitution that would regulate their access to Malacañang. They claimed they will not be biased but at the same time, “pro-government.”
With the polarization of blogs, vlogs versus journalism—the former containing a multitude of outweighing flaws and insufficiencies—can it be truly justified that journalism is replaceable?
Journalism is defined as “the collection and editing of news for presentation through the media,” and “writing characterized by a direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation.” Meanwhile, blogs are “a regular record of your thoughts, opinions, or experiences that you put on the internet for other people to read.” In short, journalism is the absence of emotions and interpretations in articles, while blogs are the presence of the aforementioned.
Without needing an editor or supervisor as well, a blogger’s own thoughts and topics that interest them are their priority; and there’s nothing wrong with that. But making bloggers and vloggers recognized as licensed individuals to do the reporting instead obscures the elements that come into journalistic ethics and editorial standards such as: objectivity, factuality, credibility, and integrity, which are rules of thumb in reporting. These are primarily taught to and mastered by journalists who undergo methodical and demanding years of writing, finishing a degree, training, internships, and more.
How can we ensure that an accountability system will be implemented and followed? More importantly, if they’re already attempting to draft their own by-laws?
Journalism has already grown “less trustworthy”
We all deserve the most truthful and credible individuals to detail accounts and events for the common good of all. But why do others swerve for the defective option as always?
According to a report by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, most Filipinos believe most news organizations have become heavily politicized (37%) and commercialized (34%), thus rendering evasion of news amongst Filipinos.
There are also instances where reporters are criticized for asking “rude,” biased, and hard questions to politicians. But let it go unnoticed when these politicians at issue proudly give misogynistic, sexist, or foul remarks. The latest report from Reuters also observed that outlets known for their reporting of politicians are “highly distrusted by supporters of the politicians in question,” such as Rappler which ranked the lowest (42%) on the brand news media trust scale. This statistic was said to be prone to “abuse” for politicians and trolls to attack independent media and fact-checkers.
Rappler and ABS-CBN also faced censorship and libel concerns, including communist accusations from pro-administration supporters and black propaganda by the National Task Force To End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC). Indeed, Filipinos continue to be caught in neck-deep stigmatized beliefs on advocacy and activism. As a result, several have relied only on contentious media networks, blog sites, and vlogs that support their narrative and politicians—only tightening their blinders and sticking them firmer to their echo chambers.
However, special treatment for and appointment of questionable vloggers or even reporters aren’t new. In an interview of veteran journalist Karen Davila with Angeles who defended fake-news peddler and then-PCCO assistant secretary Mocha Uson, Thinking Pinoy and pro-administration supporters thought the established journalist “will never be at par” with the then-social media strategist and vlogger’s wits.
On Marcos Jr.’s first day as president-elect, only three media networks were invited, namely: the Quiboloy-owned Sonshine Media Network (SMNI), the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC)-controlled station NET25, and GMA News. NET25 has received backlash from media watchers for their propagandized, poor sourcing, foul language, and tabloid reporting. The religious sect that endorsed Marcos Jr.’s presidential candidacy attacked the opposition members, Vice President and her supporters numerous times. Their partisan and right-wing reportage also earned them more engagements and followers on Facebook.
It’s quite clear that if this administration intends to pursue its selective exploits by cherry-picking parts of the media that will only enhance their good side, for mainstream media to stop “antagonizing” them, they are outrightly depriving the public of transparency and accountability—which we shouldn’t have to beg for.
‘Pang-content lang’: School of TikTok, Facebook, and fandom
Screengrab from Bongbong Marcos/YouTube, Toni Gonzaga/YouTube, Rambo Talabong/Rappler, and Google
How has vlogging contributed to the systemic crisis of misinformation and disinformation that got us here?
The “no to negative campaigning” and “well-mannered” team of Marcos Jr. prides itself on focusing on its own campaign rather than pulling its opponents down; despite being visibly contradictory on multiple occasions, with their approach mimicked by their followers.
For director Darryl Yap, the creator of the ‘Lenlen’ video series that mocked Robredo—bad publicity is still good publicity. Thus, allowing enablers like him to make more viral gigs to capture the minds and hearts of—if not the old—the younger generations. Anyone who tried criticizing them for their problematic content was called out for their “toxic cancel culture” behaviour by Marcos followers.
While the dirty work is left to the apologists, the Marcoses cleanse their hands as they humanize themselves with down-to-earth personas through their vlogs: playing games, answering Q&As, and day-in-the-life videos in the realms of YouTube and TikTok.
In many Facebook and TikTok spliced edits, Marcos Jr. is a misunderstood villain whose family name has been wronged. Now, he’s back to heroically sacrifice himself and prove us wrong even when the whole world “turned against him.” Romanticized microcontent like these sanitize their bloodstained history of fascism, murder, and corruption in a snap; and his followers insist they’re untainted while the blotches of injustice are vivid as red.
