Fourth volume, students’ file

  • Kristine Felisse Mangunay | “Deception”
    By: Kristine Felisse Mangunay
    5th blog entry
    Unedited by blog administrator

Last Sunday, the Inquirer ran an article in the sports section, quoting yet again an only source for the story on the Don Pocholo Razon Golf Tournament in Laguna. Besides having violated provisions on single-sourcing in the Philippine Press Institute’s Expanded Code of Ethics (see 4th blog entry), what seems to be the graver ethical violation is the deception involved in the release of the “article”. While the legitimacy of the story may appear to be valid, certain sentences used by the author put this into question.
Suspiciously, the article centers merely on golf player Elmer Salvador (he is the writer’s only source for the story as well). Sentences such as “the 32-year-old flourished” and “Salvador played with the poise of a grizzled veteran…” appear to depict him in a good light. The writer’s untimely prediction of the player’s so-called victory even before the end of the tournament adds to the question of the article’s legitimacy as well.
The quote and the lead chosen for the article are as suspicious as the rest of the story. “I will try to stay focused, play my game and not be intimidated” and “Elmer Salvador continued to pull surprises in the P4.4 million Don Pocholo Razon Invitational…” seem to emphasize much of the player’s positive traits. As a result, the other players in the tournament are ignored by the author (although some are briefly mentioned, the writer does not use flattering words to describe them).
Clearly, the author should have interviewed more sources besides Salvador for his article. Then again this could have been done deliberately, considering the story’s PR slant in favor of the player. If this is the case, indeed it is a grave ethical violation on the part of the writer. Deception is, after all, always involved when PR is passed off as a legitimate article.
“Salvador hangs tough, pads Razon lead to 4″ (from the Philippine Daily Inquirer): 1, 3:24 PM — [ Edit | Delete | Unapprove | Approve | Spam ] — Conrad S.C. Lacsina points to a news story as election campaign material in Phil. Journal


The Kris Aquino-James Yap-Hope issue in the ‘News’Kris-James-Hope controversy extended beyond People’s Journal’s entertainment pages.There’s a short article in People’s Journal today (Feb.27) written by Ryan Ponce Pacpaco entitled “Be strong, pray, Kris told” (The English version of this article was published in People’s Journal, but there’s a Tagalog version available in their website at The article appeared in page 6, which is devoted to News. It was all about Tessie Aquino-Oreta’s advice to Kris. Everyone knows that Tessie Aquino-Oreta is Kris’ aunt who is now running for Senator under the Team Unity. Undoubtedly, People’s Journal committed an ethical violation here. Yes, the report has the human interest in it. But it doesn’t have the news value, so why put it under a part in the newspaper which is just for News? If you read the entire article all you can see is the aunt-to-niece pieces of advice and information about Kris Aquino and James Yap. I mean, if Oreta gave Kris an advice, it isn’t news, it’s normal. But to publish stories like this isn’t supposed to be normal for a journalist.If People’s Journal really wanted to report about this story, they should just use the spaces provided in their entertainment section. After all, there are so many news and issues more important than two celebrities and a third party.Feb 27, 1:52 PM — [ Edit | Delete | Unapprove | Approve | Spam ] — Student two (10:33:00) says Bitoy’s Show Strikes Two

