We could have been living in a country that could fight against the COVID pandemic. A place where we could walk around without worry, without the fear of getting infected, which may result in death. There was a chance to put things back to the way they used to be. However, due to the government’s incompetence and lack of foresight, we’ve missed the opportunity to achieve our desired future.

In the latter half of 2020, Sen. Panfilo Lacson revealed that we could have secured the delivery of 10 million Pfizer vaccines. But according to him, because someone "dropped the ball" and failed to submit necessary documents, namely, the Confidentiality Disclosure Agreement (CDA), we were not able to purchase the vaccines that could've arrived as early as January of this year. The person who “dropped the ball” was then revealed to be Health Sec. Duque, which was confirmed by Foreign Affairs Secretary Teodoro “Teddy Boy” Locsin Jr. in December 2020.

Health Sec. Duque was quick to defend himself against Lacson’s accusations by saying that the Philippine government's negotiation with Pfizer is still ongoing. Though Lacson, who was not swayed by Duque's answer, says that while it is true that the deal for vaccines is still ongoing, the current deal is a “renewed initiative after they missed the bus the first time.” This means that the ongoing deal, which Sec. Duque was referring to, was actually a newer deal. 

Ironically, even though the government had a slow response regarding the COVID-19 vaccines, 

several members of the Presidential Security Group (PSG) and 100,000 Chinese Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators (POGO) were reported to be the first recipients of illegally smuggled vaccines.

Since November of the previous year, an estimated number of over 100,000 Chinese POGOs have received vaccinations despite the absence of regulatory approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), according to civic leader Teresita Ang-See. Ang-See said she viewed the vaccination as a "positive" development as this could help prevent transmission in the country. 

"Okay lang sa akin na ma-bakunahan sila, kasi [It's okay with me that they are vaccinated, because] we don't have much control with them," she said. "Wala naman tayong [We don’t have] basis to touch base with them, especially the POGO (Philippine Offshore Gaming Operator) workers. So, I'm glad that they are being vaccinated because it protects us also if they are protected."

This statement contradicts her previous ones in which Ang-See herself noted that since no vaccine has been approved to date by the FDA, there might be lapses in the operations, such as the process of administering the vaccine, as well as its handling and storage. This may put Filipino citizens at risk of infection, especially since multiple cases of reinfection have been recorded among the supposedly vaccinated Chinese POGOs. In addition, this is also a clear violation of the FDA Laws. Even if the people involved are foreigners, they still reside in the Philippines and they must abide by the laws of our country.

After weeks of deliberation, the University of the Philippines (UP) finally announced that the UP college admissions test (UPCAT) for AY 2021-2022 is cancelled. As of recent news the university is currently creating an algorithm to fit the applicants’ circumstances.

According to a statement released last October 27, 2020 by the Office of Admissions Director Francisco de los Reyes, UP experts came up with five possible actions for next school year’s college admissions after the coronavirus pandemic disrupted the yearly scheduled in-person entrance exam. The options posted are the following (as published on UP's official website):

1) A paper-and-pen administration of the UPCAT, subject to IATF and LGU COVID-19 protocols and coordination;

2) An online UPCAT;

3) A hybrid paper-and-pen and online mode for UPCAT;

4) A no-UPCAT scenario where UP may mine data from the applicant’s personal data sheet, high school records, the specific high school and performance of its graduates in UP, etc., to arrive at the University Predicted Grade (UPG);

5) A moratorium on freshman admission. 

Given these options, the Board of Regents weighed all the pros and cons to decide what would best benefit the incoming freshmen, the staff, and most importantly, the Philippines as a whole.

The first option, which is the paper-and-pen examination, has been proven effective over the past years. However, amidst a global pandemic, this would not have been the best decision to make. Yearly, there are around 100,000 applicants who take the UPCAT. This poses a potential health risk to the examinees and could easily contribute to the spread of the coronavirus (COVID-19). Furthermore, if this option had been chosen, the possibility of cheating among applicants would be greater since UP might have to extend the period of examination in order to strictly follow the health protocols. This would have led to examinees sharing information about the test questions and the students who will take the exam later will have an advantage because of this.

