SC issues TRO vs cybercrime law

By YUJI VINCENT B. GONZALES          

           In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court on Tuesday issued a 120-day temporary restraining order (TRO) on the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, setting the oral arguments on Jan. 15 next year.

            The TRO, which stopped for four moths the implementation of the widely protested cybercrime law that took effect last October 3, also called on respondents to comment on the verdict within ten days. Respondents are headed by President Benigno Aquino, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima, and Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa, among others.

           

            In an Inquirer report, Palace deputy spokesperson Abigail Valte said that “the administration will always respect the legal processes that are issued by the [Supreme Court].”

            Sen. Edgardo Angara, author of the measure and chairman of the Senate committee on science and technology, welcomed the TRO and even called it a “necessary pause.”

            “It will give time to the Supreme Court to study the merit and give also the critics time to re-examine their position,” Angara said.

            The issuance of the resolution coincided with the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) drafting of the law’s implementing rules and regulations which were openly questioned and slammed by various sectors.

            Meanwhile, Sen. Teofisto Guingona III, lone senator who disapproved then bill and fourth of 15 petitioners who questioned its constitutionality in the High Tribunal, said that the TRO is the “first victory of the people and of freedom of expression,” the Inquirer report added.

            The cybercrime law is drawing jeers from the online community, media organizations, lawyers, and other social groups for its libel provisions that supposedly curtail freedom of speech and expression. Most controversial points include double jeopardy, longer penalty than “traditional” libel which can last up to 12 years, and DOJ’s authority to shut down websites which the agency perceive to be malicious.

            “Let me just point out the fact that we need a Cybercrime Prevention Act. Except for certain problematic provisions, this law is necessary. That’s why it is unfortunate that the overly vague and oppressive provision on libel was inserted into the law at the last minute,” said Guingona in his opinion piece published on the Rappler website.

            Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, in her speech before Adamson University students last Oct. 7, said she expects that the Supreme Court would declare the law as unconstitutional because of its “vague” provisions.

            “Simply repeating things, you made a comment, you liked, you shared, you’re already guilty, because you’re aiding and abetting. You can interpret it that way. That’s why I’m saying it is too vague,” read an Inquirer report.

            Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero, one of the authors of the measure, admitted he oversaw some specific provisions when approved the law and is willing to push them for amendments.

            “I’ll take out the criminal liability but the civil liability provision will be intact, meaning no jail penalty,” Escudero said.

            House Speaker Feliciano Belmonte, on the other hand, said in another Inquirer report that he quite expected the latest turnout of events—senators who signed the law and now seeking for amendments—as majority of them are re-electionists.

            “They should have been awake when the bill was being discussed so they would have known [the implications] and they should have foreseen [them],” Belmonte said in the report, describing RA 10175 as a “terrific law” that must be “[given] a chance to work,” as he cited other provisions.

            The law faced heavy opposition from the cyberworld as netizens changed their Facebook profile pictures to black images, shared photos and status updates in protest of the measure to the extent of calling it “e-martial law,” and using Twitter hashtags like “#NoToCyberCrimeLaw, #FreedomOfSpeech, and #BlackTuesday.”

           

            Over the past few weeks, hackers who call themselves as members of “Anonymous Philippines” have been defacing government websites, which include Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, Senate, and Official Gazette, in protest of the cybercrime law which they called as “the most notorious act ever witnessed in the cyberhistory of the Philippines.”

            ““We have won the battle. A TRO has been issued but the war has just begun. We won't stop until it is junked,” a supporter of the Anonymous tweeted.

For the pathetic and apathetic alike [EDITORIAL]

Along with milk teas, Korean dance craze, and foreign endorsers of clothing lines, some things by the names of “sugar-coating,” “shooting the messenger,” and “tsunami-like ignorance” have taken the Philippines by storm. Based on the latest turnout of events, and by the way they were warmly embraced, it seems like these new trends are as “addictive” as the formerly mentioned ones. However, it is certain that they are not as sweet, entertaining, and desirable.

Getting straight to the core, Filipinos are fighting for something for the wrong reasons. And worse, more often than not, they don’t have reasons at all. Worst, they do not even know what they are fighting for. Such identity [and morality] crisis is manifested by how they handle and react to social issues of today, best represented by the never-ending hullabaloo on the anti-life, anti-poor, and anti-values Reproductive Health (RH) bill.

This is not a generalization, but it appears that a significant number of those who [claim to] support the controversial measure have spent too much time reading cheesy, inspirational quotations about following one’s [selfish] bliss. And in this case, their [selfish] hearts tells them that they can find their happiness in the sense of belongingness—fitting in to and being loved by a judgmental majority of a dysfunctional society. In a very competitive world, joining the bandwagon is undoubtedly one of the best defense mechanisms of the apathetic and pathetic alike. In a world where people are very unforgiving, people feel the need to join the national conversation to conceal their ignorance and pretend that they have something to say [or that they care, at the very least].

However, these people cannot be fully blamed for going with the waves. Who wants to be persecuted, anyway? And who “killed” Jesus Christ again? But then again, what happens to a ship who insists to sail amid strong waves and winds? Get swayed, stumble, and shrink. Aside from lacking an “anchor,” a strong foundation, the captain also lacked personal judgment on when to sail or not, good decision-making skills, and convictions.

By the time the RH bill is passed into a law, history will repeat itself—it will be the second death of Christ in each and every hand of the humanity.

On the other hand, it must not be misunderstood that people join the bandwagon solely for belongingness’s sake—yes, others do it just because they want to project an image of a thinking individual, boosting their self-confidence and other egoistic instincts.