  • Conrad S.C. Lacsina |

Conrad S.C. Lacsina
Student 7 Student 7 Student 7 Student 7
Unedited by blog administrator
Even before the date of the start of the campaign for this year’s elections that was prescribed by law, the Philippine Journal already printed a story, which by all indications, is a campaign material.The story appeared on January 24, 2007. There was no byline.It was a single-source story, with Rep. Juan Miguel Zubiri, the Secretary-General of the Lakas-CMD party and now a senatorial candidate of the administration ticket TEAM as the only source. Another source was mentioned— Lakas-CMD executive director Ray Roquero, but he is from the same camp as Zubiri. There was no effort whatsoever to present the view of the other sides with regard to the truthfulness of the claims and assertions made in the story.The story is a campaign piece for the administration senatorial ticket pretending to be news by being in the news pages of the newspaper. “LANDSLIDE WIN FOR GMA TICKET SEEN“A nationwide political machinery powered by an overwhelming majority of the country’s local executives with a campaign platform anchored on solid economic performance will spell a landslide victory for the senatorial ticket of the Lakas-led ruling coalition, pro-administration leaders said yesterday.
“ ‘The senatorial candidates of the ruling coalition are headed for landslide victory in the May polls backed by an awesome political machinery at the grassroots level and a campaign plank riding high on the administration’s solid performance,’ said Bukidnon Rep. Miguel Zubiri, secretary-general of the Lakas_Christian Democrats party.
“ ‘Only the ruling coalition led by Lakas-CMD has the machinery and resources to field a complete ticket from the national down to the local levels, including candidates for seats in all city and municial councils,’ Zubiri said.
“ ‘This means that the ruling coalition can ensure the victory of its senatorial slate come May 14.’
“Lakas-CMD is now cobbling together the administration’s powerhouse ticket together with its coalition partners— Kabalikat ng Mamamayang Pilipino (Kampi), Nationalist People’s Coalition (NPC), the Libereal Party (LP) headed by Manila Mayor Joselito Atienza, and the Partido Demokratiko Sosyalista ng Pilipinas (PDSP)— and will announce the lineup on or before the Feb. 12 deadline for the filing of candidacy for senatorial bets.
“ ‘With the economic reform agenda of the government finally bearing fruit six years into the Arroyo presidency, 2007 and onwards will indeed be social payback time for our people by way of more jobs, better services and higher living standards,’ said Zubiri.
“ ‘The Filipino voters are intelligent enough that putting in office a new batch of senators supportive of the President’s economic agenda will help government sustain— and even boost— the momentum of growth that has not been seen in this country in recent history,’ he added.
“President Arroyo has assured the people it will be ‘social payback time’ for them this year and onwards owing to the rebounding economy, as reflected in the continuing peso rally, the bull run of the stock market, the narrowing budget deficit, escalating direct foreign and portfolio investments, and bulging foreign or dollar reserves.
“On top of an impressive political network and a campaign platform of performance and nascent prosperity that appeal to most voters, Lakas-CMD executive director Ray Roquero said the second thing going for the pro-administration senatorial lineup is the strong support coming from the local officials.”
Feb 27, 1:45 PM — [ Edit | Delete | Unapprove | Approve | Spam ] — Student two (10:33:00) says Bitoy’s Show Strikes Two

  • Student two | Bitoy’s Show strikes two
    SECOND entry.SECOND entry.
    (unedited by blog administrator)

Last Saturday (Feb. 24, 2006), Bitoy’s Funniest Video (BFV) committed another ethical violation when one of its segment (Just for Kids) exploited children’s innocence on alcohol or wine.The segment is obviously (and as expected of the said show) a prank. A child-accomplice stands outside a convinience store and waits for a male,adult victim whom the child will persistently, in a way stubbornly, convince to buy her (the child) a bottle of wine.The child-accomplice used many arguments to convince the victims. One of which is that it is her father who summoned her to buy him a wine.The segment clearly violates the section of the KBP Television Code which is responsibility towards children. The section clearly states that “programming should be based upon sound social concepts and should include positive sets of values which allow children to become responsible adults.” The section also states that programs should “reinforce positive family attitude and values.” These provisions were obviously violated by the show.If you are an adult, requesting your child to buy your liquor in a convinience store is morally wrong. It is also unlawful for minors to buy liquors. And the show presented a way to circumvent the law — have a child request a male,adult to buy a bottle of liquor for the child.BFV may argue that their network, GMA-7 is a non-member of KBP. However, good taste and moral judgment should tell them of their social responsibility as one of the foremost media entities of the country. I believed that the prank they staged is more vicious than advertising liquor in a children’s program. (Of course, no such ads should be in a children’s program.)This was not the first time that this blogger noticed the show for its insensitivity towards children. The first time was about the segment Yari Ka wherein they showed a woman doing dirty dancing with the consent of her grandmother who taught her how to dance that way when the dancer was still a child.Feb 26, 10:33 AM — [ Edit | Delete | Unapprove | Approve | Spam ] — Jessica Hermosa (00:37:16) : comments on Philippine Star and AP story identifying suspects based on their presumed religion

