Category: Media

Zubiri’s misinformation proof of Pulse Asia survey on ‘fake news’

Ellen
Senate President Migz Zubiri with Chinese Ambassador Huang Xilian.

Pulse Asia’s recent survey on “fake news,” which showed that the majority of Filipinos are confident in their ability to tell whether a political news is true or not, indicates their naivety about the tangled web that is social media.

In its nationwide survey conducted from Sept. 17 to 21 using face-to-face interviews of 1,200 sample representatives of the population, Pulse Asia asked, “How confident are you in the ability of Filipinos to detect whether news about government and politics they have heard, read, or watched is truthful or false?”

Fifty-five percent said “confident.” Of the 55%, 8% said they were “very confident” while 47% said “somewhat confident.” Thirty-seven percent were unsure.

This high degree of confidence in the Filipinos’ ability to determine the truthfulness or falsity of political news reminds us of a 2018 study by a market research firm Ipsos MORI which showed that Filipinos was third among 38 countries surveyed with the “least accurate perception” of their nation’s issues. South Africa and Brazil beat the Philippines to that ignominious list.

Yet, the same study said, “Despite being among the least accurate, respondents in India, the Philippines and Peru are among the most confident in their answers.”

The Pulse Asia survey revealed that almost nine out of every 10 adult Filipinos (86%) believe “fake news” is a problem in the Philippines.
According to Ronald Holmes, Pulse Asia president, the term “fake news,” as used in the survey, means “balitang walang katotohanan.” False news.

In the fact- checking community, which VERA Files is part of, we discourage the use of the term “fake news” because it’s an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. An attribute of news is truthfulness. To describe it as “fake” doesn’t make sense and denigrates the value of news.
Also, “fake news” has become a catch-all phrase for anything that one dislikes, whether it’s true or not.

Instead, we use “misinformation” and “disinformation.” “Misinformation” refers to false or misleading information spread through several platforms without an intent to deceive. “Disinformation” is information deliberately created and shared to deceive.

A good example of misinformation is the announcement of Senate President Migz Zubiri during the Oct. 11 joint hearing of the Senate committees on ways and means and public order and dangerous drugs that Chinese Ambassador Huang Xilian said, “The Philippines now is part of a blacklist of tourist sites because they do not know if the tourists going there will be operating or will be joining POGO operations.”

The Chinese Embassy immediately denied Zubiri’s announcement, correctly describing it as “misinformation,” to which the senator disagreed and insisted that the ambassador mentioned the word “blacklist” several times.

Zubiri’s claim was not supported by Sen. Sherwin Gatchalian, who was also in that meeting with the Chinese ambassador. He said Huang only mentioned the “possibility” that China would “restrict” its citizens from coming to the Philippines.

Zubiri did not directly admit his mistake but his later statement corrected his false announcement. He said, “Maybe it was lost in translation and what the good ambassador meant was we could be possibly blacklisted as he mentioned they do that to countries who promote gambling to their countrymen.”

That’s misinformation. It was a false announcement that stemmed from his misunderstanding of the envoy’s statement. There was no intention to deceive.

Zubiri’s misinformation can also be an example of another public perception revealed in the Pulse Asia survey which says, a sizable number of the respondents (67%) point to politicians – national,37% and local, 30% – as peddlers of false information or “fake news” about government and politics.

The politicians are followed by social media influencers, bloggers and/or vloggers (58%).
Reflecting the decline of the people’s trust in media, journalists were also mentioned as peddlers of fake news (40%).

That hurts!

The danger of eliminating anonymity in social media

Ellen
A fake Facebook report quoting Sen. Francis Pangilinan fact-checked by VERA Filkes.

One of the attributes of Facebook (now called Meta) that attracted many to the platform, which is now the biggest in the universe (with 2.89 billion users), is anonymity.

One can be Maria even if she is Juana, or be a 35-year-old engineer from China even if he is a 25-year-old writer from the Philippines.

Officially, Facebook has a real-name policy, which requires users to “provide the name they use in real life.” In practice, however, those who are creative can go around that rule and hide their real identity.

Anonymity is not evil. It can be used for something good. However, as in all things in this world, malevolent minds are using it to do vicious acts while escaping accountability.