In their attempt to upgrade the society’s perception on them, these people have resorted to more effective ways than mere pretending to care—shooting the messenger. All throughout the span of heated arguments, protesters of the bill, particularly the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines, have received an overwhelming amount of unnecessary criticisms. It was such a commendable act, though—exhausting all possible means to gain support from the easily blinded public, attacking the messenger as an alternative to their inability to support their stand on the issue. Senator Sotto’s points on the dangers of contraceptives, putting all plagiarism issues aside, made perfect sense. But unfortunately, the pros took advantage of the recent plagiarism incident to over-emphasize Sotto’s flaw, thus embarrassing him and creating a different public opinion. Accusing the bishops and other sectors and individuals who oppose the measure as “close-minded,” RH supporters defying the Church’s is perceived nowadays as “liberal thinkers.” What must be understood is that the Church is not attacking the bill just because it has to, but because it is a moral issue, more than being an economic one. The Church, therefore, has every right to air its stand against the bill.

“The Catholic Church and those who are similarly minded ask for nothing more than fairness. After all, we have as much right to expose the dangers and ills of the Bill as those who promote it,” a report on the CBCP website read.

“The Church has the perfect right to preach against birth control and attack its proponents, just like birth control proponents have the perfect right to pontificate about its not entirely fictitious benefits and attack the Church. This is a free country. The Church may threaten hell-fire because hell comes only after death. The afterlife is not covered by the constitution,” said Teddy Boy Locsin in one of his editorials. “Indeed, there is no economic justification for birth control but there is a moral one.”

A lesser population is not, and will never be equivalent to economic development. If that is the case, then the some of the world’s biggest economies and most progressive countries, which are obviously more populated than the Philippines, will not be on the state where they are today. Along the way, something went wrong with management, discipline, education, and culture [of poverty]—but definitely not birth control. In fact, several recent studies showed that the Philippines’ population is its number one key in becoming one of Asia’s most progressive economies.

RH backers always argue that the bill is pro-choice, not understanding that wide availability of contraceptives can mean no choice at all. Wide availability [and distribution] is equivalent to wide usage. If their true mission is to educate, then they do not have to go to the extent of pushing their knocking-on-doors technique, personally handing contraceptives to communities via mobile vans.

They say the bill aims to reduce teenage pregnancies and maternal deaths, yet they do not understand that wide usage of contraceptives, which are definitely not a hundred percent safe, can even pave the way for the increase of such cases. In simpler words, RH means more contraceptives, more sex, and more danger.

They say that they are pro-life and against abortion, not understanding that although RH is not directly about abortion, failure of contraceptives will eventually lead to the acceptance of the practice someday.

And let us assume that RH would really decrease case of teenage pregnancies and maternal deaths. What happens to morality, then? Again, RH means more contraceptives, more sex, more danger, and in this case, a degradation of values. Pleasure will prevail over procreation, making the sacred act a cheap commodity.

“Sex without procreation gave way to its corollary: procreation without sex. Sexless procreation is in vogue now: test-tube babies, artificial placentas, surrogate mothers, artificial insemination, etc. Ironically, those countries that aggressively limited the possibility of procreation are now desperately inventing means to procreate even without sex,” said former UST Rector Rolando dela Rosa, O.P. in his opinion piece published in the Manila Bulletin. “Drumbeaters for contraception have recently found another potent way of advertising it: by scaring people with the dangers of AIDS, the doomsday scenario of overpopulation, and linking contraception with women’s reproductive health.”

Filipinos have lost sight of the more important things that they used to believe in, blinded by the sugar-coated beliefs being fed to them and their own craving to fit in a misguided society. Some day, when it is already too late to change the course of things, when the consequences of supporting an anti-life, anti-poor, and anti-values bill are already taking effect, the pathetic and apathetic alike will realize what the Church and other noble men are truly fighting for.

For the pathetic and apathetic alike [EDITORIAL]

Along with milk teas, Korean dance craze, and foreign endorsers of clothing lines, some things by the names of “sugar-coating,” “shooting the messenger,” and “tsunami-like ignorance” have taken the Philippines by storm. Based on the latest turnout of events, and by the way they were warmly embraced, it seems like these new trends are as “addictive” as the formerly mentioned ones. However, it is certain that they are not as sweet, entertaining, and desirable.

            Getting straight to the core, Filipinos are fighting for something for the wrong reasons. And worse, more often than not, they don’t have reasons at all. Worst, they do not even know what they are fighting for. Such identity [and morality] crisis is manifested by how they handle and react to social issues of today, best represented by the never-ending hullabaloo on the anti-life, anti-poor, and anti-values Reproductive Health (RH) bill.

            This is not a generalization, but it appears that a significant number of those who [claim to] support the controversial measure have spent too much time reading cheesy, inspirational quotations about following one’s [selfish] bliss. And in this case, their [selfish] hearts tells them that they can find their happiness in the sense of belongingness—fitting in to and being loved by a judgmental majority of a dysfunctional society. In a very competitive world, joining the bandwagon is undoubtedly one of the best defense mechanisms of the apathetic and pathetic alike. In a world where people are very unforgiving, people feel the need to join the national conversation to conceal their ignorance and pretend that they have something to say [or that they care, at the very least].

            However, these people cannot be fully blamed for going with the waves. Who wants to be persecuted, anyway? And who “killed” Jesus Christ again?

            But then again, what happens to a ship who insists to sail amid strong waves and winds? Get swayed, stumble, and shrink. Aside from lacking an “anchor,” a strong foundation, the captain also lacked personal judgment on when to sail or not, good decision-making skills, and convictions.

            By the time the RH bill is passed into a law, history will repeat itself—it will be the second death of Christ in each and every hand of the humanity. 

            On the other hand, it must not be misunderstood that people join the bandwagon solely for belongingness’s sake—yes, others do it just because they want to project an image of a thinking individual, boosting their self-confidence and other egoistic instincts.

