How does the media affect people?

[tk421]

 

Can't believe a hater follows her blog just to post a hate comment about Mocha here. Ilan kaya sa 5M followers ni Mocha ang nagaabang na magkamali siya para maka bash lang.

I don't even read any of her blogs even once.

 

That all well and good for you. But we're paying for her extremely bloated salary so she can write those blogs. Kahit hindi mo binabasa, you're (and by that I mean 'we are') effectively paying every word of it.

[rooster69ph]

 

Ikaw lang naman ang sumasakay kay Mocha kasi mukhang ikaw lang ang nagbabasa ng blogs niya dito.

Still you cant deny the fact that her followers went up drastically when her page was dedicated to supporting digong.

[camiar]

 

Ok. But I'm not keen on shutting them down naman. Kayo dyan yun gusto mag shut down ng mga newspapers with "foreign" influences eh. Kayo mag file. Kaya ako, ok lang sa akin ang Rappler kasi it's 100% Filipino owned.

Rappler claims to be 100% Filipino owned but posts pro-American and pro-Western news and commentaries.

 

Why? Because it's foreign influenced. The silent foreign partners acquired their influence through a legal loophole on PDRs.

[tk421]

 

To many of Rappler's supporters, OK lang yung violation, because the silent foreign investors are Americans and that Rappler focuses on the USA and Europe's main issue: Protection of Human Rights.

 

 

You mean you're saying there's something wrong with media focusing on the human rights issue? Isn't that one of the most basic rights we have as a civilized society?

 

China's good intentions in the West Philippine Sea? Is this a joke? The only good intention China has there are for their own. Good grief... we're talking about an imaginary threat (Rappler) vs a literal territorial invasion (West Philippine Sea) and you're focusing on the latter?

[haroots2]

 

That all well and good for you. But we're paying for her extremely bloated salary so she can write those blogs. Kahit hindi mo binabasa, you're (and by that I mean 'we are') effectively paying every word of it.

 

Her blogs are personally done by Mocha, it is not related on her position in govt. Her blog already exist even before Du30 became president. Kaya nga naging issue yan sa senate kung yung mga govt. officials (esp. in Communications) ba ay dapat pang gumamit ng personal blogs about politics.

[tk421]

Rappler claims to be 100% Filipino owned but posts pro-American and pro-Western news and commentaries.

 

Why? Because it's foreign influenced. The silent foreign partners acquired their influence through a legal loophole on PDRs.

 

Foreign-influence is still not ownership. Sus... our culture is western influenced does that make our culture unconstitutional?

[tk421]

 

Her blogs are personally done by Mocha, it is not related on her position in govt. Her blog already exist even before Du30 became president. Kaya nga naging issue yan sa senate kung yung mga govt. officials (esp. in Communications) ba ay dapat pang gumamit ng personal blogs about politics.

 

I'm sorry to say personal time or not, if you're a communications secretary, there's no such line that exist when it comes to communicating to the public. Kung kai kaibigan lang siguro pwede pa, but her platform is public. And we are paying her lunch money, therefore we are paying for her blog.

[camiar]

 

You mean you're saying there's something wrong with media focusing on the human rights issue? Isn't that one of the most basic rights we have as a civilized society?

 

China's good intentions in the West Philippine Sea? Is this a joke? The only good intention China has there are for their own. Good grief... we're talking about an imaginary threat (Rappler) vs a literal territorial invasion (West Philippine Sea) and you're focusing on the latter?

This reply precisely proves my point.

 

You support Rappler although it parrots only the Western POV. It means you're already pro-Western in your opinion and views.

 

Now, if Rappler's silent foreign partners were Chinese, and then it tries to portray that China only has good intentions in the South China Sea, you will surely protest Rappler's pro-Chinese view and blame it as a consequence of it having Chinese foreign partners!

[camiar]

 

I'm sorry to say personal time or not, if you're a communications secretary, there's no such line that exist when it comes to communicating to the public. Kung kai kaibigan lang siguro pwede pa, but her platform is public. And we are paying her lunch money, therefore we are paying for her blog.

Drilon, Bam Aquino, Lacson, etc... are also writing commentaries in newspapers and tabloids.

 

Double standards here?

[camiar]

 

Foreign-influence is still not ownership. Sus... our culture is western influenced does that make our culture unconstitutional?

The constitution's intent in requiring full Filipino ownership is to have it as a preventive measure against foreigners using local media to sway public opinion.

 

SEC is wise to base its ruling on the constitutional requirement, not on the legal definition of ownership, which in the case of Rappler, has a PDR loophole.

 

Suffice it to say that Congress will soon draft a law to plug the loophole.

Edited February 6, 2018 by camiar

[haroots2]

 

I'm sorry to say personal time or not, if you're a communications secretary, there's no such line that exist when it comes to communicating to the public. Kung kai kaibigan lang siguro pwede pa, but her platform is public. And we are paying her lunch money, therefore we are paying for her blog.

 

So if Mocha post about her dog in her personal blog during her off duty bawal din yun kasi nasa Comm. siya?

[tk421]

This reply precisely proves my point.

 

You support Rappler although it parrots only the Western POV. It means you're already pro-Western in your opinion and views.

 

Now, if Rappler's silent foreign partners were Chinese, and then it tries to portray that China only has good intentions in the South China Sea, you will surely protest Rappler's pro-Chinese view and blame it as a consequence of it having Chinese foreign partners!

