You’re Not in Kindergarten, So Stop Bullying
Jan. 21, 2010. This is the day a miniscule blogger was picked on by a pea-size brained Philippine government official. A blogger named Ella of Blog ni Ella is now facing libel charges from an article about those “rotting” merchandise inside the DSWD warehouses.
If you guys can remember, the Philippines took a beating from typhoon Ondoy last October 2009. It was October 22, 2009, when we issued an article in reference to the original article of Blog ni Ella regarding the state of of some government relief efforts in some warehouses owned by the Department of Social Welfare and Deveopment (DSWD). And the DSWD was in charge of those goods that were donated through government channels. Big chunks of those items donated came from the international community and from UNICEF.
As per the blogger’s original article, that have created other opinion pieces all over the blogosphere and into social networks to mainstream media, the relief items were just sitting in the department’s warehouses. This was at a time when all were busy with relief efforts from the devastating effects of the floods where people have died.
In the said Inquirer report, the National Bureau of Investigation filed a libel complaint as requested by then DSWD Secretary Esperanza Cabral, who is now Health Secretary, claiming the blog entry had “malicious imputations against her, the Department of Social Welfare and Development, and its employees.”
Now what is wrong with this? Quite a few I would say.
First, the blog article in question, as we can find in most blogs, is a matter of opinion. If a person makes a statement that is, as Cabral said, contrary to the facts, it may not necessarily be libelous. On the other hand, a statement can be seen as an expression of fact or opinion depends on whether or not the person making such statement would be in a position to know such facts.
Therefore, if I call Secretary Cabral a stupid moron, it is more likely to be regarded as an opinion than if such a statement was made by her secretary. It is precisely because I wouldn’t have a chance to personally know her, so my statement on her being such would merely be categorized as that, an opinion.
Second, if assuming for argument’s sake that the article may be malicious as Ms. Cabral stated, it clearly had no actual malice. It simply means that the person who made such statements had no way of knowing that such observations and statements were actually false, if indeed they were. If I saw the same thing, even as those pictures led us to see, I would have the very same observation myself. And as a matter fact I have.
And given the circumstances surrounding the relief items and the hurried necessity of the relief efforts as compared to the activity inside those DSWD warehouses, anybody would come to the same conclusion.
The article in question is also a comment on a matter of public interest. Now I’m pretty sure we all agree that the issue is of public concern. Not only Ms. Cabral is a public servant, and by that, we the public pays for her salary, and all the “rotting” items were considered public and the property used for storage were publicly owned.
And we, as the public, have the right to question know if our funds and resources are being used properly or are being diverted for some other purposes that what is originally intended, don’t we?
Besides, NBI’s argument that “if Ella was sincere in bringing out the alleged corruption, she should have asked the Ombudsman to investigate” was pathetic at best. A citizen’s sincerity is not the issue here. Sincerity is not a matter of law that would suffice for an investigative bureau to waste its precious time. Sincerity is for politicians and government officials to look for and for us the public to find in them.
I think the NBI should be better off hunting the likes of Jason Ivlers than going after amateur bloggers. This move is clearly an implied threat to bloggers who express personal observations and opinions against the government.
We need to remind Ms. Cabral that she is not in kindergarten. Tattle-taling is not an option here. If she wants to go first grade, she needs to understand and accept the fact that praises and adulations are not the only things she had to expect.
And what’s more, it is not only in school where bullying is not permitted, it is in society as a whole.
Viewed 12548 times by 2556 viewers
BURAOT is your quintessential skeptic but a not-yet-so-hopeless pessimist. Impatient most of the time, hence the name, he yearns to discover the magnanimity of the universe and the infinite folly of human stupidity (yep, that was Einstein's). And yes, oo.. he also want world peace. You can stalk him out at Anak ni Kulapo and I Am Buraot.