            In their attempt to upgrade the society’s perception on them, these people have resorted to more effective ways than mere pretending to care—shooting the messenger. All throughout the span of heated arguments, protesters of the bill, particularly the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines, have received an overwhelming amount of unnecessary criticisms. It was such a commendable act, though—exhausting all possible means to gain support from the easily blinded public, attacking the messenger as an alternative to their inability to support their stand on the issue. Senator Sotto’s points on the dangers of contraceptives, putting all plagiarism issues aside, made perfect sense. But unfortunately, the pros took advantage of the recent plagiarism incident to over-emphasize Sotto’s flaw, thus embarrassing him and creating a different public opinion. Accusing the bishops and other sectors and individuals who oppose the measure as “close-minded,” RH supporters defying the Church’s is perceived nowadays as “liberal thinkers.” What must be understood is that the Church is not attacking the bill just because it has to, but because it is a moral issue, more than being an economic one. The Church, therefore, has every right to air its stand against the bill.

 “The Catholic Church and those who are similarly minded ask for nothing more than fairness. After all, we have as much right to expose the dangers and ills of the Bill as those who promote it,” a report on the CBCP website read.

“The Church has the perfect right to preach against birth control and attack its proponents, just like birth control proponents have the perfect right to pontificate about its not entirely fictitious benefits and attack the Church. This is a free country. The Church may threaten hell-fire because hell comes only after death. The afterlife is not covered by the constitution,” said Teddy Boy Locsin in one of his editorials. “Indeed, there is no economic justification for birth control but there is a moral one.”

A lesser population is not, and will never be equivalent to economic development. If that is the case, then the some of the world’s biggest economies and most progressive countries, which are obviously more populated than the Philippines, will not be on the state where they are today. Along the way, something went wrong with management, discipline, education, and culture [of poverty]—but definitely not birth control. In fact, several recent studies showed that the Philippines’ population is its number one key in becoming one of Asia’s most progressive economies.

RH backers always argue that the bill is pro-choice, not understanding that wide availability of contraceptives can mean no choice at all. Wide availability [and distribution] is equivalent to wide usage. If their true mission is to educate, then they do not have to go to the extent of pushing their knocking-on-doors technique, personally handing contraceptives to communities via mobile vans.

They say the bill aims to reduce teenage pregnancies and maternal deaths, yet they do not understand that wide usage of contraceptives, which are definitely not a hundred percent safe, can even pave the way for the increase of such cases. In simpler words, RH means more contraceptives, more sex, and more danger.

They say that they are pro-life and against abortion, not understanding that although RH is not directly about abortion, failure of contraceptives will eventually lead to the acceptance of the practice someday.

And let us assume that RH would really decrease case of teenage pregnancies and maternal deaths. What happens to morality, then? Again, RH means more contraceptives, more sex, more danger, and in this case, a degradation of values. Pleasure will prevail over procreation, making the sacred act a cheap commodity.

“Sex without procreation gave way to its corollary: procreation without sex. Sexless procreation is in vogue now: test-tube babies, artificial placentas, surrogate mothers, artificial insemination, etc.  Ironically, those countries that aggressively limited the possibility of procreation are now desperately inventing means to procreate even without sex,” said former UST Rector Rolando dela Rosa, O.P. in his opinion piece published in the Manila Bulletin. “Drumbeaters for contraception have recently found another potent way of advertising it: by scaring people with the dangers of AIDS, the doomsday scenario of overpopulation, and linking contraception with women’s reproductive health.”

             Filipinos have lost sight of the more important things that they used to believe in, blinded by the sugar-coated beliefs being fed to them and their own craving to fit in a misguided society. Some day, when it is already too late to change the course of things, when the consequences of supporting an anti-life, anti-poor, and anti-values bill are already taking effect, the pathetic and apathetic alike will realize what the Church and other noble men are truly fighting for.

Somewhere, a line has to be drawn

By Yuji Vincent B. Gonzales     

            IRRESPONSIBLE journalism kills. And when it does, it does not only kill people’s dignity and reputation, but also people themselves. It ruins not only names and integrity, but also lives.

            This is the primary theme being underscored in Sydney Pollack’s 1981 film titled Absence of Malice—the ethical issues concerning journalism and the gravity of damage that recklessness in the work inflicts to innocent, ordinary individuals.  

            Megan Carter, a Miami Standard reporter who represents the population of terrible journalists (also known as “disgrace to the profession”) in the world, wrote a half-baked, immature front page story about the alleged association of liquor warehouse owner Michael Gallagher to the disappearance of a local union leader named Diaz.

            Carter, who did not even bother to verify the report she found on the desk of a mediocre FBI agent named Elliot Rosen, gives a face to irresponsible journalism. Rosen knew in the first place that Gallagher, whose father had ties with gangsters and mafias, is innocent. He intentionally left the “secret” document about Gallagher “being under investigation” on his table for Carter to see it, thinking that linking the former to the Diaz case would force him to name names of the true suspects.

            That is where the series of intertwining unethical practices of Carter began. Putting aside Rosen’s intention, stealing documents, especially those which are supposed to be “sensitive” ones, is and will always be a misdeed and an act of dishonesty. What made things worse was Carter did not check on the credibility, reliability, and authenticity of the file. And worst, she also did not bother to exert additional efforts to contact Gallagher and ask for his side on the matter before publishing the story. Yes, she did try to call him once but he was not able to answer, so her attempt also ended there.

             In journalism, the discipline of verifying crucial facts or statements (in the film’s case, one that has serious legal implications) is a golden rule, and not abiding to such is considered a mortal sin. Relying solely on unreliable, leaked information in writing a story is very unprofessional. The two-source rule is important for a balanced and objective output.

