from the Fake News
Senate Probe (So Far)
By Tim Henares
With so many different sides on the fake news debate (hint: there are far more than just two), there’s a lot to digest when it comes to the senate probe that isn’t even done yet as of Wednesday afternoon.
Here are 8 key takeaways from what was one of the biggest, yet most interesting clusterfucks (if we’re being honest) in the senate in recent memory:
Some senators are more concerned about their feelings than fake news itself
This whole discussion on fake news seems to be conflated with what was essentially an opinion post about the seven senators who did not sign the statement against the killing of minors. It seems that instead of investigating elements that are indeed libelous and detrimental to the public good, they’re engaging more in a pity party, and it completely distracted from the proceedings.
Even peddlers of fake news also fall victim to fake news
This explains the high number of “mistakes” that they end up having to “correct” when they’re called out on it. Therefore, there needs to be a better program at educating people on how to spot fake news, but certainly not at the 245-M budget PCOO Secretary Andanar is asking for.
People have the legal right to be jerks
We can wish that people whose opinions we don’t share behave themselves better, but unless a specific law or directive comes along (and let’s be honest: we hope not), people have the legal right to be jerks. The law cannot compel them to be decent human beings.
It’s a bit weird for people to be fighting for their right to be jackasses, but that’s the world we live in now.
Senator Nancy Binay is doing a face turn
If you’re a fan of pro wrestling, what Senator Nancy Binay is doing, mainly being conscientious in asking questions and imparting information during this hearing, is functionally her attempt at a heel-face turn. How many of us ever expected to find ourselves agreeing with her on anything?
Some senators don’t understand that the right to privacy enables anonymity
As much as some people keep citing their right against self-discrimina self-incrimination, that very same right, especially on the internet, is of essence to the marketplace of the ideas that it has become. To remove this anonymity is to unexpectedly disempower a lot of voices for the voiceless, especially in a country with a poor record of protection for actual journalists.
Forget worrying about legal action. Would you want to air out the ills of the government if your odds of getting shot in the face were pretty high?
Cocoy Dayao is the man of the hour
With so much of the hearing devoted to wanting to find out more about him, the glaring absence of one Cocoy Dayao is practically screaming for resolution.
One should also note that with the way they released his private information such as personal address and cell phone number to the public, something has to give when it comes to the limits of one’s freedom of expression, one way or another.
There is a higher standard for public officials
Or at least, there should be. It’s not a standard they always meet, but it’s pretty clear that at some point, public officials are beholden to their mandate, and even personal opinions can provide a conflict of interest with their line of work.
If only the guidelines for this were a lot more explicit.
Bam Aquino is such a Tito
“I think that we cannot expect Mr. Nieto to re-think his position because by then, he would have to be called ‘Re-Thinking Pinoy,” quipped the senator, making for the tito-est moment of his tito-riffic political career so far.
What are your thoughts on the proceedings? Share them with us below!