That has been the focus in the series of public hearings conducted by the Senate Committee on Constitutional Amendments and Revision of Codes, chaired by Francis Pangilinan: “to conduct a review, in aid of legislation, of the country’s existing criminal laws to consider the rise of social media platforms and the rapid advancement of technology.”

Pangilinan and Senate Minority Floor Leader Franklin Drilon shared their experience of having been subjected to “defamatory” posts on social media.

Drilon said there are existing legal remedies that the defamed can avail of, but they have to know the identities of the defamers. He wants to compel platforms to reveal the identity of the owners of the social media accounts that carry vicious posts.

“We are not asking you to sanction them. We will ask the court to make them accountable. But we have to know their identity to bring them to court, “Drilon said.

There was no commitment from Facebook representatives at the hearings. All they could say was, they have cooperated with Philippine authorities in a number of cases, especially those involving the exploitation of children.

During the second hearing last Dec. 15, retired Supreme Court justice Antonio T. Carpio made a number suggestions which should send chills down the spine not only of those who are fond of posting untruthful and defamatory posts but also of the platforms.

He said that unlike in the United States where online platforms can take refuge under the safe harbor clause in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 of the United States not to be accountable for the libelous comments of their users, in the Philippines, they can be held liable for libelous comments of their users, just like in any print, TV or radio media.

Online platforms are publishers, Carpio said. Thus, public officials or public figures libeled online by fake or fictitious persons can sue the online platform.

There is, however, the burden of proving malice for the libel charge to prosper.

“There is a gap between the existing libel law and what should be the ideal justice in case of online libel. The use of fake or fictitious names in online platforms to libel a person is per se proof of malice, and this should be written in the law,” Carpio said, and went on to propose “that existing law should be amended so that malice is presumed on the part of the online publishers if they allow fake or fictitious users to post on their platforms libelous comments against public officials or public figures.”

He continued: “We are all for freedom of expression, but we are also for the truth and for a level playing field. Anyone who imputes in social media a crime or derogatory act on another person must disclose his real identity to allow the libeled person a legal remedy against his or her defamer. The defamer must not be allowed to hide behind a fake or fictitious name. The burden must be placed on the online platform publishers to require those who post comments on their platforms to disclose their real identities.

Carpio noted that many posters with dubious aliases have been traced to China. He proposed further: “The online publishers should also secure the country of residence and addresses of those who post comments on their platforms. The country of residence and addresses of those who post comments can be given to the libeled person upon request to allow him or her to exercise his or her legal remedy.”

Another resource person, Jonathan Corpus Ong, co-author of “Architects of Networked Disinformation,” a definitive study on fake news production in the Philippines, sounded a note of caution on “legislation that will undermine online anonymity and privacy of users.”
He cited progressive movements such as #MeToo and #BLM which, he said, “were amplified by pseudo-anonymous accounts.”

“Unmasking low level ‘trolls’ allows the real masterminds to get away: the top-level political marketers and their political clients,” he said.

The disinformation expert added, “Overbroad legal frameworks to catch ‘cybercrime’ or ‘fake news’ vaguely defined have dealt catastrophic harms to vulnerable communities.”

Ong’s concern is reinforced by the recent decision of the Supreme Court upholding the repugnant Anti-Terror Act.

He suggested that instead of top-down legislation, the lawmakers must “provide infrastructure and funding to support bottom-up interventions done by journalists, civil society and academics who have already been doing the work of monitoring disinformation and engaging platforms in a thoughtful and responsible way.”

He said other approaches can include “funding research, creating media literacy initiatives and developing interventions that prebunk harmful speech and misleading narratives such as historical revisionism.”

It’s good that the committee is listening to many voices. What we should guard against in our search for a solution to the problem of a toxic social media is the possibility of coming up with a medicine that is worse than the disease.