            When Gallagher found out that he made it to the paper’s banner headline, he immediately went to the daily’s office, confronted Carter, and demanded her to disclose her “knowledgeable source in the Justice Department.” Carter, however, refused to divulge her source to Gallagher. As to the anonymity of sources, there is nothing wrong in hiding their identity for the sake of privacy and protection. However, this does not apply to Carter’s case because something was wrong in the process of news gathering—the [leaked, unreliable] source was illegally obtained. Carter was not really protecting her “knowledgeable source” but herself. She was protecting her own credibility, and simultaneously, she was protecting herself from shame and condemnation on the way she irresponsibly acquired information.

            In legal terms, the phrase “absence of malice” means the lack of evil intent to harm somebody. This is what Carter and the publication’s lawyer was citing to counter argue Gallagher’s accusations to them—that they have no willful motive to destroy Gallagher’s reputation. However, the mere fact that Carter still wrote the story without evidence and without asking for the subject’s side, there was an indirect and unconscious intent to harm Gallagher somewhere along her selfish interests.  She fashioned the story into that angle despite her knowledge and awareness of journalists’ big role in shaping public opinion. She may not be directly saying that Gallagher was the murderer, but that was the implication of her story in one way or another. Yes, there was probably an absence of malice, but there was also a negligence of a journalist’s duty and conduct on the other side. The latter is as equally tragic as having malice, or even worse than that. This just proves that no matter how the law is intended for nation-building and social order, just because something is legal doesn’t mean that it is morally right.

            In addition, Carter secretly recorded her conversation with Gallagher during their “lunch date” without consent. Carter was also somehow involved in a romantic affair with Gallagher. Although there is no concrete text in the rules of journalism saying that such is prohibited, it is something implied and understood that having personal attachment to sources is a big threat to credibility.

            More than fracturing Gallagher’s reputation, more than causing the liquor warehouse workers to resign, the biggest casualty of Carter’s malpractice was the death of Teresa Perrone, Gallagher’s childhood friend.

            Perrone, in her desire to clear her friend of all allegations to him, decided to meet up with Carter. She disclosed to her that Gallagher accompanied her for abortion on the weekend that Diaz disappeared, provided that her identity would not be revealed in the story. However, Carter insisted, saying that “people would understand.” It turned out that Carter is the one who did not understand the moral implications of her actions. The following day, Perrone, a devout Catholic and a teacher in a Catholic school, committed suicide after finding out that the story hit the papers.

            Carter took for granted her source and overpowered her in a sense that she abused its fragility. She ignored and disrespected Perrone’s request for confidentiality, resulting to a loss of life over credibility.

            Irresponsible journalism kills. And when it does, it sometimes does it literally.

            The worst thing that can happen to a journalist is to lose his sense of purpose. Journalists have tendencies to report or publish for the wrong reasons—for scoop, competition, ambition, prestige, meeting quotas—not understanding that they are writing about their fellow human beings, and what they write can make or break them. They do not realize the immense power and influence of the press that is on their very hands; and when they do, the damage has already been done. They are supposed to be bearers of truth, but they are gradually becoming bearers of “what is being said, what is perceived to be true, and what is simply accurate.”

            In their pursuit of stories to publish and ambition to land on the front page, journalists quite forget that their duty is not only to right but also to listen; that sometimes, they have to put their pens down and take time to sympathize and empathize with their subjects.  They are being trapped and carried away by their wrong notion of “news” and “public’s right to know.”

            The moral case and ethical issues are enough to justify journalists’ improprieties.

            There is a higher law than the law of man. And somewhere, a line has to be drawn. 

Black Tuesday for anti-cybercrime law

By Pauline Francisco

Social networking sites appeared to have been under repair when Netizens all over the Philippines changed their profile pictures to solid black images to participate in an online protest against the Cybercrime Prevention Act.

Labelled as “Black Tuesday,” the online protest was initiated by the Philippine Internet Freedom Alliance (PIFA) to express their intention to stop what many dub as the “Cyber Martial Law.”

PIFA, wrote in its campaign “Respect our right to free speech, privacy and information,” followed by the tag line, “Prevent dictatorship. Protect democracy.”

The alliance also staged a “silent protest” with some of its 100 members at the Supreme Court to oppose the Cybercrime law and to stop its implementation.

Some protesters even turned to be hacking. Philippine National Police’s website was the latest victim of computer hackers in protest of the law. 

Other websites earlier defaced includes the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines, Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System, American Chamber of Commerce of the Philippines, Philippine Anti-Piracy Team, Department of Environment and Natural Resources in Region 3, Institute for Development and Econometric Analysis, and the Department of Health’s antismoking program.

Street protests were also conducted in Mindanao. Members of militant groups in Davao City joined the movement to express disapproval on the cybercrime law as they lay down on a portion of the road, which has also caused obstruction in the traffic flow.

The group said the law violated freedom of expression, the constitutional guarantee of protection against double jeopardy, due process, and the privacy of communication and correspondence because it allowed real-time collection of traffic data, effectively, surveillance without warrant.

Many Filipino netizens considered PIFA’s call on Facebook and Twitter and changed to black profile images to express dismay for the implementation of the law and support the Anti-Cybercrime Prevention Act.

Some netizens expressed dismay by putting a black bar as their status message instead of words followed by [POST BLOCKED].

This controversy circulating all over the internet draws different criticisms and reactions from the people. It made #NoToCybercrimeLaw and #blacktuesday among the top trending topics on twitter last Tuesday.

Black Tuesday for anti-cybercrime law

By Pauline Francisco

Social networking sites appeared to have been under repair when Netizens all over the Philippines changed their profile pictures to solid black images to participate in an online protest against the Cybercrime Prevention Act.

