Right of Reply: An absurdity

FRONTLINE

Ninez Cacho-Olivares

02/27/2009

The best example of the absurdity of Congress’ Right of Reply Bill is former Public Works’ Secretary Florante Soriquez’s kilometric letter to The Tribune, which saw print in the Letters to the Editor section last Thursday. He complained that he was reviled in the Tribune report which was based on the contents of the World Bank report, where his name, along with others, was mentioned as the WB’s naming of those alleged to be involved in bid-rigging in the institution’s road projects in the country.

His name, along with others, appeared only once, and only in one line of the printed report. His mode of “Right of Reply,” took up all of one fourth page of the newspaper, where he clarifies his role.

This is not only absurd, but stupid, and one can imagine just how many politicians whose name is validly mentioned, as quoted in a report that was moreover being discussed in the Senate hearing, which means privileged information, that is even no cause for a libel suit, would jump at the opportunity to get prominent media space for their “positive” and “free” publicity.

The Right of Reply is certainly opening the door to outright abuse — not to mention the castration of the media by the politicians — because it is the politicians and other public figures who will be using and abusing this right of reply, if it becomes law.

If the newspaper does not provide the space to these politician-abusers, the newspaper’s publisher and editors are then charged with this crime. Once charged, the court will, as a matter of course, set bail for the publishers and editors, which would cost a mint, plus burden the newspaper with legal expenses. What then happens to the case? If the law says all must be given space, and in the front pages yet, and it was not given, that newspaper’s publisher and editors will be jailed, or fined by the court, since this is what the law says.

One can argue on equal space for one’s Right of Reply. But as in the case of Soriquez, will equal space mean that the newspaper will merely provide just one line? That is not the aim of these politicians as their reply will definitely be kilometric, as they want to have their PR printed in the front page. But what is that, if not managing the newsreports and by these public figures?

The editors will then be reduced to not coming up with any valid report that will make a reference to a politician, or even name him in any report that he deems is negative. What happens now to the media’s role as a watchdog, especially under a regime whose officials evade public accountability?

No more exposes, no more critical reports, no more valid mention of names in any reports.

And of course, all these crooked public figures are all off the hook, since the media will have been effectively castrated by this Right of Reply Bill.

What is clear is that these public officials, who have already been decreed by the high court as “fair game” to media, want is for media to present them in a positive light and if media refuse to do so, then the media must be penalized — with even a worse fine suggested by the high court on the libel law, instead of jail.

But this is the true intent of this stupid bill crafted by, for and of the legislators’ interest.

It has been claimed by some senators that the media outrage over this bill is a delayed reaction, as this bill was introduced some months back, and no media establishment brooked any opposition to this.

These senators should also be told that the media — at least those who count — were certainly not invited to any hearing, which in itself tends to prove that this bill was being passed surreptitiously by these legislators.

Yet these are the same figures who cried to the heavens about the death of press freedom under Marcos’ martial law, insisting that the press be free.

Hell, Marcos imposed censorship on the press, it is true. But he was at least not hypocritical about it.

These legislators who claim to embrace press freedom, and vowed to fight for the rights of the media, are all hypocrites.

Even under a democracy, they force the castration of the media.

Back to top

For comments about this website:Webmaster@tribune.net.ph
The Daily Tribune © 2006