BURAOT (87)
Kutz (66)
Mel (58)
Snow (52)
promking (27)
Silver (24)
Jet (19)
Lila R Shahani (14)
malensky (13)
cora (11)
Leo (11)
kengkay (10)
Lani (10)
carlo (8)
kotsengkuba (7)
maxi (7)
flicker (6)
Johnonymous (6)
liberdad (6)
ajay (5)
BERTENI "TOTO" CA... (5)
mark (5)
mr. nonsense (5)
nina (5)
Norman Sison (5)
ren (5)
Amor (4)
art (4)
Baby Bringas-Apruebo (4)
cheekychic (4)
Lalaine S. (4)
an2nette (3)
Anna (3)
bing (3)
boldstar (3)
caloy santiago (3)
Dinah (3)
fehm lopez (3)
GayGB (3)
I agree. Kung libelous pala ang magsabi ng opinion pati sa mga blogs ay wala nang magsasalita kung ito’y ikapapahamak din nila. I thought our country is a democratic one. Nasaan ang demokrasya kung pati pagsasabi ng opinion ay hindi na rin malaya.
Dr. Cabral, you are too old and too professional to be a bully.
kaya nga. it’s a matter of opinion. and opinions are not libelous. otherwise lahat tayo na nagsabing nangungurakot ang mga nasa gobyerno, nademanda na.
Yeah, I can agree on the bullying, Ella is not a criminal like Ivler, hauling the NBI into the Ella case was an overkill, i smell retaliation on the part of Cabral, that’s what i believe apart from sending some sort of a chilling message to the bloggers.
besides “she should have asked the Ombudsman to investigate” – i’m just curious if this is the normal citizen reaction back home, when a citizen suspects that something is wrong that needs immediate attention, given the severity of what we’ve seen on TV and read on the papers and saw on the blog. shouldn’t the gov’t agencies be the “ella” at that time?
not sayin that shes corrupt but sometimes i also think that – could this be a move to pre-empt something? like if Noynoy becomes President where he already said that he’s gonna ran after corrupt officials?
yes, this is retaliation. kawawang ella, na-harass pa. at NBI pa. overkill talaga.
Heto lang masasabi ko:
Article 3, Section 4 of the Philippine Constitution prohibits any law that abridges the freedom of speech, of the press or the right to peaceful public assembly.
The right to free speech under the Philippine Constitution is an almost verbatim rendering of the free speech clause of the First Amendment to the US Constitution
hehehe…ang ibig ko pong sabihin ay:
Hindi dapat basta-basta nasu-supress ang opinion ng bawat isang nilalang dito sa Pilipinas dahil may free speech clause tayo dito sa atin.
i’m sure this case would be dismissed. at alam din nila yun. the main purpose of this case is to harass ella and other bloggers who plan on doing the same.
Tumpak Kuya B!
But they are signalling a wrong message to bloggers like us. Parang pinipigilan nila tayong maglabas ng ating thoughts and ideas, di ba?
Heller? Hindi tayo taga-China. May freedom of expression dito sa Pinas.
bahala sila snow. basta tayo sulat lang. harassment lang naman yan. pero para sa mga nagwo-worry, kelangan humanap na rin tayo ng tropang abugado, just to make sure.
If you’re keen on the case and its merits, here are some links you may wanna factor in:
http://jlp-law.com/blog/libel-e-internet-libel/
In Philippine jurisdiction, the truth is not always a defense. While something is true, if the purpose is to besmirch, then liability still exists. To be liable for libel, the following elements must be shown to exist:
(1) the allegation of a discreditable act or condition concerning another;
Here are some photo captions in Ella’s blog:
- Marami pang pabubulukin
- Sige, ideretso ‘nyo ulit ‘yan sa DSWD warehouse. Para AMAG naman ang abutin ng biskwit… at sapot ng gagamba.
- Do you mean “do not delay ang dati nang delayed”
- Sabay tatahiin na ang sako. O di ba, parang asong tinapunan ng buto ang mga nasalanta?
- Relief goods na ayaw yata ibigay sa mga nasalanta. Halatang-halata.
Her Conclusion:
Susulpot din siguro ang laman ng mga mahiwagang kahon at mapapasakamay din ng mga tao…sa ARAW NG ELEKSYON.