This column appeared also in:

ABS-CBN online
https://news.abs-cbn.com/blogs/opinions/12/20/21/the-danger-of-eliminating-anonymity-in-social-media

Malaya Business Insight
https://malayaph.com/news_opinion/the-danger-of-eliminating-anonymity-in-social-media/

VERA Files
https://verafiles.org/articles/danger-eliminating-anonymity-social-media

Beware of this ‘Bishop Ted Bacani’ impostor

Ellen

Last Friday afternoon, June 11, I got a call from an unidentified number while I was attending a VERA Files activity. The caller introduced himself as “Bishop Ted Bacani.”

I had to ask him twice who he was because he was not speaking gently the way I remember Bishop Ted Bacani spoke. Anyway, he said, “Si Bishop Bacani ito.”

He said he had learned that VERA Files is the owner of Facebook Philippines. I immediately corrected him. VERA Files does not own Facebook Philippines. We are just one of the three third-party fact-checkers of Facebook in the country.

He said he got the information from Christine Herrera of the Inquirer.

I said, “Christine Herrera? Patay na po si Christine Herrera (Christine Herrera has passed away).” He kept on repeating the name of Christine Herrera.

Herrera had long left the Philippine Daily Inquirer and was reporting for The Manila Standard when she died of cardiac aneurysm in November 2017.

It was a red flag. But I still asked him what I can do for him. He said his Facebook account was suspended the previous day because of violations of community standards. I told him to write to Facebook. I even asked him to send me a copy and I’ll see what I can do about it.
He said, “Paano ‘yung pagmumura. ‘Yung putang-ina. Bakit n’yo tinatanggal ang putang-ina sa comment ko. (How about the curses. The son of a bitch. Why do you delete the son of a bitch in my comments?)

Then he cursed me several times. I had to cut him off and blocked his number.

A VERA Files colleague told me that the impostor “Bishop Ted Bacani” also harassed Rep. Arlene Brosas (Gabriela party-list). Here’s a portion of a post in Gabriela Women’s Party FB page:

“Rep. Arlene Brosas (Gabriela party-list) said Friday that she is eyeing to file charges against a pro-Duterte vlogger who subjected her to a peppering of vulgar and lewd language over a phone call.

Brosas told a news conference that their group is still studying what charges to file against Niño Barzaga, who recorded the conversation and uploaded it on social media, but said that among these would be a violation of the anti-wiretapping law.

’What he did to me is not a mere practical joke, but emotional and sexual harassment. This is a serious criminal offense and we will file a formal case soon,’she said.

Brosas said that last June 2, she received a call from an unknown number who claimed to be Bishop Ted Bacani and proceeded to ask about the activities of Gabriela Women’s Party.

She said she detailed the activities of Gabriela, but then the call suddenly took a turn.

Laking gulat ko nang bigla na lang akong minura ng caller, pinagsisigawan, at sinabihan ng mga malalaswang bagay,” she said.
(I was completely shocked when the caller cursed me, yelled at me and told me lewd things.)

She said she then hung up, but was then faced with a barrage of hate texts and calls on her personal phone number.
’Malakas ang loob ng mga DDS (Diehard Duterte Supporters) vloggers na ito dahil kasangga nila ang presidenteng wala ring respeto sa kababaihan,” Brosas said.
(These DDS vloggers have bravado because they are allied with the president who also has no respect for women.)”

I remember this Niño Barzaga. On Oct. 26, 2018, following Facebook’s takedown of 95 pages and 39 accounts in the Philippines for violating its spam and authenticity policies, DZRH’s Cesar Chavez interviewed him because his accounts were among those removed from the social media platform.

Chavez called me up and I explained that as Facebook’s third-party fact-checker, VERA Files does not delete, block, or remove posts, pages or accounts. We just fact check and tag fake, false, and misleading posts.

After Chavez’s program, I received a text message from an unidentified number cursing me.

So, he is still at it. And now, he is masquerading as “Bishop Ted Bacani.” Beware.

Two case dismissals but no release order

Ellen
Senator Leila de Lima and journalist Lady Ann Salem

The case of illegal possession of firearms and explosives against journalist Lady Ann “Icy” Salem of Manila Today was dismissed last Feb. 5 but she continues to be in jail in Mandaluyong City.

A drug case against Sen. Leila De Lima was dismissed last Feb. 17. She, however, remains in detention at the Philippine National Police Custodial Center in Camp Crame, Quezon City because she still faces two other cases.

