Category: Paper Chase

The ‘air war’ for votes in May 2013: Bets, parties spent P2.2B on TV ads

mcmangahas Leave a comment

ELECTIONS in the Philippines, especially for candidates to national office, are considered to be primarily “air war” affairs.

This was, in fact, what happened again in the May 2013 elections, which saw most of the moneyed candidates for senator, and the administration and opposition political coalitions, splurging on political advertisements like there was no tomorrow.

Our latest report. “The ‘air war’ for votes in May 2013″, is authored by PCIJ Training Director Che de los Reyes.

According to Nielsen data that PCIJ reviewed, the candidates for senator, the political parties, and some party-list groups waged pitched ad battles on television during the last balloting, and at the cost of stupendous sums.

TV ads seemed to have worked wonders for the victors. There were a few others, however, who spent big but lost big, too.

During the 90-day official campaign period, the 12 winning candidates for senator and their political coalitions — administration Team PNoy and the opposition United Nationalist Alliance or UNA — altogether spent an indicative total of P1.18 billion on TV ads alone.

Five other candidates for senator who lost incurred another P466.58 million in TV ad expenses during the period.

Team PNoy and UNA, meanwhile, spent a combined total of P154.32 million on TV ads that featured their candidates.

But that is not the end of the story.

Even before the official campaign period could start, Nielsen data show that the two coalitions and 14 candidates for senator had aired “advocacy ads” from Nov. 11, 2012 to Feb. 11, 2013. Altogether, these ads amounted to another P424.87 million.

Combined, the sums show that the composite spending on TV ads alone of the two coalitions and their senatorial candidates totaled P2.23 billion in six months (November 11, 2012 to May 11, 2013), or an average of P371.11 million a month, or P12.37 million a day

And wait, there’s more.

Nine senatorial candidates and one party-list group would have breached the airtime limit for political ads on TV had it not been for a crucial order from the Supreme Court regarding a new rule being imposed by the Commission on Elections (Comelec). One of those nine candidates would have also surpassed the campaign-spending limit.

Seven of the nine actually won, while the party-list group, Buhay, eventually garnered the most number of votes among party-list groups and is poised to occupy three seats in Congress.

Last April 16, less than a month before the elections, the Supreme Court issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) on the “aggregate time limit” rule imposed by Comelec.

The TRO effectively reverted the counting of advertising minutes to the “per station” basis, just like in the May 2010 presidential polls.

Read our latest report, The ‘air war’ for votes in May 2013:

Main: Without SC TRO, 9 Senate bets, Buhay liable for breaching TV ads airtime limit
Sidebar: Serious, furious
Sidebar: Pre-campaign ad blast

DATA A DAY: With diploma, without a job

Ed Lingao Leave a comment

LOGIC WOULD TELL US that those with a college diploma should have the least problems landing a job.

Guess again.

In today’s Data a Day, we take a peek at data released by the National Statistics Office through its latest Labor Force Survey.

There are 2.89 million unemployed Filipinos as of the latest Labor Force Survey of the National Statistics Office. Which group comprises the majority of the unemployed?

  1. High school graduates

  2. High school undergraduates

  3. College graduates

  4. College undergraduates

As we said, it would seem logical that college graduates should have the least problems getting employed. The data from the PCIJ’s MoneyPolitics online database, however, tell us a different story.

Check out the answer here.

 

SC approves PCIJ request, orders release of SALNs

Ed Lingao Leave a comment

supreme-court

IN WHAT MANY are hoping could be the end of a two-decade drought of information in the judiciary, the Supreme Court en banc approved an August 2012 request by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) for the release of the statements of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALNs) of all the sitting Supreme Court justices from the time they were appointed to the high tribunal until 2011.

A notice issued by Supreme Court Clerk of Court Enriqueta E. Vidal and released to the PCIJ states that the SALNs and Personal Data Sheets (PDS) of Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno and 13 other associate justices would be released to the PCIJ upon payment of the required fees.

The SALNs to be released to the PCIJ would include all SALNs filed by the sitting justices since they were appointed to the tribunal until the year 2011.

THE PCIJ had requested copies of the Supreme Court justices’s asset disclosure records on Aug, 14, 2012 yet, or 10 months before the high court finally approved it on Tuesday, June 11, 2013.

By then, the court had released the 2011 SALNs of the justices to just one media agency — Solar Network News.

PCIJ and Solar worked together to compare these SALNs with the SALNs that the justices had filed in previous years, some of which are available in the PCIJ Library.