(2) publication of the charge;
http://www.ellaganda.com/?p=1759
(3) identity of the person defamed; and
http://www.ellaganda.com/?p=1759
(4) existence of malice.
Legal malice is a term that refers to one party’s intention to do injury to another. Malice can either be expressed or implied.
- Expressed malice occurs when the party gives outward notice that they intend to commit a crime or some other wrong towards another.
From Ella’s blog:
Nagpalabas ng directive ang pangulo. Individuals, private companies and other nations were ENCOURAGED to send their donations to DSWD. I blogged about it here (blog entry not found ).
This PGMA directive sounded suspicious to me then. Now I know why.
Here’s the story.
A group of eight people, your ate Ella included, went to one of DSWD warehouses to help in repacking relief goods. We know they need volunteers pero hindi namin akalaing WALANG TAO TALAGA SA LOOB NG WAREHOUSE!
***Ella suspected PGMA’s directive. She went to volunteer and took photos expressly violating the instruction not to do so. She displayed these on her blog with the captions earlier mentioned.
- Implied malice occurs when one party causes death or injury to another during the course of unlawful or disreputable actions.
From Ella:
Pinagbawalan kaming kumuha ng pictures sa loob ng warehouse. I wonder why.
***She took photos and later displayed it online with the captions earlier mentioned.
Malice generally involves the intentional infliction of physical, mental, psychological, or financial damage to another party.
Now how do you determine intention?
1. Do you base it on the blogger’s action in response to her suspicion?
This PGMA directive sounded suspicious to me then.
***She volunteered then took photos inside the warehouse.
2. Do you base it on the accused and the accuser’s history and connections, if any?
There are aspersions as to Cabral’s being an alter-ego of President Arroyo, in other blogs.
If there’s an allusion to intentions then because of political connection, let’s investigate this further by reading:
http://www.bulatlat.com/news/6-32/6-32-libel.htm :
42 Journalists Face Libel Raps from Arroyo’s Husband
Bandera (six counts, Tulfo’s column “On Target” inilabas noong Jan. 26, May 23 at 27, June 6,8 at 17)
27. Eileen Mangubat (publisher)
28. Beting Laygo Dolor (editor-in-chief)
29. Jimmy Alcantara (associate editor)
30. Raymond Rivera (circulation manager)
The Beting Laygo Dolor :
Of Philippine News Online:
http://philippinenews.com/article.php?id=5380
who started PCIJ (Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism ) alongside Sheila Coronel, Malou Mangahas, Lorna Kalaw-Tirol, Howie Severino and David Celdran.
http://preciousanne.blogspot.com/
Editor- of:
1. Bandera
2. Prime Asia and Pinoy Global Access
http://www.upjournalismclub.org/gallery/photos/suit-of-cards-a-forum-on-libel/
3. Playboy Philippines
http://www.bworldonline.com/Weekender072508/main.php?id=focus1
4. Business World
http://www.grabeh.com/forum/index.php
CONTRIBUTING EDITOR of:
http://www.filglobe.com/files/augpage22forum.pdf
Same Beting Laygo Dolor who released this:
http://philippinenews.com/article.php?id=5380
Donated goods sitting in DSWD warehouse
Published, October 23, 2009
… after Ella released this:
http://www.ellaganda.com/?p=1759
Aanhin pa ang damo kung patay na ang kabayo? (A special report from a volunteer)
Published, Oct 21st, 2009
Same Beting Laygo Dolor who co-wrote the articles appearing here:
http://pinoybsn.blogspot.com/2006/10/arroyo-to-nurses-retake-board-test.html
http://bolanon.com/forums_topic_view.aspx?page=1&tid=3363&fid=2929&=desc
…with the girl whose name appears here:
http://services.inquirer.net/mobile/10/01/22/html_output/xmlhtml/20100121-248693-xml.html
…and whose identity is confirmed here:
http://forums.seo.ph/showthread.php?t=10191
Re: DSWD vs Jade? – 01-22-2010, 11:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kickmoko
teka maihabol ko lang..member din ba dito si jade?