  1. Jessica Hermosa |

Philippine Star and AP Violate Ethical Provision on Respect for Religion
Submitted by Jessica Hermosa STUDENT 5 STUDENT 5 STUDENT 5
3rd blog entry
Unedited by blog administrator
The Philippine Star and the international news agency AP unethically associated Muslims and Thai separatist rebels in an article that appeared in the World News section, page A-22 of the Philippine Star last February 22.Thumbnail photo of the news clipping is at
Larger version of the news clipping is at
The headline read: ALLEGED MUSLIM REBELS TORCH THAI WAREHOUSE. The lead was no better: “Suspected Muslim insurgents in southern Thailand set fire yesterday on a large warehouse for rubber…”Both AP and The Philippine Star are guilty of violating the PPI’s ethical provision of not “in any manner, ridicule, cast aspersions on, or degrade an person by reason of sex, CREED, RELIGIOUS BELIEF, political conviction, cultural and ethnic origin”.Describing the rebels as “Muslim” is not justified because the article did not mention how Islam was involved as the rebel’s motivator for the crime, and more importantly because it unfairly associates all Muslims with insurgents.Also, the fact that the identity of the torchers are still uncertain, as indicated by the use of “alleged” and “suspected”, even worsens the ethical violation because the conclusion that the torchers were probably Muslim could have been based only on the Thai official’s bias and the even the reporter’s bias. If the religion of the torchers was not certain, then all the more reason not to mention it in the headline and lead.One would think that an international news agency like AP would be more conscious of the plurality of the world’s religions and be less inclined to be biased against Muslims. The Philippine Star is also at fault because it could have edited the headline and the lead to refer to the torchers as “Thai separatist rebels” instead.Feb 23, 12:37 AM — [ Edit | Delete | Unapprove | Approve | Spam ] — Student 6 talks about “Tukaan” (cockfighting show) on its 8th year; and says KBP is not doing anything about it

  1. weisa orejola |

Ethical Violation of GMA 7’s Flash Report by Weisa Orejola
Third Blog Entry
Flash Report is an hourly news program aired by GMA 7 in between commercial breaks of regular programming. However, during the weekends, GMA airs an extended version of the program that is broadcast late in the evening. It is called Flash Report Special Edition and it runs for 15 minutes every Sunday at 12 midnight. On February 11, 2007, Flash Report Special Edition violated the TV Code of Ethics when it did not label a video clip properly.The program reported a news about the attempted kidnapping of Robert Dean Barbers, general manager of Philippine Tourism Authority. It aired a video clip of the said incident. However, the label on the clip only showed who took video, where it took place and that it is exclusive. There was no any indication of the date and time the video was taken. These are vital facts that must be included in every file video aired in television because the audience deserves to know these things. The said news program, however, failed to recognize that. As a result, it violated the TV Code of Ethics.Feb 22, 10:05 AM — [ Edit | Delete | Unapprove | Approve | Spam ] — Student 6 talks about “Tukaan” (cockfighting show) on its 8th year; and says KBP is not doing anything about it


Talking about TukaanIBC 13 has this regular Sunday show called Tukaan, aired from12 nn to 1pm. The show is all about cockfighting – rooster breeds, medicines and vitamins for roosters, famous cock breeders and even derby schedules.
The KBP’s TV Code has a provision about gambling, which includes cockfighting. It states that “the coverage of horseracing, COCKFIGHTING, jai-alai and all forms of gambling, legal or illegal…The announcement of tips, results and SCHEDULES of horseracing, cockfighting, jai-alai, small town lottery…shall not be allowed.” I think the rationale behind this provision is to avoid promoting gambling, in this case, cockfighting. However, I think Channel 13 is violating this provision because of Tukaan. It may not show full footages of derbies, but what they are doing in the show is as good as such.
The show has several segments: Bloodlines, which is about rooster species best for cockfighting; Cockhouse Management; and Tukaan Bulletin, wherein DERBY SCHEDULES (in different parts of the country like Catanduanes, Metro Manila and Pangasinan, complete with the names of the derby sponsors) are flashed on screen.
Also, in the product mention part of the show, it’s not surprising that most of the advertisements shown promote cockfighting. From medicines for the “manok panabong” to the DVD of the World Slasher Cup 2, all of those ads really target cockfighting enthusiasts.
What Channel 13 is doing is really a violation of the said provision. But the funny thing is, Tukaan is already celebrating its 8th anniversary. It’s been shown in Philippine television that long, but the KBP isn’t doing anything.
Feb 20, 3:44 PM — [ Edit | Delete | Unapprove | Approve | Spam ] — Notes of april burcer(1st entry) (13:20:00) : on a story