The effort produced a four-part report, “The Wealth of the Gods of Padre Faura”, that PCIJ published in December 2012. Check it out here:

Part 1. SC justices among PH’s best paid; allowances, bonuses not in SALNs
Sidebar. COA the courageous
Sidebar. Money talk
Part 2. Corona’s fat allowances not taxed: Same, same still at SC?
Part 3. Rapidly rising net worth shared bliss of SC justices
Sidebar. Half a giga of data
Part 4. Transparency on ice: Judicial independence or impunity?
Sidebar. Sereno y Carpio

The PCIJ, however, has not yet received official or formal notice from the court that its August 14, 2012 petition for the release of the SALNs has been approved.

The tribunal’s decision was seen by freedom of information advocates as a major victory in the fight for transparency in the judiciary.

The asset records of the judiciary have been kept secret since 1992, through a series of self-serving resolutions and decisions by the Supreme Court virtually exempting it from a provision in the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees (Republic Act No. 6713) requiring that the asset records of government officials be made public, within 15 days from date of request by citizens.

The PCIJ has been filing yearly requests for access to the SALNs of the Supreme Court Justices, but the requests have been mostly ignored. In August last year, the tribunal opened the door a little when it granted the request by Solar News for the 2011 SALNs of the Supreme Court justices.

The PCIJ petition which was approved by the tribunal was filed on August 14, 2012 by PCIJ Executive Director Malou Mangahas. The approved petition covers the SALNs of the justices from the time they were appointed until the year 2011.

Atty. Nepomuceno Malaluan, convenor of the Right to Know, Right Now Coalition, of which the PCIJ is a member, called the decision “a very positive development” on the issue of transparency and accountability. However Malaluan said he hoped to see more clarity in the procedures for accessing future asset records in the judiciary.

“We welcome the SC decision to grant the PCIJ request for the release of the SALNs of the Justices,” Malaluan said. “We still hope to see greater procedural certainty in access to SALNs in the judiciary, but this is certainly a very positive development towards this.”

The PCIJ request for SALNs covered the following Supreme Court justices:

  • Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno – SALNs and PDSs for 2010 and 2011;
  • Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio – SALNS and PDSs from 2001-2011;
  • Associate Justice Presbitero J. Velasco – SALNs and PDSs  from 2002-2011;
  • Associate Justice Teresita J. de Castro – SALNs and PDSs 2007-2011;
  • Associate Justice Arturo D. Brion – SALNs and PDSs 2008-2011;
  • Associate Justice Diosdado M. Peralta – SALNs and PDSs 2009-2011;
  • Associate Justice Lucas P. Bersamin – SALNs and PDSs 2009-2011;
  • Associate Justice Mariano C. del Castillo, SALNs and PDSs 2009-2011;
  • Associate Justice Roberto A. Abad – SALNs and PDSs 2009-2011;
  • Associate Justice Martin S. Villarama Jr. – SALNs and PDSs 2009-2011;
  • Associate Justice Jose P. Perez – SALNs and PDSs 2009-2011;
  • Associate Justice Jose C. Mendoza – SALNs and PDSs 2009-2011;
  • Associate Justice Bienvenido L. Reyes – SALN and PDS 2011;
  • Associate Justice Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe – SALNs and PDS 2011

In compliance with the somewhat convoluted requirements set forth by the Supreme Court for the release of the justices’s SALNs, the PCIJ was required to justify its request for the documents by stating its purpose and the interests that the PCIJ sought to be served.

As well, the PCIJ and all the other individuals and organizations that had petitioned for SALNs from the SC were required to submit a long list of documents including affidavits and accreditation papers.

The Supreme Court had also made any decision for the release of the SALNs into a matter that must be discussed by the tribunal en banc. This is part may be the reason why the Court almost took an entire year to decide on the PCIJ petition.

In its application, the PCIJ said the SALNs would be used for research and journalistic output on the “accuracy and/or truthfulness of the declaration of assets and liabilities” of the Justices. As well, the PCIJ said it wished to track the growth or decline of the wealth of the members of the judiciary, and look into possible cases of conflict of interest.

The judiciary had proven to be the most difficult government branch to request SALNs from. The PCIJ, which has made it a habit to request SALNs and PDSs of all government officials annually, has been able to secure SALNs from the Executive and the Senate. However, the House of Representatives has complied irregularly with the requirement for the publication of their SALNs, depending on the temper of the current House leadership.

It was the judiciary however that proved to be the toughest nut to crack. The Supreme Court, in particular, had stonewalled on requests for SALNs since the time of Supreme Court Chief Justice Andres Narvasa.

The Narvasa court had ruled that the SALNs of all members of the judiciary were confidential, on account of alleged fears that the documents would be used to blackmail officers of the court.