Yes. Si vlette
3. Do you base it on the snowballing imputations the blog entry has spawned?
a. Like the blog entries of her fellow bloggers: http://gurlalien.blogspot.com/2010/01/para-kay-ella.html
Wow… di maka get over? bakit kaya? well… ang sabi niya, hindi daw dapat palampasin ang mga ganitong ‘paninira’ sa gobyerno. huh? pero bakit? Alam mo madam, kung di ka talaga guilty, dapat madali kang makaka move-on. eh bakit parang hanggang ngayon eh hurt na hurt ka pa din sa mga nabasa mong blog post? dahil ba the truth hurts? at kahit pa na hindi na ikaw ang mei hawak ng DSWD eh nag file ka pa din ng kaso?
yung mga againsta kay ella, obvious na obvious na related sa DSWD. kung makapag post eh damang dama nila every word.
Whose alias appears here:
http://forums.seo.ph/showthread.php?s=81b8794c5836bf5d9aae7608177a1b3f&t=5216
b. Or the published articles of media men like:
Ramon Tulfo
Whose article: It pays to be honest
http://services.inquirer.net/mobile/10/02/01/html_output/xmlhtml/20100130-250222-xml.html
states:
FORMER SOCIAL WELFARE and now Health Secretary Esperanza Cabral is reportedly using her office to harass a blogger…
The same group also allegedly went to the Parañnaque residence of the Dolor family, as Cabral was reportedly convinced that Ella was a member of that family.
Same Tulfo who curiously appeared here:
42 Journalists kinasuhan ng Libelo
Bandera (six counts, Tulfo’s column “On Target” inilabas noong Jan. 26, May 23 at 27, June 6,8 at 17)
27. Eileen Mangubat (publisher)
28. Beting Laygo Dolor (editor-in-chief)
29. Jimmy Alcantara (associate editor)
30. Raymond Rivera (circulation manager)
http://zumel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14&Itemid=2
As confirmed from this column:
http://tulfo.net/column1.htm
If Ella is guilty, then she is guilty. If Ella of Blog ni Ella is found guilty of one or more Pinas libel laws from an article about those merchandise inside the DSWD warehouses, then justice will be : (a) Ella is fined maximum P100.00; (b) Ella is jailed for 10 minutes or less. One who has broken the law should be found guilty by the courts. Justice is in the punishment meted.
The next step should be for NoyNoy or whoever gets to be next president to take the lead to push Congress to amend the oppressive libel laws that suppress freedom-of-expression. This is the same issue where Pinas media can get sent to jail for printing certifiable truth about mayors or others being seen inside motels or carousing around town with callgirls or prostitutes.
that’s true! if we could only sue these politicians who promised us all the best government service only to end up as corrupt animals and enriched themselves in government positions!
UP n grad, yep. if she IS guilty. but the thing is, i don’t think she is. and this case will surely be dismissed. Mike Arroyo’s case against the media a while back is so much stronger yet he decided to let it go. it is because it would bear no fruit. except of course to harass the plaintiffs.
and this is the whole purpose of the libel case.
they have to remember: blog is different from news. different from giving a fact statement than giving out a comment. aside from that, for each blog site, there would usually be a disclaimer. and usually the discliamer would say na kung meron man ang sino mang mambabasa na gustong ipabago, pwede naman nyang kontakin yung blogger no at gaya dito sa barrio siete nakasaad na maaring hindi lahat ng content nito ay tama!
kung gusto nya, contakin nya yung host nung site at dun sya magreklamo, yun ay kung eentertain sya. hahaha.
langya, kwatog pa rin pala pangalan ko. weheheh.
well delta, that’s the main defense for Ella, it is a blog. and blog are personal. therefore opinionated.
besides, even if the news media were the source of the story, it still wouldn’t be libelous because of the complainant is a public figure, the issue is a matter of public interest and mostly, it was TRUE.
totoo namang naka-tengga lang at that time yung mga goods at hindi gumagalaw. of course being that, it follows an OPINION that was assumed that maybe there was something going on.
as far as yung goods are concerned.. sa experience ni Ella, naka-tengga lang talaga yung mga yun.. she was there offering her help pero hindi pinahawak sa kanya yun.. and when she asked if there are plans to disseminate them, wala siyang nakuhang sinagot.