The second option, an online UPCAT, has the advantage of being safer and more accessible. However, this ease of access would only apply to those who have the privilege of a stable internet connection and a well-functioning device. Sadly, the Philippines ranks as one of the countries with the worst and most expensive internet connections in the world, according to VPN provider Surfshark’s 2020 Digital Quality of Life Index. Much like with the first option, cheating is also possible since there would be no observers to make sure that examinees do not use sources around them to look for the answers.

The third option, a combination of paper-and-pen and online UPCAT was also considered. It might seem like a great compromise, but the problem was that it most likely had the same set of disadvantages as the first two. With no further information released by the university, not much is known as to how UP would administer this kind of testing. 

The fourth option on the list is using the applicant's personal record as the basis of admission. This scenario is most likely to be administered now that there is no UPCAT. This is also the current admission process in other universities such as the Ateneo De Manila University and the University of Sto. Tomas. Among the five options, it is the most ideal because not only does it ensure the safety of the examinees, it also lessens the possibility of cheating. In addition, it is the most plausible since UP has a standardized system of evaluating an applicant's grade. This system is called the University Predicted Grade (UPG), which is designed to evaluate an examinee's academic performance using their test scores in the UPCAT and high school records. 

The final option on the list is having a moratorium on freshman admission. This is considered a last resort and would have been the worst arrangement because of the expected damages that it will bring to the country. First, those who cannot afford quality education ("underprivileged" ) whom the university mostly caters to, would be left with even lesser options. These people would have to find other alternatives such as loans or might need to temporarily halt their education altogether. Moreover, some teachers and university staff may have lost their sources of income for an entire academic year. The country’s economic status would also be expected to plummet, as a result of unemployment and a lack of fresh graduates.

The history of UPG started in the 1970s when a resolution was passed to combine the three-year high school average and the College Admissions Test scores. The UPCAT back then was 80% based on the subtest portion while the remaining 20% was based on high school grades. After a series of studies, they found out that high school grades should be given more weight in grading the applicant. It was not until 1976 that Prof. Romeo Manlapaz improved it by changing into the 60-40 grading system that we know today. This was when UPG, the system that we currently use, was officially born. 

The purpose of this system is to promote equity and ensure that each applicant is properly screened. So in 1998, UP improved the UPG system by introducing the Excellence-Equity Admissions System (EEAS). This system makes sure that the applicants are fairly treated because the EEAS adjusts the UPG of applicants using a palugit and pabigat. The palugit gives a bonus of 0.5 on their UPG if an applicant comes from a public barangay, public vocational, or public general high schools, excluding those administered by state universities and colleges and science high schools or if they belong to a minority group. The pabigat on the other hand gives a penalty to the applicant’s scores which is the opposite of palugit. This happens when a student applies for a campus that is not near his or her locality. Thanks to the EEAS, people from all sectors have a fair chance of getting admitted into UP.

As previously stated, an in-person conduct of the test is not recommended due to the country’s current circumstances. The next best option is to utilize the existing UPG system by taking an applicant’s personal data sheet, high school records, and performance into consideration, thereby leveling the playing field for the examinees. In addition, a written output in the form of an essay might also serve as a great substitute for the written component in the computation for UPG.

In the end, the Board of Regents is heading the right direction by choosing to forgo the UPCAT. It is unfortunate but as of now this is the most reasonable option that the BOR can take in these times of difficulty. //by Christine Caparas and Simon Delfinado

Sources: 

A giant social networking site with over 2.7 billion monthly active users, Facebook is a popular website that is used for sharing ideas and communicating with people worldwide. But, according to President Duterte on September 21, Facebook is pushing another agenda by “laying down a policy for the government” and is targeting his supporters by taking down groups, pages, and accounts that support his policies.

Nathaniel Gleicher, head of Facebook Security Policy, said in an online conference on September 22, that they removed two networks of fake accounts. These two networks comprise over 100 Facebook accounts, 43 pages, 9 groups, and 39 Instagram accounts and have over 276,000 followers on Facebook and 55,000 on Instagram overall.

The first one was traced to a group of individuals in China’s Fujian province. They mainly posted about issues in the West Philippine Sea and Beijing’s interests while also being supportive of President Rodrigo Duterte and the possible 2022 presidential bid of his daughter, current Davao Mayor Sara Duterte-Carpio.