  1. Conrad S.C. Lacsina |

Circus comes to town banner story of PDI
By Conrad S.C. Lacsina (2nd Blog Entry)
Student 7 Student 7 Student 7 Student 7
Unedited by blog administrattor
The Philippine Daily Inquirer bannered on Tuesday, Feb 13, 2007 the last day of the filing of senatorial candidacies.
The headline foretold that what follows is not a proper news story: “Circus comes to town.” This headline was presumptuous because it presumes that showbiz people make a circus. And by being presumptuous as such, it was clearly biased against showbiz stars and their spouses running as senators.
It is unethical because it is an opinion piece that passes off as news. It was PDI’s banner headline that day.
The event was the last day of the filing of certificates of candidacies for the senatorial race. And quite a number of those who went to the Comelec offices in Intramuros are in one way or the other has something to do with show business. So there was a picture of Francis Pangilinan with wife Sharon Cuneta and Ralph Recto with wife Vilma Santos. PDI reported that Comelec employees mobbed the stars.
The report contrasted the circus that was the showbiz personalities who went to the Comelec offices from Joker Arroyo who file his candidacy two days before:
“Maverick Sen. Joker Arroyo, a known champion of opposition causes who raised opposition hackles the other day by declaring that President Arroyo should be allowed to finish her term because they couldn’t offer anything better, seemed above the fanfare.
“Among the earliest to file his candidacy on Monday, Arroyo wore a simple, collared shirt without any show biz stars by his side.”
Because of such slant in reporting the event and because of the headline, the writers seemed to have implied that showbiz people have turned the elections into a circus.
The day before, the PDI had in its front page a photograph of Noynoy Aquino who just filed his senatorial candidacy together with his family. There was Cory Aquino and sisters Ballsy and others. But given prominence was Kris Aquino and husband James Yap.
The Circus comes to town story was sensationalized. Aside from the presumptuous headline, the words and phrases that the reporters used in the story include “carnival back in town,” “Francis Pangilinan… was outshone by Megastar, Sharon Cuneta,” “Sen. Ralph Recto…was no match to the attention received by his spouse, Star for All Seasons and Lipa City Mayor Vilma Santos,” “Ms Arroyo was putting on her own show,” and “…the moment of the Megastar and the Star for All Seasons in an embrace.”
Of course, not a few have reservations about showbiz stars running for public offices especially as senators of the country. There are misgivings about stars due to their lack of experience in governance and legislation or more generally, their lack of proper education.
Whatever merit there is to that belief, it should remain well within the editorial and opinion pages. Journalists can always express their misgivings in the opinion or the editorial pages, not in the news pages. News must be as fair, accurate and objective as possible.
Feb 20, 2:58 PM — [ Edit | Delete | Unapprove | Approve | Spam ] — Notes of april burcer(1st entry) (13:20:00) : on a story

  1. student TWO. student TWO | What’s wrong with acupuncture?
    By Student TWO. Student TWO. 2004-11624
    SECOND blog entry. Second blog entry.
    (unedited by blog administrator)