 

Withdraw online licensing policy, media groups urge Singapore

mcmangahas Leave a comment

FOUR independent media organizations in Asia on Friday urged the government of Singapore to withdraw its newly issued “draconian” licensing policy for online news websites, citing measure’s “potential to curtail the rights to the freedom of expression and information online.”

In a joint statement, the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA), the Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA), the Southeast Asian Centre for e-Media (SEACeM), and the Think Centre called the new policy “highly regrettable” in light of already “strict controls” that to this day govern the traditional media in Singapore.

The statement was issued simultaneously from Bangkok, Thailand; Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; and Singapore, where the four regional media groups are located.

The licensing regime for online news sites was introduced by the Media Development Authority (MDA), an agency under the Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) that regulates all types of media in Singapore.

“It is highly regrettable that the authorities have chosen to tighten its grip on online space in a country where traditional media outlets have been subjected to strict controls like the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act (NPPA) and consistently perform poorly in press freedom rankings,” the statement said.

“We question the necessity or merits of the licensing framework at this juncture, especially since the MDA has stated that there are no expected changes to the content standards governing websites,” the groups added.

“We also deplore the seeming haste and secrecy at which the regulations came into force in the absence of any public consultations or debate in Parliament.”

The licensing framework that took effect June 1, 2013 covers news websites that publish one article that reports on Singapore news every week and that draw 50000 unique visitors every month.

The MDA made an announcement about the new policy on May 28, 2013, and the regulation came into force three days later.

The policy requires the covered online news sites to secure “individual licenses, including posting (and forfeiture) of monetary bonds and an annual review of licenses.”

The media groups averred that, “under the new regime, operators of news sites which defy the authorities’ order to apply for a license could face a fine of up to SGD200,000 or a maximum jail term of three years or both.”

While the MDA has clarified that personal blogs are currently exempted from the licensing conditions, the groups lamented that the policy “does not safeguard against the thinly veiled threat” that “if they take on the nature of news sites, we will take a closer look and evaluate them accordingly”.

“The requirement of a SGD50,000 performance bond could still mean that independent websites such as citizen and community-run platforms are compelled to cease operations due to the inability to raise funds,” the statement noted.

The policy also imposes a 24-hour takedown rule for “objectionable”
content on websites, which also applies even to comments made by readers. This, the startement said, “gives the MDA censorship powers over licensed websites.”

In addition, the media groups stated, “we are further alarmed that liability for sanctions extend to similar content carried in mirrors or other websites.”

“Worryingly, there is a conspicuous absence of any mention of oversight or recourse mechanisms against any abuse of the law. Such unfettered discretionary powers grant the authorities broad latitude to suppress free speech online on the vague grounds of public interest, morality, order and security, among others,” the statement said.

According to the media groups, the regulatory measures “undoubtedly create a chilling effect and have the potential to shrink the democratizing potential of popular online platforms Singapore.”

Such attempts are not unprecedented in Singapore, the media groups said.

In 2011, the government gazetted socio-political commentary website The Online Citizen as a “political association”.

This year, bloggers and website owners have variously been threatened with defamation suits, served with takedown notices and made to issue public apologies, the groups reported.

The Minister of Communication has also stated that the Broadcasting Act would be amended next year to include overseas news websites reporting on Singapore as well.

“We would like to assert that the media in general should be kept free from state control, and that self-regulation by the media should be the starting point of any official policy, in order to fully realize the right to freedom of expression and opinion,” the statement added.

“We remind the Singapore government that keeping the internet free is crucial to promoting and protecting the right to the freedom of expression and opinion, which, under international human rights law, includes the freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

The media groups called on the government of Singapore to “withdraw the draconian licensing framework for online news sites,” adding that “any mechanism to address alleged objectionable online content must be dealt with on a case-case-to case basis, through a fair and transparent process with judicial oversight instead of extending the discretionary powers of executive or quasi-government bodies.”

Singapore is ranked 153 (Not Free) in Freedom House’s Freedom of the Press 2013 report and 149th out of 179 countries in the 2013 Press Freedom Index of Reporters Without Borders.

Employed? Unemployed? Take a Quick Quiz!

mcmangahas Leave a comment

ARE YOU employed? Unemployed? Underemployed?
Take a Quick Quiz in PCIJ’s MoneyPolitics Online.

There are 2.89 million unemployed Filipinos as of the latest Labor Force Survey of the National Statistics Office. Which group comprises the majority of the unemployed?
A. High school graduates
B. High school undergraduates
C. College graduates
D. College undergraduates

Click here to reveal the answer. No cheating, please!