The second network, which was based in the Philippines, was traced and found out to be managed by people affiliated with various police and military agencies. The domestic network, according to Gleicher, posted content primarily in Filipino and English. Local news and events, such as domestic politics, the military’s fight against terrorism, the draft of the pending anti-terrorism bill, and criticisms on communism, youth activists, the opposition, the Communist Party of the Philippines and its military wing the New People’s Army, and the National Democratic Front are the topics. 

Because of this, Duterte lashed out at Facebook by asking if the site served any purpose to the country if they don’t help the government in the “fight of ideas.” He then seemingly threatened the social network site by saying he doesn’t know if there’s “life after Facebook.” He told them that their reasons for taking down the “advocacy” pages were “so convoluted” that he couldn’t even understand them. After the president questioned Facebook about the take down of his “advocacy” accounts, Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque explained that the president will not ban the social media site and would only like to have a talk with them.

But is Facebook at fault for taking down these accounts? There are two main points that need to be addressed. First, the main reason behind why the accounts were taken down is most of them were fake and were coordinating with one another. This violated Facebook’s policy against Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior (CIB). CIB is defined as “using deceptive behaviors to conceal the identity of the organization behind a campaign, make the organization or its activity appear more popular or trustworthy than it is, or evade enforcement efforts.” 

This was not the first time that Facebook took down networks that supported the Duterte regime. In fact, there were already two instances prior, but neither were due to political reasons. In 2018, a couple of Facebook pages were removed because all the pages were found to be “sharing links to the same advertising click farms off Facebook,” which violates spam and authenticity policies. Another network of fake accounts, which were managed by President Duterte’s former social media strategist, was removed last year because of “coordinated inauthentic behavior” that misled the public.

They were not taken down because of the content they posted, nor was it because of who posted the content. It was because the owners of these fake accounts were violating Facebook policies. In other words, Facebook does not care for the “fight of ideas,” just as the President suggested, because the only ideas that Facebook is following are its community rules.

The second point to be addressed is that there are foreign organizations meddling with the country’s politics. Now, the question is why are there individuals from China who are trying to influence our political interests? This issue is a possible threat to our sovereignty and status as a democratic nation. Our citizens should be the ones to choose who will lead the country, without the influence of foreigners. We should all be worried, especially when a foreign country as big as China is trying to interfere. 

The ironic thing is that last September, Duterte hit back at some European lawmakers for allegedly meddling in the country’s affairs. Roque also said that the president considers any foreign interference with another country’s sovereign affairs unacceptable. 

Imagine what may happen if these China-handled fake accounts weren’t taken down and continued to influence Filipino citizens, especially given the fact that the Philippines has the fourth highest number of Facebook users in Asia, with around 62 million people. Many people would be seeing the disinformation and propaganda that were shared by these accounts and perceive it as legitimate information. We would have been dancing into the palms of foreign powers without us realizing it.

Facebook was right to take down these networks because they violated community rules and the government was the one at fault for using fake accounts for their propaganda. They also shouldn’t let China interfere in our politics, because it doesn’t have the right to do so. If the president really believes that foreign interference is unacceptable, then he should also include these Chinese fake accounts. //by Simon Delfinado

We live in a country where someone has to commit a crime to be heard by the government.

On March 2, 2020, a hostage situation occurred in the Greenhills Shopping Center in San Juan. The hostage-taker, a former security guard of the establishment named Alchie Paray, took hold of roughly 30 hostages. At first glance, this may seem like a terrorist incident where the taker asks for compensation in exchange for the hostages. But looking at the story in-depth will show that this is not a terrorist issue, but rather, a workers' rights issue. 

The hostage incident lasted for 9 hours with the police negotiating with Paray to release the hostages. An amount of 1 million pesos was even offered as hush money by the agency who hired him, but Paray refused, insisting that he talk to his fellow guards, that the company fire his bosses, and let his message be heard.

After the negotiations, he finally released the hostages and a 20-minute press conference was held where Paray was free to explain his side. At the conference, he told the media about the corruption that he had witnessed during his work. His bosses were bribed with ₱5,000 by a tenant to have him “reassigned” after he refused entry to the tenant because of a “no ID, no entry” policy before the mall opened. But he later explained that this “reassignment” of duty was just a way to forcefully make him quit his job and thus resulting in him committing the unlawful act.