Baket hindi na lang nila ipakita sa bayan kung paano idistribute ang mga relief goods etc?? Simple as that para mapatunayan nila na hindi nga nila binubulok talaga ang mga relief goods.
Ella’s concern is a valid one. Baket nga naman nakatengga ang mga relief goods that time sa warehouse? Sa dami ng mga tao sa evacuation centers e dapat naka-distribute na ang mga yan.
Oh well..pilipins…hayzt.
sakto silver. totoo naman yung sinabi ni ella.
pwede ka rin magpablog ng mga ibang volunteers na nakapag deliver ng goods mo, to counter Ella’s blog..
you use a blog to counter a blog.. both are opinions.
hindi yang ganyan na NBI ang gagamitin mo.. hindi naman criminal case ito.
pakshet.com
Sincerity is not a matter of law that would suffice for an investigative bureau to waste its precious time. Sincerity is for politicians and government officials to look for and for us the public to find in them.
***natumbok mo bossing! isipin mo na lang kung ilang araw natengga ang stock sa bodega nila. e ang daming nagugutom. ang gusto lang naman ni ella at nating lahat ay kung bakit ganun ang nangyayari hindi ba? kung may paraan masosolusyunan yun kaso asan ang sinseridad nila? tapos ngayon may mga litanya pa silang ganyan na pati blogging titirahin nila. tanong lang diyan eh sino ngayon ang nagbibigay ng malisya of all these? kung nabigyan ng maganda palinawagan yan at na satisfy ang mga tao e di sana natapos ang problema nila kaso kitang kita ang kapalpakan.
dencios, pathetic talaga yung justification ng NBI. palusot lang.
Hey Ateng,
Tagal kong nag hibernate, hehehehe, na miss ko ang imong alindog!
Sa Philippine libel law, kino consider ang motive, Ateng. If Ella can show that she published the piece and photos with good motives and for justifiable ends, she will be acquitted.
The good thing about this is, mabubuksan ulit yung issue and hopefully magkakarun ng magandang kahihinatnan as far as putting system sa relief distribution natin dun.
I read the piece, hindi naman attack na personal dun kay Miss Cabral yung sinulat ni Ella. Napaka balat sibuyas naman ni Cabral, hehehehe. Kung wiz mo type yung isinulat sa iyo, eh di sagutin ang mga accusation and whatever insinuations ng punto por punto saka mag ask ng public apology davah? Tapos ang kwento! Hindi yung mega deviate ang issue with matching gamit pa ng NBI.
I hope Cabral pushes the issue para mas maraming pandora’s box ng DSWD ang mabuksan, hehehhehehehe. Kaya lang kawawa si Ella, sha bale ang magiging catalyst if ever. Oh well.
wait na lang naten what happens to this one. nakatutuk den kami sa mga developments. obvious na obvious na napikon si cabral at talagang overkill ang ginawa
Ganyan naman sa Pinas eh… Lahat ng tao lalo na pag nasa gobyerno ka, dafat Most Polite saka Most Courteous palagi ang drama mo. Kapag wala ka sa posisyon, kahit tinrabaho mo lahat at nagka award ka, kailangan mega acknowledge mo sila for their support, siyet!
Si Cabral eh isang ehemplo ng Filipino administrator na nasa posisyon pero obviously walang kakayahan mamuno ng isang department. Kailangan mag retrain sa management, hehehehe. SAPILITANG I ENROLL SA REYNA ELENA UNIVERSITY AND ISANG YAN!!! Bigyan ng discount sa tuition, 100 boxes of imported relief goods na lang ang tuition nya for one semester, hahahahahaha!!!!
O ayan, pang libel yan ha, hinahamon ko sha…ipa NBI mo akoh daliiiiii!!!!
HOY! nga pala kutz, kaila nimo ni day?