In page A20 of the 2007 Valentine’s Day issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer, one of their Northern Luzon writers wrote about acupuncture, its benefits, and the flaw of western medicine. There is no problem in writing about acupuncture; the problem is that the article’s only source is one doctor named Dr. Charles Cheng, director of the Baguio Filipino Chinese Hospital.The whole article is like an advertisement for Dr. Cheng and “his” hospital. There is a paragraph on his achievements that are not even related to acupuncture. The Baguio Filipino Chinese Hospital was also referred once as “his” hospital.The author also quoted him as saying that western medicine’s approach to human diseases is flawed. The author did not or failed to seek other experts or doctor’s opinion whether the “mechanical” approach of western medicine is truly better than the “philosophical” approach of oriental medicine or not. The “mechanical” and “philosophical” approaches were not explained. Consequently, the readers may be left bewildered by the mere beauty of the play of words.Dr. Cheng also criticized the system of western medicine, which often required the issuance of medicine. He was also quoted as saying that 80% of human diseases could be cured by simple, less expensive yet effective methods while only 20% required state-of-the-art medical treatment. Obviously, this was just Dr. Cheng’s assertion. The fact did not come from a scientific study which results can be replicated. If ever Dr. Cheng was referring to a study, the author must write in his story that Dr. Cheng cited a study.It may also be good for the author to get second opinion on this matter which may come from an urban doctor, a patient who was has tried western medicine but was eventually cured by acupuncture, or other acupuncture practitioners who share the same view of Dr. Cheng.The PPI Expanded Code of Ethics states that “single-source stories must be avoided as a rule. There is always an imperative to get a second, third or more sources, the contending parties to an issue, the expert source, the affected party, the prominent and the obscure in the story. We must strive at all times to ascertain the truth of our sources’ assertions.”Original news story from the Inquirer website:
Cariño, Delmar. “RP told Oriental treatment is better”. Dated Feb. 14, 2007. Accessed at:
Feb 19, 2:04 PM — [ Edit | Delete | Unapprove | Approve | Spam ] — your assignment. see bulletin board. pls tell others. sorry this is late.

  1. april burcer(1st entry) | gma story violates provision on sourcing
    (unedited by blog administrator)

I was just reading the news on the net when I chanced upon this news story on The article is about the opposition candidates supposedly stopped by the PUP guards during their campus tour. the ethical violation of this article is single-sourcing. The only source of the story was Sen Panfilo Lacson, probably during an interview. According to him, the guards from Polytechnic University of the Philippines (PUP) denied them entry to the campus because the opposition senatoriables did not have a permit from the DepEd. The fault of the writer (there was no byline) was that he/she failed to get the other side of the story. the writer just presented Lacson’s side as part of the opposition. But how about the explanation of the PUP guards? There must have logical and enough reason to deny them entry to the campus because who would want to mess with these senatoriables? Either way, not giving the other side the chance to explain their reasons would mean a certain bias towards the source. The writer should be careful because this is a political story, especially during this time when the election is coming. Moonlighting certain party or individuals would attract doubts and scrutiny, not just for the writer but also the organization he/she is writing for. By getting all sides of the news story, the writer gives the readers the chance to decide what and whom to believe. This way, the administration and the opposition are on equal footing, and the writer will not be doubted as leaning towards somebody. (story below)———————————————————–
GO bets cry harassment in campus tour
02/19/2007 | 05:08 PM
A day after meeting with former President Joseph Estrada, opposition senatorial bets cried foul Monday over Malacañang’s alleged harassment of their campaign.Re-electionist Sen. Panfilo Lacson said the Genuine Opposition (GO) candidates were not allowed to enter the state-run Polytechnic University of the Philippines (PUP) campus for a dialog with students there.“The opposition senatorial candidates were not allowed inside the campus. They had to stay outside,” Lacson said.He said the opposition candidates were denied entry to the campus after the guards asked to see a “permit” from the Department of Education (DepEd).“The administration candidates were allowed to hold campus tours and dialogues with students without guards asking to see permits. We just wanted to have a dialogue with students, yet we are being denied entry because we don’t have a permit,” he said.The opposition had scheduled a stopover at the PUP campus in Manila’s Sta. Mesa district for a dialogue with students. Manila mayor Jose Atienza Jr is a Malacañang ally.However, Lacson said they expected the alleged harassment, saying it is part of the territory when campaigning as an opposition candidate.“It’s a given when you run in the opposition. You have to be ready to face harassment,” he said.Lacson also said the opposition candidates are willing to enter into a debate with their administration counterparts.He said he is personally open to debating with political rival Sen. Edgardo Angara, with whom he crossed paths as early as 2003.Angara had accused Lacson last week of spreading text messages Angara and opposition bet Loren Legarda have a relationship. Lacson replied that Legarda was “too pretty” for Angara.“I know the administration candidates will have a hard time answering the issues we will raise,” he said when asked if he were willing to debate with Angara.Meanwhile, Lacson brushed off claims of problems within the opposition, saying they are just having “birth pains” that include synchronizing their schedules.He said the candidates of the opposition have their respective commitments even before the campaign.“This is just the start. We have 80 days to go. This is normal for a campaign, to have kinks and problems,” he said.Earlier in the day, GO candidate Sorsogon Rep. Francis Escuero campaigned without his fellow opposition bets at Manila’s Binondo district.Radio station dzBB said Escudero’s campaign triggered a massive traffic snarl in the area as dragon dancers also took the streets for continuing Chinese New Year rites.During his trip to Binondo, Escudero allegedly promised to assist members of the Chinese community as part of his commitment to help the Philippine economy. – GMANews.TVFeb 19, 1:20 PM — [ Edit | Delete | Unapprove | Approve | Spam ] — your assignment. see bulletin board. pls tell others. sorry this is late.