There’s also the selective application of freedom of expression. Marcos supporters passionately defended talk show host Toni Gonzaga from criticism in her interview with him. They even thought she was better than most journalists for she was neutral and not negative, refusing to acknowledge the impact of her platform and angle that invalidated martial law victims. But where were they—or worse—why were they sadistic—joyful even—every time a journalist, critic, peasant, and activist were shoved to the fringes for exercising the same thing?
When content creator Agon Hare of Project Nightfall made a video about the controversial presidential win of Marcos Jr. and the atrocities of the dictatorship of his father, supporters of the family fiercely accused the vlogger of being another biased foreigner who shouldn’t interfere with the Philippines’ history. The video was then removed and he released an apology.
This isn’t just about them being unapologetic with their blatant display of double standards, but a perilous testament that regardless of where you are; on the riskier edge of being a journalist or safer side as a blogger or vlogger, they’ll hurl at you with their own rendition of history when you reveal a periphery they constantly deny.
Conjure an image of these reshaping tenfold into power when more vlogger-apologists are then legitimized in the government. It’s a distressing scene just visualizing it. Perhaps this is why it was unbearable to brace for the impact of the 35 million votes at first, for we named them blind followers—just as we were blindsided too by what was about to hit us.
Quantity over quality?
Table by Rambo Talabong/Rappler, sourced from Social Blade
Listed are the Pro-Marcos vloggers with a high subscriber count, who are members of the UVIP. Angeles said virality, engagement, and a large number of followers are factors in basing the bloggers and influencers that can cover Malacañang.
The same idea applies to a clairvoyant insight from 2008 by writers Angela and Katrina Stuart Santiago in their book The Filipino is Worth Blogging For. “[T]he success of a blog is measured by it its popularity, i.e., the number of blogs that link to it and the comments it gets per post. Never mind the substance or lack of it or the vision or lack of it,” they wrote.
As the editor of the publication’s blogs section, this is true. There is a dopamine push that feels like a hard-earned reward, a validation, when our think pieces, commentaries, and reviews acquire high engagement, receive compliments, and have the potential to encourage discourse.
But even I, myself, have reservations. High yet susceptible engagements, which may be twisted into the “wisdom of the crowd,” shouldn’t be a standard to accredit bloggers, influencers, or anyone, into becoming the new and main information disseminators in the government. Especially when these high tractions mainly stem from spliced videos and false news, turned into propaganda and sensationalized content.
Ingredients to toss a democracy
Photo by Larizza Lucas/TomasinoWeb
This shouldn’t even be a debate in the first place. But unfortunately, it is. From the get-go, it’s not rocket science to determine what job is more appropriate and qualified in dissecting and delivering information.
This is not to antagonize that all bloggers and vloggers are discreditable. It’s a matter of who is more qualified for the position, place, and event. There is no perfect blogger and even journalist. There are those who claim the journalist title whilst being deliberately puppeteered by commercial and political interests, rather than being watchdogs of the state and truth bearers for the people.
I’m certain that arguments about the pros of citizen journalism will arise. In our own ways of being netizens that post and capture happenings in the online and offline setting, we all contribute positively to citizen journalism; expanding data accessibility and boosting exposure to more people. However, if the concept of citizen journalism is distorted as a dire excuse to legitimize unqualified individuals to capriciously blog and vlog in the Palace, it will jeopardize each and every one of us.
Stuart-Santiago wrote, “[W]e blog because we can, but [we] also blog because we insist that there are alternative ways of seeing, as there are always the silences that surround us. We blog because we always imagine that at the very least, even if no one reads it or no one agrees with our story, it will reveal that someone thought differently from the mainstream.” She also insists that blogging is a necessity to question the status quo with a sense of responsibility.
Indeed, content produced by bloggers and vloggers aims to bring a nuanced and fresh take from the conventional. But an important question to ponder is: Are the bloggers who will be granted these extra privileges (that independent outlets and journalists hardly ever had) be there to analyze the status quo, or protect it?
Why are journalists at fault—forced to adjust and hush—when certain politicians flinch at criticism, the consequences of their own misdeeds? The role of a reporter is not to beautify a pleasing picture of the government like a sponsored food review. They show up not only in favourable situations, but they arrive with unwavering tenacity and grit despite the circumstances.
Every time they were barred to cover, nudged by the lapdogs of politicians, shaken by the deadliest typhoons and calamities, and bitterly silenced every time they uttered facts. They did not become professionals and put their lives on the line just to be effortlessly replaced by disreputable impostors.
In the incoming six years, we must not only buckle our seats for the red carpet of populism rolled by President Duterte for his successor. We are challenged to muster the impetus to unearth the other odds of disinformation stacked against us.
Before they desecrate the crevices of our history and democracy for good.
Mikaela Gabrielle de Castro
Blogs Editor, Blogs Writer
|
+ posts
Comments