Salem’s lawyer, Kristina Conti of the Public Interest Law Center, speaking at a rally of the journalist’s supporters in front of the Mandaluyong City Regional Trial Court, said last Friday that the Feb. 5 dismissal of the case against Salem and trade unionist Rodrigo Esparago was not accompanied by a release order.

Conti said there’s no legal reason for Salem to stay a minute longer in jail for a case that is “walang ka kwenta-kwenta (senseless).”

Salem was arrested last Dec. 10, while the world was marking Human Rights Day, based on a search warrant issued by Judge Cecilyn Burgos-Villavert of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court.

In dismissing the case against Salem, Presiding Judge Monique Quisumbing-Ignacio declared the police officers’ search warrant void for being vague after they confiscated items not listed in the warrant.

News reports noted that instead of confiscating only one laptop and one unit of cellphone, as stated in the search warrant, the police took four laptops and five cellphones of different brands.

“The raiding team did not limit themselves to the items listed in the Search Warrants … The seizure of these items is unlawful as even the ‘plain view doctrine’ is clearly inapplicable to these cases,” said the court that also found substantial inconsistencies and contradictions in the testimonies of informants.

“Since the sole basis of the issuance of the Search Warrants w(as) their (informants) sworn statements and testimonies, the Court finds that probable cause was not sufficiently establish(ed),” the dismissal order stated.

In blocking Salem’s release, the prosecutor was insisting that the dismissal is not yet final because it is under appeal. Conti, however, said it does not hold water because the case can go on without keeping Salem in jail.

Conti said Salem, 35, is holding on admirably in detention. She shares an 8 feet by 3 feet detention cell in the Mandaluyong City jail with five other women detainees.

“To maximize the space, they have hung up hammocks up the steel bars where some of them sleep,” said Conti.
De Lima, on the other hand, is marking her four-year imprisonment by launching two books: “Dispatches from Crame I” and “Faith, Hope & Love: Dispatches from Crame II.”

Reacting to the dismissal of one of the three drug cases against her, De Lima, who investigated President Duterte’s alleged human rights violations when she was chair of the Human Rights Commission and Duterte was mayor of Davao City, said: “To be acquitted even in just one case, in the time of Duterte, is a moral victory. “

In the statement read by her lawyers during a press conference after the dismissal of Criminal Case No. 17-166, she took the opportunity to explain the two remaining cases and her situation in detention.

She said that even if the Demurrer to Evidence and Motion for Bail in her other criminal case (No. 17-165) was denied, she and her lawyers believe that the government does not have a strong evidence to prove their trumped-up charges.

In the case “conspiracy to engage in illegal drug trading,” De Lima said the prosecution has not come up with any evidence of the alleged crime. “Walang kahit isang testigo na nagpatunay na ako at ang aking kapwa akusado ay nakipagsabwatan sa mga drug lords para maglako o magbenta ng ilegal na droga sa Bilibid. (Not one of the witnesses proved that I and the other accused conspired with the drug lords to sell illegal drugs in Bilibid.),” she pointed out.

According to her, the prosecution’s witnesses whom it described as “drug lords” have denied that they were drug lords and asserted that they had never entered into any illegal deal with the senator.

She underscored the anomaly in the charges filed against her: “Ito lang din ang katangi-tanging mga kaso tungkol sa droga na kahit isang butil o gramo ng droga, ay walang naipresenta. (This is the only drug case in which not a single grain or gram of drugs was presented.”

“Ibig sabihin, puro laway lang ang basehan (It means their basis is all saliva),”she said.

De Lima explained it has been proven that Case 17-165 was not about drugs but about the unbridled corruption and malpractices in the Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) such as paying prison officials for the return of their privileges which she stopped when she was justice secretary.

De Lima said her accusers have not proven that she received money from the alleged sale of illegal drugs. “Puro tsismis. Puro haka-haka lang. (It was all gossip. Pure speculation.)”