  1. psychogoddess | hello… here’s the link for our additional blog entry for class regarding the media and elections 19, 5:07 AM — [ Edit | Delete | Unapprove | Approve | Spam ] — your assignment. see bulletin board. pls tell others. sorry this is late.

  1. dianne rosario | |

Inquirer violates code of ethics againBy Dianne Rosario (2nd blog entry)
Student 11 Student 11 Student 11 Student 11 Student 11
(Unedited by blog administrator)Once again the Philippine Daily Inquirer violated the Code of Professional and Ethical Conduct of the Philippine Press Institute when it ran a story entitled “Graft raps filed vs customs chief” (please see article below) on February 6, 2007.
First, Norman Bordadora, the author of the article, used only a single source in the story. He only quoted Pablo Bautista, lawyer and former customs official, as the main source of the news. This was in clear violation of the Code of Ethics which states “Single-source must be avoided as a rule. There is always an imperative to get a second, third or more sources, the contending parties to an issue, the expert source, the affected party, the prominent and the obscure, in the story.”
In this case, the author failed to get more than one source of the story. Bordadora could have interviewed witnesses in order to supply more sources to “ascertain the truth” of Bautista’s assertions.
More importantly, Bordadora also failed to get the side of the accused.
According to the article, ten customs officials including Commissioner Napoleon Morales were given graft charges because of “their alleged involvement in the spiriting out of 100,000 kilos of meat from a customs warehouse last year.”
However, not even one of the ten accused was given his side of the story. This is another violation of the code of ethics which states “All efforts must be exerted to make stories fair, accurate and balanced. Getting the other side is a must, especially for the most sensitive and critical stories. The other side must run on the first take of the story and not any other day later.”
Accusations against government officials are serious matters, especially when it justifies public interest. Therefore, all efforts must be done to make stories fair, accurate and balanced.
Graft raps filed vs customs chief
By Norman Bordadora
A NONGOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION yesterday filed graft charges against Commissioner Napoleon Morales and nine other Bureau of Customs officials for their alleged involvement in the spiriting out of 100,000 kilos of meat from a customs warehouse last year.
Lawyer Pablo Bautista, himself a former customs official and current chair of the Foundation for the Uplift of Public Revenues, alleged in the NGO’s complaint before the Ombudsman that the seized meat was in Morales’ custody when it was taken out of the warehouse in Manila.
Aside from Morales, the NGO also filed charges against Morales’ chief of staff James Enriquez, Task Force Anti-Smuggling (TFAS) executive director Alexander Arcilla, Port of Manila district collector Horacio Suansing Jr., customs officials Davinio Catbagan, Facundo Bitanga, Romeo Fernando Jr., Diomedes Cabaluna and Boy Reyes, and customs broker Sulpicio Estrada.
The group said Morales also violated Article 239 of the Revised penal Code when he created a Special Customs Area under his office allegedly without lawful authority.
It was from this special customs area, contracted from Sigma Seven Warehousing Inc., that the 100 tons of seized meat were taken out after being confiscated for having been misdeclared.
“It was while under the custody of the office of the commissioner that most of the frozen meat was spirited out of the warehouse,” Bautista charged.
“This was further aggravated due to his failure to order the physical examination or inventory and assessment of the cargo, resulting in the loss of revenue on the part of the government,” he said.
Bautista was a former deputy director for legal affairs of the national Anti-Smuggling Task Force and was also legal counsel for the Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (Isafp).
The NGO’s complaint showed that on Aug. 25, 2006, a shipment of four container vans arrived at the Port of Manila and were declared to contain “frozen mackerel.”
With the alleged help of some customs officials, Asia Golden Ark Marketing Center and its broker Sulpicio Estrada “misdeclared and misclassified” the shipment as frozen mackerel to avoid paying the appropriate but much higher duties.
The shipment was seized two days later by anti-smuggling task force which found it to be frozen meat and not fish.
The containers were taken to the commissioner’s customs special area allegedly on the orders of TFAS director Arcilla.
The meat was forfeited in favor of the government.
“However, after a few days later, the shipment was released and transported irregularly out of the customs premises through the cooperation and facilitation of some customs officials, particularly Enriquez, Suansing, Arcilla, Catbagan and Bitanga,” Bautista said.
He said the shipment was released without any authority and without paying duties, taxes and penalty charges, “thus, resulting to huge revenue loss.”
It was also alleged the shipment was further pilfered when it was transported to Pampanga for condemnation.
SOURCE: Feb. 6, 2007, PDIFeb 18, 3:11 AM — [ Edit | Delete | Unapprove | Approve | Spam ] — your assignment. see bulletin board. pls tell others. sorry this is late.