He also said that the incident he caused is a warning and reminder for all businesses that workers are also important and bosses should not be looking down on people who work for them.

Just as what we have heard from Paray himself, it becomes apparent that there is gross mishandling of workers' rights in our country. 

Paray's case was a result of abuse of authority and corruption. There are a lot of people who experience this but are too afraid to voice out their dissatisfactions because they risk losing their income sources, or sometimes, their lives. 

The Philippines is listed among the worst countries for workers according to the 2019 Global Rights Index of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC). They have a rating system from 1 to 5, with 1 being the best and 5 being the worst.Our country was given a rating of 5 , which is described: “While the legislation may spell out certain rights, workers have effectively no access to these rights and are therefore exposed to autocratic regimes and unfair labor practice.”

The minimum wage ranges from P8,717.94 to P14,731.10 per month depending on which area or region the worker is employed. This value is far from the P42,000/month that the National Economic and Development Authority has computed for a family of five to live comfortably. People who earn the minimum wage income are only considered surviving, not living.

As if the above fact is not enough to prove how our workers are maltreated by our current system, there is also no way for them to express their thoughts on any of these issues.Workers like Paray have the right to join certain organizations like labor unions to negotiate for more favorable working conditions and other benefits through collective bargaining. The problem is that in the Philippines, labor union members are killed. According to the 2019 Global Rights Index, “shrinking democratic space was witnessed” in the Philippines as freedom for speech and assembly are “denied or constrained”. 

There were 14 people—mostly farmers—who were killed by police and military forces in Canlaon City and towns of Manjuyod and Sta. Catalina in Negros Oriental on the March of 2018. The authorities stated that the people who were killed “fought back” but the families of the slain said that they were only elderly people and they could not afford to buy any weapons. 

The following was stated in the index as well: “Workers and trade unionists in the Philippines faced violent attacks and intimidation. Protests were brutally repressed by police forces in an attempt by government forces to suppress political dissent."

Labor unions are the voice of the workers, and if the right to participate in them is taken away, events such as the San Juan hostage incident might happen again. 

The government should not stop labor unions from protesting because this is how workers let the government know about their problems. Their complaints can be used by the government to identify what problems need to be resolved in their work environment. 

What Paray did wasn’t right, but the message he was trying to send is something that needs to be addressed. This hostage incident has opened the eyes of every Filipino to how bad the situation of workers are in the Philippines but the cost of this is the well-being of the people he hostaged and also the future of him and his family . If only the government doesn’t suppress people in labor unions and listens to their pleas instead, then Paray could have joined one and delivered his message without harming others

This is only one example of a mistreated worker. Surely, there are many more workers like him in the Philippines who experience unfair treatment. The current system makes  no room for change and the workers feel hopeless and because of that, they are forced to resort to crime.The government must address these issues to lessen the probability of another Alchie Paray incident happening again. //by Simon Delfinado

 Sources:

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1137359/ph-among-worst-countries-for-workers-global-index

https://www.rappler.com/move-ph/ispeak/253403-opinion-the-real-hostage-situation

https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/in-depth/253327-alchie-paray-what-turned-greenhills-guard-into-hostage-taker

https://www.rappler.com/thought-leaders/249891-analysis-economic-lies-duterte-legacy

https://www.interaksyon.com/breaking-news/2018/06/11/128411/filipino-family-basic-monthly-income-p42000-or-p10000/#:~:text=An%20average%20Filipino%20family%20spends,fund%20amounting%20to%20P3%2C000.

https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2019/07/03/1931677/chr-urges-action-philippines-among-worst-countries-workers-anew

https://psa.gov.ph/current-labor-statistics/highlights#:~:text=In%20the%20case%20of%20the,region%20the%20worker%20is%20employed.

https://businessmirror.com.ph/2018/12/27/in-union-theres-strength-but-what-if-so-few-workers-are-organized/

https://uwua.net/what-are-the-benefits-of-being-a-union-worker/#:~:text=A%20labor%20union%20is%20an,other%20benefits%20through%20collective%20bargaining

Photo Credits: Claire Tamayo

The Philippines attained its freedom in 1946. This event signifies that our country is now fully independent from foreign powers. But our government has made a bill that may possibly sell off this independence.