She added: “Mula’t sapul, ang mga kasong ito ay ginagamit lamang na paraan para patahimikin ako at gambalain ang aking paglilingkod sa bayan bilang senador, sa paglaban sa kawalang hustisya at pagtataguyod ng karapatang mamuhay nang marangal at may dignidad ng ating mga kababayan, lalo na ang maralita. Subalit mula noon hanggang ngayon at sa darating pang mga araw, hindi ko hinayaan at hahayaang magtagumpay ang ganitong taktika.

(From the beginning, these cases were used to silence me and prevent me from serving the people as senator, to fight injustice and for the right of our countrymen to live with honor and dignity, especially the poor. But from the beginning up to now and in the coming days, I did not and will not allow this tactic to succeed.)”

De Lima said if those in power would be allowed to circumvent the law to imprison an innocent senator, what more when their target are the poor and the defenseless. “To jail one innocent person – whoever they may be – is an insult to every Filipino who deserves a better government, and an assault on the future of our country,” she said.

Salem and De Lima are two faces of courage against an insecure thug in power. They need and deserve the people’s support.

VERA Files, Reporters Without Borders Germany partner to monitor media ownership in PH

Ellen

Lisa-Maria Kretschmer, head of Research & Project Coordinator of Reporters Without Borders Germany Media Ownership Monitor, explains the project they are undertaking with VERA Files in the Philippines. Beside her is LUZ Rimban, VERA Files trustee.

Lisa-Maria Kretschmer, head of Research & Project Coordinator of Reporters Without Borders Germany Media Ownership Monitor, explains the project they are undertaking with VERA Files in the Philippines. Beside her is LUZ Rimban, VERA Files trustee.


By YVETTE MORALES

VERA Files has partnered with Reporters ohne Grenzen, German section of Reporters sans frontières (Reporters without Borders, RSF) to embark on a three-month study of media ownership in the Philippines.

The Media Ownership Monitor (MOM) Philippines is part of RSF’s global project to study the extent of the concentration of media ownership, a prerequisite for securing freedom of the press and defending the diversity of opinions.

Vergel Santos, Chairman of the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility, who was one of the participants in the roundtable discussion held last week to kick-off the project, called the MOM a “terrific,” much-needed initiative that will open people’s eyes to the power behind the media organizations.

Vergel Santos of Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility with Crispin Maslog of UP, Los Banos.

Vergel Santos of Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility with Crispin Maslog of UP, Los Banos.


“Whatever you say, the owners impose their will on the media organization,” Santos said. He added that the study will provide the public with a glimpse of how media owners’ interests become part of the news agenda, and what kind of gatekeeping happens inside newsrooms.

The project, which employs a generic methodology for all countries, will look at ownership and media concentration of the most relevant newspapers, tabloids, online news sites, television and radio stations based on audience share.

“If your figures are really high, that means you’re widely circulated, that means you have more readers and that means and it can […] translate into, let’s say, good business. Meaning, a lot of advertisers would want to publish their ads on the paper,” said Ariel Sebellino, Executive Director of the Philippine Press Institute, who was also one of the participants in the roundtable discussion.

From left to right: Rachel Khan, chair of the Journalism Department, UP;Ariel Sebellino, PPI executive director; and Ramon Tuazon of the Asian Institute of Journalism and Communication.

From left to right: Rachel Khan, chair of the Journalism Department, UP;Ariel Sebellino, PPI executive director; and Ramon Tuazon of the Asian Institute of Journalism and Communication.


A website will be put up to contain the result of the study which will be presented to the public in November in a press conference to be followed by an academic workshop on media pluralism.

RSF started MOM in Colombia and Cambodia in 2015. This year, aside from the Philippines, RSF is also undertaking MOM in Tunisia, Turkey, Mongolia, Peru, and Ukraine.

Reporters Without Borders Germany has existed for 21 years and is part of the international, Paris-based organization Reporters sans frontières, whose aim is to defend human rights, in particular freedom of the press and the right to inform and be informed anywhere in the world.

VERA Files is nonprofit media organization composed of veteran journalists committed to advance excellence in journalism by engaging in research-intensive, high-impact reports in multiple formats and providing training, particularly mentoring of journalists.

Lisa-Maria Kretschmer and Ellen Tordesillas, VERA Files trustee.

Lisa-Maria Kretschmer and Ellen Tordesillas, VERA Files trustee.