  1. Student #5 |

Questions on selected provisions of the COMELEC Resolution No. 7767
By: Student #5
Media 230
Unedited by the Blog Administrator
For purposes of fulfilling the requirements of Media Ethics, UP College of Mass CommunicationCOMELEC Resolution No. 7767 states that:SEC. 11. Prohibited Forms of Election Propaganda. – During the campaign period, it is unlawful:
4. For any newspaper or publication, radio, television or cable television station, or other mass media, or any person making use of the mass media to sell or to give free of charge print space or air time for campaign or election propaganda purposes to any candidate, political party, or party-list group, organization, or coalition thereof in excess of the size, duration or frequency authorized by law or these rules;
5. For any radio, television, cable television station, announcer or broadcaster to allow the scheduling of any program, or permit any sponsor to manifestly favor or oppose any candidate, political party, party-list group, organization, and/or coalition thereof by unduly or repeatedly referring to, or unnecessarily mentioning his name, or including therein said candidate, political party, party-list group, organization, and/or coalition thereof; and xxx
SEC. 20. Right to Reply. – All registered political parties, party-list groups, organizations, and/or coalitions thereof, and bona fide candidates shall have the right to reply to charges published or aired against them. The reply shall be given publicity by the newspaper, television, and/or radio station which first printed or aired the charges with the same prominence or in the same page or in the same time slot as the first statement. xxx
I simply want to raise some points of clarification.
On Sec. 11, par.4, does campaign or election propaganda include exclusive interviews with the political candidates (re: their personal life, past experiences in the public service, personal background, or issues confronting them), in any of the mass media programs? (Anyway, the same is not included in the Prohibited Forms of Election Propaganda). I just think, it can be a form of implicit election propaganda. In this case, to comply with the limit 120 mins. air time, will the entire length of the interview be computed as part of the 120 mins.?
On Sec. 11, par. 5, considering broadcast interviews, how will the COMELEC take the defense of the media, for instance, that they are merely giving the public the right information as to the qualification and eligibility of the candidates by scrutinizing their personal background?
On Sec. 20, who will determine who has the right to reply? Isn’t it a discretion of the media organization?

Feb 17, 4:12 PM — [ Edit | Delete | Unapprove | Approve | Spam ] — Weisa Orejola writes (08:26:05) : on failure of Ch.5’s Sentro to identify film clips

This entry was posted by chattel.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: