How does the media affect people?

[haroots2]

So if what Camiar is saying is true and they closed Rappler down due to it being allegedly influenced by foreign entities, why did they not do the same with all of these other media networks at the same damned time?

 

Tsaka kung ganun lang ang excuse niyo, how about all those Chinese (or Japanese, Korean) newspapers that are being distributed in their respected communities? I'm sure you've seen these in Binondo and elsewhere. If I remember correctly a lot of Filipino Chinese aren't Filipino citizens, yet these people can invest in a mass media publication. They are written, printed and distributed within the Philippines for mass consumption.

 

By right, they are all defined as mass media, correct? Is the law being applied equally or only to those that the government doesn't like?

 

What an assumption to make such a conclusion.

Edited January 31, 2018 by haroots2

[tk421]

 

What an assumption to make such a conclusion.

 

So can you say these other media publications aren't funded by outside entities? As in 100% sure?

[haroots2]

 

So can you say these other media publications aren't funded by outside entities? As in 100% sure?

 

Those chinese newpapers like United Daily News, World News are already circulating for too long. They don't need millions from foreign investment to run an existing printing press. The only issue I know about them is the One China Policy because some of them are from Taiwan.

[tk421]

So on this, because theyve been circulating for a long time, is ok with you?

 

I smell double standard. I a apply niyo lang yun law (strictly, at that) kapag means ito para matanggal ang critics, no?

 

Meron ba sinasabi sa constitution how much should be invested bago ito lumalabag sa law of foreign ownership?

[tk421]

Tk, hindi naman hahabulin ng sec ang mga chinese newspaper outfits dito sa pinas. As if naman marunong sila magbasa ng chinese characters para mabasa kung ano man ang pambabatikos nito sa gobyerno ni digong. Hahahahaha

May pagka timang lang kasi yun reasoning nila. Labag daw sa constitution ang rappler, pero yun iba dyan hinahayaan lang.

[haroots2]

So on this, because theyve been circulating for a long time, is ok with you?

 

I smell double standard. I a apply niyo lang yun law (strictly, at that) kapag means ito para matanggal ang critics, no?

 

Meron ba sinasabi sa constitution how much should be invested bago ito lumalabag sa law of foreign ownership?

 

Ano naman ang basehan mo para habulin sila aber? Dahil you remember dati na maraming fil-chi na Chinese citizen?

[tk421]

Aba malay ko. Kayo ang nagsasabi dyan na dapat walang foreign-influences ang media eh.

 

And punto ko lang ay kung ganun kayo sa Rappler, bakit sa ibang 'harmless' publications hindi pantay ang treatment?

Edited February 1, 2018 by tk421

[camiar]

So if what Camiar is saying is true and they closed Rappler down due to it being allegedly influenced by foreign entities, why did they not do the same with all of these other media networks at the same damned time?

 

Tsaka kung ganun lang ang excuse niyo, how about all those Chinese (or Japanese, Korean) newspapers that are being distributed in their respected communities? I'm sure you've seen these in Binondo and elsewhere. If I remember correctly a lot of Filipino Chinese aren't Filipino citizens, yet these people can invest in a mass media publication. They are written, printed and distributed within the Philippines for mass consumption.

 

By right, they are all defined as mass media, correct? Is the law being applied equally or only to those that the government doesn't like?

They did not close Rappler.

 

They revoked its registration -- not because it is "allegedly being influenced by foreign entities" but because its ownership is not 100% Filipino.

 

Foreign news media, no matter how respected they are in their own country cannot operate in the Philippines as dictated by our constitution. But copies of their publications can be distributed and read here. Where's the confusion?

Edited February 1, 2018 by camiar

[camiar]

Aba malay ko. Kayo ang nagsasabi dyan na dapat walang foreign-influences ang media eh.

 

And punto ko lang ay kung ganun kayo sa Rappler, bakit sa ibang 'harmless' publications hindi pantay ang treatment?

Nalilito kayo.

 

Anybody who took up Philippine Constitution as their college subject will learn that ban the on foreign ownership of news media organization is a preventive measure against foreign influence.