Last February 18, Tuesday, the House of Representatives approved on its second reading a bill seeking to allow foreign ownership of telecommunication and transportation businesses.

The bill, House Bill 78 (HB 78), delineates “public service” from “public utility” and sets a distinction between the two terms. This bill aims to amend the existing Commonwealth Act No. 146 or Public Service Law where the two terms are interchangeable. Under HB 78, “public service” covers telecommunication, transportation, gas, electric light, heat and power water supply, and petroleum, among others, and "public utility” covers the distribution and transmission of electricity, water pipeline distribution system, and sewerage pipeline system.

The problem with the bill is that it forgets the “60-40 rule on foreign ownership”. Section 11, Article XII of the Constitution states that a public utility should only be owned by a Filipino citizen, corporations, or associations organized under the laws of the Philippines, with at least 60% of its capital owned by such citizens while the remaining 40% may go to foreign ownership. House bill 78 basically disregards this, not mentioning anything about this 60-40 rule.

This shouldn’t be possible, first off. According to Gabriela Women’s Party Representative Arlene Brosas, HB 78 forces to amend the Constitution with legislation. This isn’t valid when only three modes, namely, Constitutional Convention, Constituent Assembly, or through People’s Initiative, can amend it.

Even bigger than this is how local businesses risk getting displaced. This bill completely opens the most basic needs of the Philippine market to foreign companies. With no limit to who can own these public services or how much of them are owned by actual Filipinos, foreign powers will come rolling in.

Albay 2nd District Rep. Joey Salceda, who introduced the bill, argues that lifting the cap on foreign ownership will significantly contribute to increasing competition, which will help lower prices and improve the quality of basic services.

He may have a point in saying that the competition among businesses will result in lower prices and better public services. But Defend Jobs Philippines, a non-profit organization formed by various labor groups, points out that this might have adverse effects on the common Filipino worker. These adverse effects include cheaper wages, docile labor and slashed benefits in favor for profits, more difficult set-ups for workers in terms of the level of bargaining, labor flexibilization schemes, and job security issues.

House Committee on Economic Affairs Chair Sharon Garin also released in a statement that HB 78 would help improve the "deplorable state" of the Philippines' public services by giving more leeway for foreign direct investment.

Both Sharon Garin and Joey Salceda support the implementation of HB 78, but their arguments contradict one another. Sharon Garin admitted in her statement that public services here in the Philippines are “deplorable”. If that is the case, how are these local companies expected to be able to compete with foreign companies for the same market? How will competition be promoted in a country where deplorable services are put up against more advanced foreign corporations?

It's also incredibly ironic for the House of Representatives to push for HB 78 when media network ABS-CBN is being shut down for alleged foreign ownership. If ABS-CBN shuts down before the House bill is officially signed by the president, it would be incredibly unfair for the said media network and the people who work in it, not to mention hypocritical.

Public services are the basic needs of a country. If we let foreigners in and let them handle our problems in public service, it will essentially be the same as giving up.

The Philippines has issues with its public services and you can see that this is true just by looking at statistics on the internet about how our country ranked 101st among 179 countries in terms of internet speeds. But this is not an excuse to give out our problems for foreigners to solve. The government should instead focus on making laws that aim to answer the poor public service here in the Philippines. This is our country and these are our problems, therefore it is our responsibility to solve them through our own processes. //by Simon Delfinado

Sources:

https://amp.rappler.com/nation/252258-house-bill-unconstitutional-allowing-full-foreign-control-over-telco-transportation

https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/02/19/20/house-approves-on-2nd-reading-bill-allowing-foreign-ownership-in-telco-transport

https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2020/02/21/1994735/foreign-ownership-public-services-will-intensify-exploitation-filipino-workers-labor-group

https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2020/03/02/1997446/foreign-ownership-public-utilities-benefit-consumers

https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2020/02/19/1994300/house-oks-full-foreign-ownership-power-transport-communications

https://news.abs-cbn.com/business/04/18/19/ph-internet-speed-still-below-global-average-speedtest

Photo Credits: Joshua Sales

The Philippines is one of the only two remaining countries that still haven’t legalized a law favoring divorce among married couples. But recently, a committee in the House of Representatives approved in principle the Marriage Dissolution Bill, a measure equivalent to divorce in other countries.