 

 

Wow. There's a world of differences between these two. One is invading our territory, one is defending human life (Filipino lives at that).

 

And even then alleged influence is still not ownership whoever else Rappler is supporting.

[tk421]

 

So if Mocha post about her dog in her personal blog during her off duty bawal din yun kasi nasa Comm. siya?

 

She posts about dogs?!? I happen to love dogs~! They're so cute and cuddly...

 

But not the kind of dogs that Duterte has. Those are rabid. The worst kind.

 

Hindi. Ganito kasi yun: yun blog ba niya, ginagamit ba niya para mag post ng mga aso niya o ginagamit niya sa trabho niya? Paano mo masisiguradong sinusulat niya yun mga yun ng free time niya? So kung nag live blog sya habang nasa isa syang official function, considered free time ba nya yun?

[haroots2]

 

She posts about dogs?!? I happen to love dogs~! They're so cute and cuddly...

 

But not the kind of dogs that Duterte has. Those are rabid. The worst kind.

 

Hindi. Ganito kasi yun: yun blog ba niya, ginagamit ba niya para mag post ng mga aso niya o ginagamit niya sa trabho niya? Paano mo masisiguradong sinusulat niya yun mga yun ng free time niya? So kung nag live blog sya habang nasa isa syang official function, considered free time ba nya yun?

 

Kaya nga walang maka bawal kay Mocha even her opponents sa legislative branch. Her blogs whatever may contain is protected by the Freedom of Speech in the constitution. Kung may sinabi siyang libelous then kasuhan siya pero walang pwede magsabi sa kanya na hindi na siya pwedeng mag blogs kung gusto niya,

Edited February 6, 2018 by haroots2

[tk421]

 

Kaya nga walang maka bawal kay Mocha even her opponents sa legislative branch. Her blogs whatever may contain is protected by the Freedom of Speech in the constitution. Kung may sinabi siyang libelous then kasuhan siya pero walang pwede magsabi sa kanya na hindi na siya pwedeng mag blogs kung gusto niya,

 

We're still paying her to blog.

[camiar]

 

 

Wow. There's a world of differences between these two. One is invading our territory, one is defending human life (Filipino lives at that).

 

And even then alleged influence is still not ownership whoever else Rappler is supporting.

you don't get my point.

 

read back and understand the context.

[camiar]

 

We're still paying her to blog.

No, we're not.

 

What she does with her personal time is her prerogative.

Edited February 6, 2018 by camiar

[tk421]

No, we're not.

 

What she does with her personal time is her prerogative.

 

As stated in my example. If she posts during an official function. Is that personal time? And if her blog is a means to fulfill her duties as Communications Secretary is that not paying her for her blog?

[tk421]

you don't get my point.

 

read back and understand the context.

 

There's no need. It's still pretty clear that because Rappler is focusing on human rights issue, they have to be taken down by the government.

 

The foreign ownership issue is just a smokescreen to make it seem they're doing something legal. Very strong-arm tactic similar to what is being employed by PRC on 'dissidents'.

[camiar]

 

There's no need. It's still pretty clear that because Rappler is focusing on human rights issue, they have to be taken down by the government.

 

The foreign ownership issue is just a smokescreen to make it seem they're doing something legal. Very strong-arm tactic similar to what is being employed by PRC on 'dissidents'.

 

How would you take it if some Chinese individuals acquired PDR investments on Rappler and Maria Ressa suddenly extols the benevolence of Chinese towards its neighbors, after which SEC questions Rappler's ownership and revokes its license?

Edited February 6, 2018 by camiar

[tk421]

 

How would you take it if some Chinese individuals acquired PDR investments on Rappler and Maria Ressa suddenly extols the benevolence of Chinese towards its neighbors, after which SEC questions Rappler's ownership and revokes its license?

 

 

Depends on the Context. Does China at that time have territorial disputes with us or no?

[camiar]

 

 

Depends on the Context. Does China at that time have territorial disputes with us or no?

Yes, they have! Everybody knows that.

 

In this case it is China who would be using Rappler to sway public opinion. How would you react then?

Edited February 6, 2018 by camiar

[camiar]

 

As stated in my example. If she posts during an official function. Is that personal time? And if her blog is a means to fulfill her duties as Communications Secretary is that not paying her for her blog?

That's an oxymoron. She cannot post in her personal blog as an official function.

 

She can post outside her official time. She can post during break time, during lunch, and in the evening.

 

Heck! Even Donald Trump use Twitter. Why can't she?

[tk421]

That's an oxymoron. She cannot post in her personal blog as an official function.

 

She can post outside her official time. She can post during break time, during lunch, and in the evening.

 

Heck! Even Donald Trump use Twitter. Why can't she?

 

And you think people are happy that Donald is tweeting while he's supposed to be doing his presidential duties?

 

By official function I meant if she's in an event, during official time and she writes a live blog post. Hope that's clear enough.

[tk421]

Yes, they have! Everybody knows that.

 

In this case it is China who would be using Rappler to sway public opinion. How would you react then?

 

In that context (with China still having territorial disputes with us), then yes, I will protest as that would mean it's cuddling with an enemy.

 

But that's not the case, is it? Rappler is writing about human rights and whether or not it's being influenced by a foreign entity is immaterial to me, if it's championing human decency, then I'm behind it.