Labelled as “Black Tuesday,” the online protest was initiated by the Philippine Internet Freedom Alliance (PIFA) to express their intention to stop what many dub as the “Cyber Martial Law.”

PIFA, wrote in its campaign “Respect our right to free speech, privacy and information,” followed by the tag line, “Prevent dictatorship. Protect democracy.”

The alliance also staged a “silent protest” with some of its 100 members at the Supreme Court to oppose the Cybercrime law and to stop its implementation.

Some protesters even turned to be hacking. Philippine National Police’s website was the latest victim of computer hackers in protest of the law. 

Other websites earlier defaced includes the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines, Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System, American Chamber of Commerce of the Philippines, Philippine Anti-Piracy Team, Department of Environment and Natural Resources in Region 3, Institute for Development and Econometric Analysis, and the Department of Health’s antismoking program.

Street protests were also conducted in Mindanao. Members of militant groups in Davao City joined the movement to express disapproval on the cybercrime law as they lay down on a portion of the road, which has also caused obstruction in the traffic flow.

The group said the law violated freedom of expression, the constitutional guarantee of protection against double jeopardy, due process, and the privacy of communication and correspondence because it allowed real-time collection of traffic data, effectively, surveillance without warrant.

Many Filipino netizens considered PIFA’s call on Facebook and Twitter and changed to black profile images to express dismay for the implementation of the law and support the Anti-Cybercrime Prevention Act.

Some netizens expressed dismay by putting a black bar as their status message instead of words followed by [POST BLOCKED].

This controversy circulating all over the internet draws different criticisms and reactions from the people. It made #NoToCybercrimeLaw and #blacktuesday among the top trending topics on twitter last Tuesday.

SWS surveys: Filipinos satisfied with PNoy’s performance

Data from Social Weather Stations (SWS) showed that Filipinos were generally satisfied with President Benigno Aquino III’s performance from the onset of his incumbency in 2010 to the third quarter of this year, with ratings falling mostly under the “very good” (+50 to +69) and “good” (+30 to +49) marks.

Ratings never lower than ‘good’

In the second quarter of 2010, a survey on public trust to the then newly elected President found a very good net trust rating of +83, with 88% of adult Filipinos having much trust and 4% having little trust on the President.

The net trust rating is the difference of the percentage of those had much trust with those who had little trust.

His first net satisfaction rating, for the third quarter of 2010, was a very good rating +60, with 71% satisfied and 11% dissatisfied adult Filipinos, which increased to a still very good rating +64 (74% satisfied and 10% dissatisfied) in the fourth quarter of the same year.

The net satisfaction rating is obtained by subtracting the percentage of the dissatisfied from the satisfied respondents.

The first decrease on his net satisfaction rating was in the first quarter of 2011, when survey results found 69% adult Filipinos satisfied and 18% dissatisfied with the President’s performance, leading to a net rating of +51 still a very good.

The said survey, conducted from March 4-7 2011, showed that 48% of the Filipino respondents thought that the President’s purchase of brand new Porsche was “not a good example.”

Aquino’s net satisfaction ratings sustained another decrease in the second quarter of 2011, his first good net rating - +46, with 64% of Filipinos satisfied and 18% dissatisfied.

Ratings increased during the third and fourth quarters of 2011, with very good net satisfaction ratings of +56 (70% satisfied and 14% dissatisfied), and +58 (71% satisfied and 13% dissatisfied).

In the first quarter of 2012, however, Aquino’s net satisfaction rating fell to +49, under the good mark, with 68% satisfied and 19% dissatisfied with his work. Likewise, in the second quarter of 2012, ratings decreased by seven points, resulting to a +42 good satisfaction rating, with 63% satisfied and 21% dissatisfied respondents.

The latest survey, conducted from August 24 to 27, revealed 77% satisfied and 10% dissatisfied with PNoy’s performance, leading to a record-high net satisfaction rating of +67, under the very good mark.

In the years of his incumbency, net satisfaction ratings of the President according to SWS surveys fall under +42 to last quarter’s +67, never lower than good.

Surveys are conducted quarterly, for three days, by face-to-face interviews of 1,200 adults in Metro Manila, the Balance of Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. According to the SWS website, surveys are non-commissioned, are conducted as a form of public service, and first publishing rights are assigned to Business World.

Highest ratings in Visayas, lowest in Metro Manila

                The survey on public trust conducted on June 2010 found Visayas with the highest net trust rating of +87, falling under the mark of excellent. Trust ratings in Balance Luzon, Metro Manila and Mindanao also fall under excellent, with ratings of +84, +84, and +79 respectively.

                In the quarters that followed, satisfaction ratings in the said areas mostly fell under the very good and good mark, except for a moderate rating of +18 in Metro Manila during the second quarter of this year, with 48% satisfied and 30% dissatisfied respondents.

                During the third quarter of 2010, all areas had a very good net satisfaction rating (+64 in Luzon, +54 in Visayas, +52 in Mindanao, and +66 in Metro Manila), and it remained very good the quarter that followed, noting increases in all areas except for a seven point decrease in Metro Manila.

                The over-all decrease in the net satisfaction ratings of Aquino during the first quarter of 2011 could be attributed to ratings from Luzon, Mindanao and Metro Manila. From a +69 rating in the previous quarter, it dropped to +48 in Luzon, falling under the good mark. Only Visayas sustained a four-point increase, from +56 to +60, while Mindanao and Metro Manila ratings decreased, from +65 to +55 and from +59 to +41, respectively, although both still termed very good.