The Marriage Dissolution Bill is the consolidation of the three divorce bills which are House Bills 100, 838, and 2263. These were consolidated by a technical working group led by Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman. You can find these bills in http://www.congress.gov.ph/legisdocs/

“These (bills) should be prioritized and may be disposed of as matters already reported, upon the approval of the majority of the members of the committee present, there being a quorum,” Lagman said.

But what could possibly happen if divorce is legalized in our country? What kind of effects will it bring? Will it be good or bad? Before we discuss these things, let us first define what divorce is.

According to UpCounsel, an online marketplace for legal services, the legal definition of divorce is “the dissolution of a marriage contracted between a man and a woman, by the judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, or by an act of the legislature.” In short, divorce means putting an end to an existing marriage.

There are a lot of reasons why couples would file for a divorce such as infidelity, financial problems, lack of intimacy, and domestic abuse. For some, divorce is a way to get out of situations where they encounter problems like these. It could be something helpful for the Filipinos since the idea of divorce is a sort of "rebirth" in life for them.

But this master key solution to almost all relationship problems can also be used as a key to escape from the chains of responsibility. Divorce can be a surefire solution to end problems in one’s relationship but that doesn’t mean it is a good solution. It may also have negative effects.

The first consequence is that divorce can be abused; it can be used as a fast quit button for a marital relationship. When compared to legal separation, divorce is easier because it has looser qualifications. There may be couples who file for divorce just because they experience few inconveniences in their married life. In fact, a common reason why people file for divorce is weight gain. What, then, does that mean? According to Shellie Warren, a life coach and a blogger on marriage.com, gaining weight causes the other spouse to be less physically attracted to his/her spouse. For others, weight gain takes a toll on self-esteem, which trickles into issues with intimacy, another possible cause for divorce. Couples having these kinds of problems can simply get divorced because it’s an easy option for them.

The second consequence is somewhat connected to the first one. As mentioned, divorce can be used as a fast quit button, and in that it could devalue the name of marriage. If divorce is legalized in the country, this can affect the future generation's perspective on marriage. They could place less value on marriage and believe that marrying somebody is only a slightly higher level of relationship than being someone’s boyfriend or a girlfriend. They could enter a marriage and quit it in an instant because they are confident that divorce would get rid of the conflict between them and their spouse.

The third consequence is that it may negatively impact the children of the divorced couple. Once a couple is divorced, the psychological effect the divorce has on the child will have a lasting effect on his or her mental development. In a study done by Brian M. D’Onofrio, a PhD graduate from Indiana University, USA, it was found that parental separation or divorce is associated with increased risk for numerous psychological, academic, and social problems throughout the life course of a child.

The last reason why divorce is not necessarily a good solution is that divorce doesn’t guarantee a happy second chance. A study from Chicago revealed that “divorce has a lingering, detrimental impact on health that even remarriage cannot fully repair.” The study added that divorcees who remarry had 12% more chronic health conditions, which was slightly less than the 20% for the divorced or widowed who did not remarry. According to researcher Dr. Linda Waite, a sociologist at the University of Chicago, income drops and stress develops during divorce or widowhood.

Some might argue that divorce is used to escape domestic abuse, but statistics suggest that divorce does not really solve this problem. In the Philippines, an average of 19 people become victims of marital violence every day while in the US, an average of 20 people are victims of intimate partner violence every minute. That is 1,515 times more domestic abuse victims than the Philippines. While the US has a greater population and better documentation, it shows that even with divorce available, domestic abuse still continues to happen.

At the end of the day, if a couple really wishes to be separated from each other, there are alternatives to divorce, such as annulment and legal separation. These two alternatives are less likely to be abused because annulment can only be used for special situations such as fraud and impotency. As for legal separation, according to Article 63 of the Family Code of the Philippines, you cannot remarry after filing for it. While it is true that these alternatives are expensive, this could persuade people to take marriage a lot more seriously and choose their partners for life more carefully.

In the end, divorce could be a good answer but it shouldn't be used if the marriage isn’t even problematic. So before it reaches that point, one should not rush towards marriage and make sure to be familiar with the person that will be your lifelong partner. Even if the divorce bill is legalized, lawmakers should put rules so that only the people who really need it can file for it. //by Simon Delfinado

The media has been giving the royal couple Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Markle too much attention that it has infringed on their rights as humans.

