Never again means never forget

Cong Corrales

SORRY, I failed to write my column last week. Like you, I have also been distracted the past couple of days. It got so crazy that it pushed a lot of people to take a long hard look at how their individual perspectives and standpoints fit into the “greater” schemes of things in the world…

Talking of crazy, many a jaw dropped when senator and presidential aspirant Miriam Defensor-Santiago announced that her vice president next year would be Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. Even more were perplexed—to say the least—when God’s gift to journalism, Rappler, quoted Santiago as saying Marcos didn’t owe Filipinos an apology.

In Facebook, a clearly articulate and bright young man posted his take on Santiago’s statement. The gist of his post is that the younger Marcos shouldn’t be held accountable for the sins of his father. It has since been shared but with the sharers’ captioning it with: “Why Miriam?” Some still, added #NeverAgain.

Joren Sereno rebutted the young man’s argument on Facebook effectively by pointing out that while we cannot deny our parentage, and everything that goes with it, one can always choose to correct the mistakes of their progenitor.

However, before we can go about rectifying the mistakes our parents made, we must first identify these mistakes and atone for these. For how could you correct something you don’t admit had happened?

Whenever, Bongbong Marcos goes on quad media and spew things like his father’s martial law was necessary for the country to progress insults me. “Sa ikauunlad ng bayan, disiplina ang kailangan.” This, to me, is a blatant display of impunity.

Many otherwise brilliant Filipinos were killed. The excesses of the Marcoses during the height of martial law do not merit even an apology?

The Task Force Detainees of the Philippines, based in Cubao, has about 5,000 names of fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, aunts, uncles, and spouses in their Museum of Resistance. Are Santiago and Marcos saying these Filipinos do not deserve an apology?

I admit that before Santiago made the announcement, I have decided to vote for her. Obviously, that has changed now. Not too long ago, remember when she told reporters she has got the cancer. If she could not finish her term, by rules of succession, we would have another Ferdinand Marcos as President. I shudder at the thought.

However, methinks this decision to make Marcos her vice president in next year’s elections will render all of her and her staff’s work these past years and effective connecting with the younger demographic would spiral fast down the drain.

It started with her one-liners, the memes, the shirts, and then the book: “Stupid is forever.” It earned rave reviews and cemented her brand name into the Philippines’ pop culture. The younger demographic found her to be fascinating, especially when she’s in one of her school speaking tours where the approving noise could only be liken to a rock concert. Young people could not seem to get enough of her.

Like a branded product, Santiago was consciously marketed to the younger demographic and they gobbled every media hype it dishes out. It was a successful packaging and marketing campaign. It was effective.

Sayang.

But then again, I’m just a community journalist. What do I know?

By the way, how about that trending report last week of Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte—in a supposed effort to beat the 5pm deadline—strapping into a jet and zoomed to Manila. There were even reports that Duterte took a chopper to steer clear from the gridlock below.

At the Palacio del Gobernador in Intramuros on Friday, one reporter reportedly heard someone yell: “Naka-file na,” misleading Duterte’s supporters into thinking their candidate had indeed filed his certificate of candidacy.

It turned out later—much to the chagrin of his supporters in Manila and Davao—Duterte wasn’t even on the jet that left Davao City to Manila in the first place.

I find it funny sometimes when a reputable news organization reports an unverified information that happened to be inaccurate or out rightly wrong. In the industry, it is popularly known as “na kuryente.” However, I don’t find it the least funny when publicists and political advisers deliberately manipulate the news media through disinformation. They call it “news management,” I call it manipulation.

I read at least two veteran publicists who didn’t scrimp their words in lambasting Duterte’s campaigners for its “news management” stunt. It happened right under the noses of even the most veteran of editors, newsroom managers and gatekeepers. Worse, it also unfolded, publicly, on social media sites all over the country.

The subsequent reactions from netizens on social media, at first, came as posts of trickling disappointment then later posts came in drizzles of disbelief of being had—of being played like a fiddle. Finally, by early evening, netizens’ disgust flowed in posts that dripped with sarcasm.

It is only natural to feel bad as soon as you realize you’ve been had.

We felt disgusted because we were betrayed by the people we trusted to report events accurately, responsibly, and timely. But if there is one thing we can take out of this deliberate disinformation is the realization that we as news and information consumers have a counter-balancing power to hold the fourth estate—traditional and new media—to account for what it dishes out to the general public.

The experience should teach us not to believe everything on the Internet. We must always remember that the Internet is still essentially just a tool and like most tools, it can be helpful only when used properly.

Well, like what my friends down southern Mindanao said: “End of wild dreams.” The dream of the chance of having the very first Mindanaoan President of the republic and back to reality.

I agree. Let’s go back to reality. Only this time, let’s be more discriminating in our sources of current events—be it traditional media or the Internet.

Reporters do not exist in a vacuum. Their coverage and subsequent reportage has a direct correlation with what the demands of its audience, readers or consumers are.

By being critical to the reports we read, we are actually helping ourselves have a more accurate, responsible, and balanced news articles by making the people behind the news gathering to be better at ground-truthing and counter-checking with their reports.

In the end, we—news and information consumers—deserve the media that we have.