                During the second quarter of 2011, ratings in Luzon and Visayas decreased, while ratings in Mindanao and Metro Manila obtained a minimal increase. Metro Manila (with a +43 net satisfaction rating), and Luzon (+41) fell under the good mark, while Visayas (+51) and Mindanao (+54) stayed on the very good mark, although the former sustained a nine point drop from the previous quarter.

                Data found in the survey conducted during the third quarter of 2011 showed not much change, with Luzon and Metro Manila still having good satisfaction ratings (+41 and +43, respectively) and Visayas and Mindanao having very good marks (+52 and +55). In the fourth quarter of 2012, Metro Manila had a +54 net satisfaction rating, falling under the very good mark, similar to the other areas.

                In March 2012, Aquino’s net satisfaction ratings in Metro Manila (+52), Visayas (+50) and Mindanao (+53) remained very good, although they dropped considerably compared to the previous quarter. In Luzon, ratings dropped by 15 points, which resulted in a good rating of +45.

                Ratings continued to drop in the second quarter of this year. Only ratings in Mindanao, which increased by 8 points to +61 remained in the very good mark. Metro Manila experienced a 34-point drop to +18, landing on the moderate mark.

                Significant increases in net satisfaction ratings in the areas contributed to a high-time record of +67 overall net satisfaction rating for August. Visayas, Ratings in the Visayas rose to an excellent +76, while Balance Luzon had a 29-point increase, which led to a +70 excellent rating of Aquino’s performance. Very good ratings of +59 (a 41-point increase) and +61 were found in Metro Manila and Mindanao, respectively.

                

               

Arroyo to create a charter for Veterans

By: Maria Laarni Mallari

Pampanga Representative Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo filed a bill creating a charter for Veterans Memorial Medical Center (VMMC), on October 6.

The said bill will give VMMC the “power to own real and personal properties and creation of a governing body that will direct the accomplishment of its mission as defined and delineated by its charter.”

"The VMMC is unlike the Philippine Heart Center, Lung Center, Kidney Center, Philippine General Hospital and the Philippine Children's Medical Center which have their own charters. These medical institutions’ use and services are not free," Arroyo said in a press release.

Under the bill, to be known as the "The Veterans Memorial Medical Center Charter of 2012," VMMC shall have its own be led by Chief Executive Officer, to be appointed by the President, and shall have a six-year term.

House Bill 6502, also states that all donations to the hospital and the hospital itself, shall be exempted from taxes or any other charges imposed by the government.

"Recognizing the invaluable sacrifices and services of veterans and military retirees, the 

VMMC is primarily committed to serve the Filipino war veterans as defined in Republic Act 6948 entitled an 'Act Standardizing and Upgrading the Benefits for Military Veterans and their Dependents,'" Arroyo added.

VMMC is a tertiary hospital that has served the country for 53 years. Its mission is to provide “quality hospitalization, medical care and treatment to Filipino veterans” and military retirees.

It can be remembered that Arroyo stayed in VMMC under a hospital arrest.

We Might Run Out of Bananas

By Jan Eidrienne De Luis

Big tarpaulins, TV advertisements, free t-shirts and other things that seem to greet people happy fiesta or to just advertise a program or a product inundate the metro and the media.

The campaign period has not officially started yet but it’s obviously in the fast lane.

Our culture and kind tradition has been tainted by these political ballyhoos and shenanigans. A year before the elections everything is tarnished with malice that seemingly  insult the intellectual caliber of the Filipino people or at most times take advantage of benighted citizens.

Not only the display of humongous faces and names is extremely appalling, but also the emergence of celebrity-turned-political candidates—not to mention some ill-repute ones in the world of show business.

If someone runs for a spot in the legislature, one must be equipped with sufficient knowledge of the different policies on the creation of laws or even the legislative proceedings. One can argue that these are lore and that it can be acquired by the human intellect through experience. Well of course that could happen, but for a third-world country, the Filipino people cannot wait for someone to be able to test the fast and loose waters of congress. Think of it this way, many bills both from the upper-chamber and the lower-chamber are being contested and disputed because of its precipitousness and lack of substance and background research, because of this some congressmen had gotten the ire of the citizens, with some being derided as politically ignorant for they are just actors-turned-politicians.

Also, the candidates’ family name does not speak of his serving caliber as a person. One must remember this.

The question of who seated them in office is a huge bludgeon to the masses.  Will we allow more monkeys to sit in the precious seats of the Batasang Pambasa and make monkey-laws that will eventually govern monkey citizens and will turn the place into monkey-land? A state governed by monkeys in the most monkey way will yield into the emergence of more monkeys worst than the monkey kings. If this persists then soon we will have shortage of bananas.

The Filipino people must understand that what they see in teledramas is not real. They must know how to shield themselves from knaveries served to them with tender, love and care. Still education is very crucial and significant for we determine the future of the country through our votes. We are the fountainhead of the government of the Philippines for we settle who sits and who goes. In a deeper sense of the democratic and republican ideologies, we are the government

Apathy has no place in the Filipino hearts especially as 2013 goes closer and closer. We must verify the words that come out of the well-sugared mouths of the candidates because it is only through background-checking and keen observation that we can sort out the sourness or the appalling halitosis lying beneath.

The Philippine policies on running for public office are very democratic. It allows a showbiz mother to run for congress as long as she has the means to do so and if she is of the right age.

Democracy is good but it often contributes to the downfall of most states, because democracy by its own political sense acknowledges man as a rational being—capable of understanding concepts and ideas, capable of good logical reasoning and through this must man use his freedom. It gives us the full pledged right to be free, to use this freedom in making sense of things, to use it in a rational way as we human beings are naturally intellectual beings.

Are we going to be prisoners of our own ignorance? Or are we going to inculcate the intellectual freedom and power that our constitution vested upon us?

Vote FREELY then.