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/breakingnews/view/20100124-249162/Filipino-in-Maryland-teacher-of-the-month
Wiz Ateng…pero vonggacious sha davah? Bayani!
Mabuti pa sha may passion pa rin sa teaching, hehehehe. Aketch feeling ko nag plateau na now kaya after na makuha ko ang akon diploma saka blackbelt sa Six sigma, vavush na aketch sa academe, wehehehehe!!!
Oist Ateng nag six sigma ka vah evah? Mahirap ba? Ini encourage ako nung isang sinosocialclimb ko para makalipat na ako sa kompanya nila.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Silver and Snow, Alphredite. Alphredite said: RT @tweetmeme You’re Not in Kindergarten, So Stop Bullying http://tinyurl.com/ybhfu7d [...]
ANg sabi ng yumaong lolo ko;
Pag me usok ay may apoy….
At pag me mabantot… me umutot…
I do belive that Ela exposed those issue coz she really got a basis on it.. umaray lang talaga ng mga DSWD dahil may katotohanan yun kahit papaano… ang corruption ay kalat na sa saan man sangay ng gobyerno, lalo na sa kasalukuyang administrasyon….
I can say na isa ako sa mga buhay na patotoo, dahil limpak-limpak na rin na salapi ang pinamudmod ko sa mga hinayupak na buwite at buwaya na naka upo sa($^%$@%^&&%^).. eh kasi nga, hindi naman uusad ang negosyo ko kung walang kapalit na pera… anong magagawa ko??? kesa naman mapanis lahat kargamento ko…
“Sabi nga ni boy Instik.. kung wala ka Pera.. wala ako magawa..”
Hindi lang nila matanggap na nagmula lang sa isang katulad nating blogger ang pinag mulan ng issue na iyon…
pero me Araw din mga yan…. susuwertehin din ang susunod na pangulo, pag lumayas na ang malas na bansot sa palasyo.
siya nawa! AMEN…
Galing naman ni Cabral! NBI agad!
I read the article when it got published. First, sana naman eh matino facts nung mga nagsulat. Buhay ang blog ni Ella. Susmiyo, mag type na lang ata ng URL di pa nagawa. Second, di ko ata makita mali ng mag publish ng observations. Bawal na rin ba yun dito sa atin? Third, to Cabral, natakot ka ba or napikon?
Nag ract ba si Cabral ng ganito dahil blog lang ito? Paano kung main stream na publish?
Haaayyyyy internet freedom…
NBI kasi sila ang government unit na in charge and me kaalaman sa mga kasong cyber in nature.
Kelangan nila alamin kung sino yung tao behind the alias and yung NBI yung nasa posisyon para gawin yung pag-iimbestigang yun.
Freedom doesn’t mean you can trample on the freedom of another person.
Please do not make this an issue between the entire blogging community or the net community for that matter VS. the one filing the case. If we do that, we are glossing over the fact that we indeed need to be responsible of our actions whether be it on the net or offline.
We do not need to incite emotional upheaval ergo defensive comments from bloggers because the issue here is whether the imputations in Ella’s blog are enough to consider it libel. It’s whether her actions has tarnished the reputation of another and whether that action was ill-motivated or not. If we make it the flag-bearer of the defense for internet freedom, and enjoin the bloggers and the net community by appealing to their emotions, that would be highly irresponsible because, indeed, in this case, not all avenues towards proper and fair journalism were taken.
Blogging falls under this category as journalism is defined as: the craft of conveying news, descriptive material and opinion via a widening spectrum of media. These include newspapers, magazines, radio and television, the internet and even, more recently, the mobile phone. [Wikipedia]
c : writing designed to appeal to current popular taste or public interest. [Merriam-Webster]
Let us focus on the issue at hand and not shape the web community just based on the freedom we want endowed us net people. Other people who may not be bloggers deserve to enjoy their own freedom, too. We need not trample on theirs just so we can enjoy ours.
This isn’t about the blogging community VS. SEC. Cabral. This is about Sec. Cabral filing a libel suit against Ella. Ella isn’t the whole blogging community.