They say, too much of anything is a bad thing, well, this explains why the royal couple relinquished their official duties as members of the royal family as of early January. They are hoping to escape the scrutiny of the British media, by planning to move to Canada.

But while finding a place to permanently live, the couple has been followed around by press photographers trying to capture potentially valuable images that can be used for British tabloids. Their lawyers have already warned British news outlets to stop by sending a letter threatening legal action over the purchase and publication of photos of Meghan walking with her infant son, Archie, in a park near their house. The letter also stated that the photographs of the Duchess walking the family's dogs were taken by photographers hiding in the bushes, and that other photographers have also tried to take pictures of the couple through the windows of their house in North Saanich. Some have even set up camp outside the home.

This is not the first time the royal couple has encountered all these paparazzi and the media hoping to take advantage of their private lives. Back when Prince Harry was still engaged to Meghan, media outlets in Britain had written all kinds of unflattering articles about Meghan. In a certain article written by Daily Mail, as soon as you start reading, you will be greeted by a picture of Meghan’s home in L.A. with the cutline “Home sweet home? Prince Harry's new girl, Meghan Markle, grew up in this house in Crenshaw, Los Angeles, a troubled area that had 47 crimes in the past week - including murder”. Then after that, they mentioned that Meghan’s parents were divorced and that both of them have debts and have filed for bankruptcy. A couple of sentences later, the article says that her mother “appears to be one of the defining influences in her daughter’s life”, seemingly implying that Meghan has had bad influences in her life.

And it hasn’t just been Meghan. Prince Harry’s phone was allegedly hacked by media outlets The Sun and The Daily Mirror, that were accused of intercepting voicemail messages even as far back as the 2000s. Prince Harry’s mother, Princess Diana, was also a victim of the British media. She was constantly followed by paparazzi, particularly after her marriage to Prince Charles ended. This led to her death in Paris in 1997, when her car crashed as she tried to escape these paparazzi.

As journalists, our main purpose is to provide the public with news, entertainment, and other sorts of information. Even though these reporters fulfilled their purpose, they committed acts of unprofessionalism and "followed the story" to an extreme, even if it meant violating other people's human rights just to provide "juicy" news which will give them more profit. They call themselves journalists but the way they do things is more like that of a gossiper. So how do gossipers differ from journalists?

Gossipers shame the name of journalists. In a way, they have no reason to do all this stalking and hacking since there is a system called the “Royal Rota” which allows a rotation of royal reporters from British newspapers to attend and report on the royal family's engagements. But due to greed, these paparazzi just have to go on full-on creepy mode with the hacking and stalking. Ugh.

For example, the paparazzi who took their pictures committed harassment and invasion of privacy according to U.K. laws. The definition of harassment is “essentially behaviour that causes another person alarm or distress and it refers to a course of conduct, not a single incident”. In this case, it certainly applies after all of the picture-taking incidents. It is also a type of invasion of privacy because they were trying to take pictures of people inside their house without consent.

The other one is the hackers from Daily Mail and The Sun. It is stated in U.K. law that phone hacking is covered by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA). It is an offense for anyone to intercept telephone calls with the exception of the police and security services acting with a warrant from the Secretary of State.

All these are things that gossipers will do just to get their news. They will ignore laws, ruin a person’s reputation, and violate a human’s right to privacy just to get the attention of everybody and reach the news headlines. But journalists are people who follow a set of rules called a journalists’ code of ethics.

In the journalists’ code of ethics, journalism is guided by five core values: The first one is Truth and Accuracy, all facts must be true and accurate and if one cannot corroborate information one should say so.

The second value is Independence: a journalist should be independent and should not take any sides and if he does have a side, one should announce any political affiliations, financial arrangements or other personal information that might constitute a conflict of interest.

The third value is Fairness and Impartiality: a journalist should be fair and the stories one writes must always be balanced and as much as possible be objective.

The fourth value is Humanity: Journalists should do no harm and even if some article that one writes may be hurtful, one should be aware of the impact of their words and images on the lives of others.

The last value is Accountability: A journalist should be ready to take accountability for whatever error he/she makes and must correct and apologize for them sincerely.