Conception of a Misconception

By: Iza Maria Gonzalez

Oh, the irony.  Or, more accurately,the ironies.

The average Filipino must be tired of hearing the same old argument over and over again. Since time immemorial, poverty has always been attributed to the rapid population growth. Gasgasna, in layman’s terms, but used as the main contention in the insistent pushing for a law on Reproductive Health.Gasgasna, and what makes it so much worse is that this argument is a misconception. How ironic, that from a misconception, a bill was born, and in this bill lies more outward – and in some cases, insulting – ironies.

House Bill No. 4244, or “An Act Providing for a Comprehensive Policy on Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health, and Population and Development, and for other Purposes,” is the current Reproductive Health Bill. Authored by Representative EdcelLagman and 103 others, the bill contains vague provisions on the use and distribution of contraceptives, on abortion, and on other concerns. Thus, the first irony – how was it possible that a bill written by so many lawmakers, and is actually a consolidation of six other house bills, still be so unclear?

What remains crystal clear is where the adamant demand for a law on Reproductive Health stems from. Supporters of the bill claim that the uncontrollable growth of the nation’s population greatly contributes to poverty and all the other problems that come with it, such as unemployment, pollution, illiteracy, and the like. According to various studies, however, a young and developing population serves as the backbone of a growing economy. Yet, if the solution to poverty is a progressive economy, then a law should not be created to control population growth. There lies another irony.Why prevent the growth of the population when a sustainable economy – the solution to the escalating problem of poverty – largely depends on it?

A closer look on the problem of poverty will shed light on one of the greatest ironies there is. Is there really a correlation between population expansion and poverty? Is it not lack of education, of employment opportunities, of reforms and plans that lead to development, that truly hinder the progress of Filipinos’ lives? Blaming poverty to the population equates to blaming the people for a problem that they never created. In the first place, it is the incompetence of an ineffectual government that thwarts good governance. To add insult to injury, corruption and erroneous economic policies worsen the problem. Hence, the loveliest irony of all, as if it is not wrong to blame the people for a problem they cannot solve, the reproductive health bill blames the people for a problem that the government itself crafted into the monster it is today.

And of course, there exists smaller but equally disturbing ironies. In Section 4 (Definition of terms) of the bill, under Reproductive Health Care, the bill enacts “proscription of abortion and management of abortion of complications.” The bill states that it does not prescribe and encourage abortion, but mandates every hospital and other medical units to offer the appropriate assistance to women who engaged in abortion without judgement. The provision is fair, but unnecessary, given that even without it, women – or any person for that matter – should be given proper medical care regardless of the circumstance she is in.

The bill also states that it “recognizes that abortion is illegal and punishable by law,” but it allows and even encourages the use and distribution of contraceptives, when in fact, some contraceptives are abortifacients. Therefore, it does not legalize abortion, but in an implicit manner, allows it.Implicit, yes, but an explicit irony.

Proponents of the bill also insist on being pro-choice. Being a democratic country, they say, we are entitled to freedom of choice. In provisions of the bill, couples are free to choose “the number and spacing of their children,” but prescribes and “ideal family size” of two children. The less fortunate in the society choose to have more children because manpower is their only resource. For instance, farmers, having a labor-intensive source of livelihood, need more manpower. Prescribing an “ideal family size” of two children is not always “ideal” for every Filipino family. But regardless of manpower or labor-force, why prescribe an “ideal family size” to a culture known to be family-oriented from the very beginning?

Another contradiction to the bill being pro-choice is that it mandates “all accredited health facilities” to “provide a full range of modern family planning methods.”  The provision implies that the opinion of health facilities on the use of thesaid methods does not matter. Whether or not they are against the use of contraceptives, they are required to make them available to every Filipino citizen.

Pro-choice, but with no choices.Pro-choice, but not pro-life.Yet again, ironic.\

The mere act of making contraceptives and other means of family planning and birth control available to the people – to Filipinos of all ages – will have a serious negative effect on the country’s current state of mind. Being a predominantly Catholic nation, premarital sex, and abortion are two things that Filipinos greatly condemn. If the bill, however, would be passed, it would be as if the use of contraceptives has finally been accepted, leading to an increase in cases of premarital sex. In other words, contraceptives would encourage the youth to engage in premarital sex without considering the responsibilities of parenthood, because they do not see the possibility of being a parent.

 Since it has been proven through the years that not all contraceptives are effective, the bill may also lead to more cases of teenage pregnancy; thus, more young adults unable to finish their education,more children without fathers, and more mothers engaging in abortion.

A final irony: Sex is an act committed for the purpose of reproduction but looking closely, this bill encourages young people to engage in the act without thinking of the responsibilities of being a parent and raising a family. Is this how the bill upholds ‘Responsible Parenthood’?

Instead of allotting another large amount of taxpayers’ money to a law that would prevent, instead of help, the country’s progress, shouldn’t the government focus on the implementation of projects and creation of reforms that would eradicate poverty, the source of all these nonsense?

At the end of the day, there should be no more debate. A bill as vague and as questionable as HB 4244 should not be enacted into a law, for it would only worsen the country’s current situation. If indeed, it is true that the Philippines’ economy is gradually improving, then it is imperative that this bill must not be passed. A vibrant, young, and developing population is the key to a globally competitive economy. Again, the population must NOT be controlled.

Only one abortion should be committed – an abortion of the misconception that population expansion causes poverty, a belief that should not have been born in the first place. 

Manny and his Legacy

By: Rijel Reyes

From the image of the fictional greatness Rocky Balboa, from the torch flames of Hall of Famers and All-Time Greats of the sport of Boxing, belts and money are nothing more than superfluous rewards. Manny “Pacman” Pacquiao stepped up to imprint his name through the ages by agreeing to split the purse uneven just to make the “Fight of The Millennium” happen against Floyd Mayweather Jr.