 

Even "harmless" publishers who wish to operate in the Philippines have to have 100% Filipino ownership.

 

Anyway, just because New York Times or Wall Street Journal are sold in Philippine newsstands does not mean that those publishers are operating here.

Edited February 1, 2018 by camiar

[tk421]

They revoked its registration -- not because it is "allegedly being influenced by foreign entities" but because its ownership is not 100% Filipino.

 

Rappler is owned 100% by Filipinos, so the excuse they are making is that it is being funded by foreign nationals.

 

Foreign news media, no matter how respected they are in their own country cannot operate in the Philippines as dictated by our constitution. But copies of their publications can be distributed and read here. Where's the confusion?

 

Those other medias are not copies. For example, CNN Philippines is not a copy of a publication, is it not?

 

And the other publications aren't copies either, they operate, write and print their papers here.

Nalilito kayo.

 

Anybody who took up Philippine Constitution as their college subject will learn that ban the on foreign ownership of news media organization is a preventive measure against foreign influence.

 

Even "harmless" publishers who wish to operate in the Philippines have to have 100% Filipino ownership.

 

Anyway, just because New York Times or Wall Street Journal are sold in Philippine newsstands does not mean that those publishers are operating here.

 

 

I'm not referring to those magazines that are printed overseas and imported here. Kung ganun lang, pati yun US Comic books and Mangas will be covered by that ban.

[camiar]

 

Rappler is owned 100% by Filipinos, so the excuse they are making is that it is being funded by foreign nationals.

 

 

Those other medias are not copies. For example, CNN Philippines is not a copy of a publication, is it not?

 

And the other publications aren't copies either, they operate, write and print their papers here.

 

 

I'm not referring to those magazines that are printed overseas and imported here. Kung ganun lang, pati yun US Comic books and Mangas will be covered by that ban.

OMG! You don't even understand publishing terms.

 

A newspaper company, for example, prints 200,000 copies of its morning news edition, Each newspaper you buy is a COPY of the morning news.

 

CNN Philippines is a broadcasting company, not a newspaper company. Therefore the term "copy" does not apply.

 

Anyway, as I said, if they want to operate here, they must register as 100% Filipino.

 

If there are other news media in the Philippines who violate this, then SEC must go after them, too.

 

If you know who they are, it is your duty as a citizen to report them.

Edited February 1, 2018 by camiar

[tk421]

It's the old switcheroo. >sigh<

 

Anyways, tignan niyo nga halimbawa yun Manila Shimbun. That's a Japanese newspaper, operating in Manila. It's a mass media publication owned by a Japanese company (correct me if I'm wrong). Publishing original content in the Philippines. How come that is allowed and Rappler is not?

[rooster69ph]

Para matapos na,To those saying na rappler violated foreign ownership per se ...

 

Can anyone pls post the SEC en banc ruling that states rappler indeed has more than 0% foreign ownership.

[camiar]

It's the old switcheroo. >sigh<

 

Anyways, tignan niyo nga halimbawa yun Manila Shimbun. That's a Japanese newspaper, operating in Manila. It's a mass media publication owned by a Japanese company (correct me if I'm wrong). Publishing original content in the Philippines. How come that is allowed and Rappler is not?

If the newspaper is sold here as a publication of a foreign newspaper, and it is clearly identified as a foreign newspaper, then there's no violation.

 

New York Times can send an exact facsimile of its newspaper for local printing here in the Philippines to be sold in local newsstands. Since it is clearly identified as a foreign newspaper, no violations there.

 

If a newspaper claims to be a Filipino newspaper but is in fact not 100% Filipino owned, then that's a violation.

[rooster69ph]

 

If a newspaper claims to be a Filipino newspaper but is in fact not 100% Filipino owned, then that's a violation.

And tk is saying rappler to this day is 100 percent filipino owned.

 

The SEC ruling is easily available. Can you pls guide us where SEC specifically states that rappler has more than 0 percent foreign ownership.

Edited February 1, 2018 by rooster69ph