They should not forget all of these just for the sake of news because when they do, they lose their identity as journalists and become gossipers. //by Simon Delfinado

Source: https://ethicaljournalismnetwork.org/who-we-are/5-principles-of-journalism

Filipino netizens were outraged after the poster-trailer for “Elcano and Magellan: The First Voyage Around the World” was released this November. It is a Spanish animated movie about the journey of Ferdinand Magellan and Juan Elcano, and their arrival in Cebu in 1521.

At first glance, there is seemingly nothing wrong with the movie. It might even seem appealing when one sees the part where it says, “with Philippines' very own hero, Lapu-Lapu.” One might think “Wow, a Filipino hero in a cartoon movie!” But taking a closer look at the details of the poster and watching the trailer, it can be seen that things are not what they seem.

Photo courtesy of Inquirer.net

The poster for the animated movie shows Juan Elcano front and center with Magellan behind him to his left. To his right, a woman named Samar, presumably a pre-colonial Filipino woman, is staring at Elcano affectionately. Meanwhile, Lapu-Lapu is featured in the lower half of the poster with a villainous look on his face.

From these details of the poster, one can already tell that something is wrong. In the history lessons taught to us in school, Magellan and Elcano colonized Cebu and converted Filipino natives into Christians, and killed those who didn’t agree to convert and swear fealty to Spain. There was no mention of a native Filipina falling in love with Juan Elcano either. History books also show Lapu-Lapu to be a patriot who defended his people from foreign invaders, but his face in the poster shows him to be akin to some generic villain.

While some netizens argued that the movie was made by a studio from Spain, and thus, in their point of view, Juan Elcano was the hero and Lapu-Lapu was the villain, it still doesn’t change the fact that Magellan acted like a brigand, slaver, and maritime pirate during his brief stay in the islands. And to be fair, there is nothing heroic about pillaging, kidnapping for ransom, enslaving, or murdering people.

Sure, it could be claimed that these are over-exaggerations, but take a look at Magellan's official chronicler, Antonio Pigafetta. He writes multiple times of "heroic" Magellan and his crew engaging in what would now be called piracy and banditry. He mentioned an incident where a local chieftain was invited on board their ships to trade. When they were unable to reach an agreement, the crew held the chieftain and his companions hostage and demanded animal goods for their release. Fearful for his life, the chieftain ordered that their demands immediately be met. In another instance, they signaled and demanded that a Filipino ocean craft salute them with their sails. When this demand was not met, they pursued, boarded, and pillaged the craft. Here, they captured on board a local chieftain and his family, who were then held for ransom. Pigafetta's journal is filled with many more similar events that are "heroic" indeed.

To add insult to injury, a particular short scene from the trailer shows Juan Elcano marveling at the wondrous nature of the Philippines, with Toco Toucans and Scarlet Macaws flying around the trees. Nothing wrong with showcasing the beauty of the Philippine Islands, right? Well, no. Those birds are normally found in South America and not the Philippines.

The abundance of historical and factual inaccuracies could potentially mislead unsuspecting viewers into viewing Magellan as a hero, instead as a thug. Fortunately, no amount of false perfume will completely drown out the stench that is the historic facts of Magellan's role in establishing Spanish domination over our islands and the atrocities that came with it. To deny Magellan committed any wrongdoing would be akin to saying there were no human rights violations during President Marcos’ Martial Law or to say the Bataan Death March did not happen. To deny that certain historical events happened or were not really as bad is to encourage them to happen again. George Santayana said it best with, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Additionally, if one looks at the characters properly, one will also notice that some of them resemble the characters from a certain Dreamworks movie titled “The Road to El Dorado.” To be specific, Juan Elcano resembles Tulio, The King of Cebu is to Chief Tannabok, Samar, who is the designated romantic interest, looks like Chel and disappointingly, Lapu-Lapu is to Tzekel-kan, who was the antagonist in the movie.

This is an animated movie for kids that contains historically misleading and inaccurate information, the romanticizing of colonizers, a villainous portrayal of a national hero, and character designs ripped straight off from another animated movie all packaged into one! So, what are you waiting for? “Elcano and Magellan: The First Voyage Around the World” colonizing Philippine cinemas this upcoming 2020! //by Simon Delfinaldo and Gabe Ulanday