That classifies greatness.

No more reasons. No more ducking. No more chicken dance. Blood testing, check. Uneven split of purse in favor of Floyd, check. Setting? Just like what Pacquiao said against a possible rematch after his loss to Erik Morales, “Anytime, anywhere.”

Unblemished records are not always the proof of superiority and dominance over other fighters in your era. Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier, Rocky Marciano and the like did not need untarnished records. They did not pursue financial stability or the belts. They got to prove themselves. They fight the best, to prove that they are undisputed and immeasurable.

Though coming from a loss in one of the greatest controversial decisions in Boxing history from a non-household name in his last fight, what makes Manny Pacquiao the best among the rest and seals his fate in the Hall of Fame and All-Time Greats despite a debatable flopping?

Well, aside from being a World Championship in eight different weight divisions, aside from being recognized as one of the best pound-for-pound boxers in the world, aside from bagging billions of pesos or millions of dollars in a single fight and aside from his demolition of great fighters in his era; he has the guts and glory of being a champion. He has the greatest backbone of all. He has the faith of the people in him.

Falling to 54-4-2 win-loss-draw record after losing to Timothy Bradley, the pride of the Philippines is yet to say “I’m done.” He has nothing to prove anymore for he already contributed to the betterment of the sport; yet, he refusedto stop.

Despite losing, Pacman never lost his composure as a champion, matching the greatness of the legends of the sport. Pacquiao respected the decision, stayed down to earth, prayed and thanked everyone who had fought with him and carried his name with pride. And that’s what makes him different. He is loved by the people. He is recognized. He is praised. He is humbled. Win or lose, people watch and will watch him because he fights anybody in all terms, no ducking reasons.

And now, told to fight yet again his “waterloo” - Mexican superstar Juan Manuel Marquez who gave him three fights of relentless action and controversial escapes, he agreed to face this guy among anyone else. A decision made because he wants to make a statement to end this controversy bothering him for years. And maybe, somehow, before facing Mayweather – the greatest adversary ever compared to him, to be free from doubts and haunting pasts.

Now that he agrees in all the terms which Floyd had wanted, it is now up to the American whether he will continue to “duck” against this fighter or choose to have his name immortalized in the sport and in history.

Manny cares less for the rankings, cares less for his record, cares less for hate and cares too much for his people. He cares for his legacy in the sport and in history.

All of his achievements are less than those people he wanted to amuse.

He got what Micky Ward, Thunder Gatti, The Greatest, Smokin’ and the legends once had and others lack – The People and their faith.

He is the People’s Champion.

Editorial Cartoon

Could it be just fate?

By Anthony Don Marca

The Final Four is set.

I was still studying in Lourdes School Quezon City when the University of Santo Tomas won the championship in 2006. As far as I can remember, I was rooting for them because my dad used to be a Thomasian. He told me and my brothers that one day we will also feel the same joy he was feeling during that day.

I never thought it would come true.Today I am on my third year in college, and so far, this year’s rank of the Tigers in the 75^th season on the UAAP at 2^nd spot is the best during my stay at the University.

Being number two gives the Tigers a twice-to-beat advantage over the National University, who, ironically, gave the former that spot when the latter won its re-play game versus the Far Eastern University.

The UST community as well as enthusiasts, prayed hard for the Bulldogs’ victory because in case they lost that match, the Tigers and Tams would have to face in a playoff game for 2^nd spot, while De La Salle University secures the number four seat. Just the same, NU also needed the win to clinch a spot on the Final Four, since the last time they went to the playoffs was way back in 2001.

It is also a blessing in disguise for UST because they do not have to face FEU anymore, who defeated them twice prior to the playoffs. Plus, NU did not win a single game against the España-based cagers also in the elimination round. The Tigers have a very good chance to make it to the finals, or even taking home the title.

By any chance, UST will not battle FEU in the playoffs after the latter was eliminated by DLSU in a knockout match. Yes, FEU was one of the leading contenders; they are even on the 2^nd spot just before lumping a 3-game losing skid.

Whenever I have time to meet my friends from other universities, some of them would say “Naka-tsambananaman ‘yung UST,” pertaining to Tigers coach PidoJarencio’s famous line every time UST wins a game.

I then thought to myself if it was just luck. And the answer I got is no.

UST deserves to be on where they are right now. They fought hard in every game, hustling for the ball, making every possession count, and working harder on defense. Of all the four losses of the Tigers, only one was decided by a very far margin, while the rest were just a sheer one-point deficit.

They bolstered their roster by bringing back in Aljon Mariano, who is a force inside and also a threat beyond the arc. With the ball in the paint, defense usually doubles him; giving shooters like Tata Bautista and JericTeng an opening for a clear shot outside.

Jeric Fortuna may not be scoring that much, but he also a key to the team’s run by being a vocal leader on court and by delivering good plays. In their match against the University of the Philippines, he sparked the Tigers’ offense in his back-to-back three-point plays. This just shows a great attitude of a leader, stepping up during crucial situations. Another big factor is their big man Karim Abdul, who is a leading candidate for the Most Valuable Player award in listing double-double averages of 17.6 points and 13 rebounds.

The Tigers were also known as the “Come-back Tigers” after listing four come-from-behind wins against top seed Ateneo de Manila University, NU and UP; two of which are against NU, who they will face in the first round of the Semi-finals. The Bulldogs may have the upper hand in terms of player’s capabilities and skills, but the Tigers have the advantage of the situation and the momentum plus the experience in battling for crucial games.

I believe they are ready. They are motivated, inspired, willed, and most of all, blessed. Their hunger for redemption and thirst for a title is what fuels them to drive for that goal – the championship.