QUO VADIS, BONGBONG?
The series of forums being staged by various media and civic groups are intended to give voters a chance to know the candidates better up close under public scrutiny, to make candidates accountable for their respective visions, thoughts and plans at the same time, under the same circumstances.
So why is Bongbong excluding himself again?? This time from KBP forum? Does he think he’s above the rest and not worthy of his time? Or is he afraid to be compared to others? Or is the campaign strategy for him is to listen to the questions first then ask a friendly interviewer to ask the same on a later arranged date for his prepared and studied responses?? That’s a cop-out.
Or is his campaign team simply would not dare risk to lose critical support from among his fanatic fans if his performance and ability to be confronted with difficult questions do not meet his supporters’ high expectations of him??
Whatever his or his campaign team’s reasons, it’s becoming obvious he fears being made accountable and confronted in a forum attended by all others. It’s definitely not like what his namesake, eloquent father – FM – was known to be: Taking on all quarters, anywhere, anytime and whoever! He dares enter any and all lions’ dens. That was the Marcos trait.
Kung face-to-face classes yan, malapit ng i-drop si Bongbong sa subject. Two absences na, hindi pa naguumpisa ang official campaign period. Sayang lahat ang build up sa kanya kung namimili lang pala parati ng interviewer na napapakiusapan. Bakit puro iwas pusoy?
I’m sure many of his own supporters, many of whom are on my page must also be wondering why this is happening. Some will surely offer lame excuses for him but even they are surely hard put in justifying this second absence.
Sayang. He’s missing the chance to make his supporters even prouder of him.
Note: From the UK National Gallery-
The Latin phrase Quo Vadis (Where are you going?) denotes an episode from the life of Saint Peter, as told in the New Testament Apocrypha and the ‘Golden Legend’. Peter fled from Rome during the persecution of Christians under the emperor Nero; as he was travelling along the Appian Way he met Christ in a vision.
An agenda to mislead the public
A statement titled “SECOND OPINION” circulated on social media supposedly crafted by a group of doctors and health workers.
At first glance, the article appears to be genuinely concerned with the plight of the medical sector in the frontlines.
Journalist Ermin Garcia, a critic of Vice President Leni Robredo, has an approving opinion for the leader of the political opposition and staunch critic of President Rodrigo Duterte for her comment on COVID-19 urging Pinoys to join hands against the deadly virus.
Leni is not an obstructionist, for a change, said Garcia.
But Garcia also wished that Robredo would also address her unity call to the ranks of the opposition that she leads.
On March 9 in a post in his Facebook account, Garcia spiced up his post with a note that could also have aborted Leni’s orgasm over getting praise from a severe critic:
“FINALLY, VP LENI SHOWS THE WAY.. Helpful message this one. Not the voice of an obstructionist, for a change.”
“Imagine impact if she does something similar, enjoining opposition to wash its mouth, sanitize it’s message, touch people’s heart and work as one with people and govt, for a better nation.”
“Hmmm wishful thinking. But we can dream, can’t we – for faster development and progress.”
Press freedom cannot be invoked to defend and promote a media outlet’s business operations
KNOW THE DIFFERENCE. Not only does ABS-CBN have all the latitude and airtime to discuss and reject charges filed by Sol-Gen Calida. It has talents, writers, reporters, commentators to argue for it using ABS-CBN’s facilities That’s the exercise of press freedom as a constitutional right.
“Freedom of the press or freedom of the media is the principle that communication and expression through various media, including printed and electronic media, especially published materials, should be considered a right to be exercised freely.”- Wikipedia
The moment ABS-CBN’s reporters, commentators, anchors and officials are barred from airing their views in defense of the company, that’s curtailment of PRESS FREEDOM, a violation of the Constitution. (Although the rule on sub judice can also be invoked if warranted to prevent discussion of merits of the case)
If a journalist is charged in court for libel or media establishment for violation of laws, the charges cannot be regarded as a curtailment of, or violation of press freedom because the constitution provides for it.
Of course, complaints of libel and violation of franchise are regarded as harassment, but it’s also no different from how news subjects react to critical news reports and opinions aired or published by journalists about them.
In the case of ABS-CBN it is being charged for violation of its franchise, not for abusive language or false statements of reporters, commentators considered as libelous or false. So press freedom is simply not an issue because press freedom is for journalism practice limited only by libel law. Media establishments, on the other hand are governed by a different set of rules – ownership laws, employment laws, franchise laws, tax laws, ordinances, etc.
Hence, press freedom cannot, and should not be invoked to defend and promote a media outlet’s business operations. It’s totally irrelevant.
There’s a whale of difference in application. (Whether the case as quo warranto is correct, is a different story.)