Ella’s ‘freedom’ isn’t internet freedom.
…unless we want to show the whole world that internet freedom as defined by bloggers is the right to throw aspersions on another without fear of repercussions and without accompanying culpability.
middleground,
i don’t know but i have read ella’s entry and there is no way it sounds like she’s trampling on Sec. Cabral’s name nor her right. nobody’s trying to point a gun on her head.
this is not JUST about Sec. Cabral filing a libel suit vs. a blogger named Ella. to think otherwise would be pathetic if not shallow at best.
not all the people in the blogging community are PR professionals trying to earn a quick buck. a lot of us think too. and this case is a natural reaction from too sensitive government official caught not doing her job.
yes, NBI has the capability to investigate who’s behind aliases and blogs, a thing that is cyber in nature. but so is google. all she you guys need to do is ask any of us. you don’t need an NBI to do that?
and by the way, ella’s freedom IS internet freedom, and your freedom as well.
Not everyone knows how to use the net or Google like we do. And for those who do not know how, it is but proper that they approach authorities who can.
Let us consider the fact that whatever SEC. Cabral does, accusations will be hurled at her, her intentions questioned, so the safest and wisest way is for her to entrust the task to people who are savvy at it and who understand the legal boundaries they need to respect.
***Not all the people in the blogging community are PR professionals trying to earn a quick buck.
My very point. There are those who blog and who are responsible bloggers. There are those who know that their freedom ends when it’s gonna step over the boundaries of another’s. Why should bloggers be exempt from libel? How should bloggers define freedom of the press? Do we want it to be absolute? What about those who do not blog? Why do we ask for our rights when we aren’t even willing to give it to others?
If by Ella’s freedom you are referring to the right for free internet expression without repercussions, then I do not see it as the benchmark of internet freedom we should all follow.
…because when i say, Ella’s freedom isn’t internet freedom, what I’m saying is we shouldn’t turn this into a “racist” cause.
If a Pinoy has violated a law in another nation, we’re not supposed to call on our Filipino spirit inciting others to defend him , appealing to our emotion that an affront to him would be an affront to the entire nation.
That’s not being responsible. That’s inciting war, creating factions.
The same is true if we pit the blogging world against those who decry the abuse of electronic freedom. We bolster their claim if we can not even admit that indeed, we have too powerful a medium right at our fingertips and we can shape the world with it.
Freedom in this arena the should be more defined, with more safeguards.
With this potent a tool, we have to be willing to take responsibility of our actions.
This being a landmark case,we have to be aware that whatever rights we fight for now will be the same rights that will be enjoyed by potential cybergangs and cyberbullies in the future.
who says bloggers should be exempt from libel?
these laws are meant to protect people like you and me from baseless and malicious accusations. and it is Sec. Cabral’s right by law to find justice from our courts.
blogging is an evolving practice. and therefore not printed to the letter of the law, but in any case, and with all intents and purposes, is by far presumed part of the media.
freedom is not absolute, and it is hereby dictated by laws. but we are not here discussing absolute freedoms are we? because this is not a philosophy class, but a mere discussion of the validity and ethical justifications of the “filing of the libel case”.
why level it up to racism? this is not about racism. unless you want to call a chicken a duck.
while Sec. Cabral has the right to file her libel case, it is also clearly defined in our own laws why Ella the blogger should NOT be held liable.
we as a citizen have a moral right to criticize our government. and if our government or an instrument thereof response to these criticisms is to file cases, instead of doing their jobs, that’s more than just bullying, it’s also a waste of our own money.
and remember, cyberbullies are not those who are hiding in aliases but clearly and evidently shows who they are, but THOSE WHO HIDES FROM THE PUBLIC USING ALIASES THAT CANNOT BE VERIFIED LIKE YOU DO.
***and remember, cyberbullies are not those who are hiding in aliases but clearly and evidently shows who they are, but THOSE WHO HIDES FROM THE PUBLIC USING ALIASES THAT CANNOT BE VERIFIED LIKE YOU DO.
why such a violent reaction? i am talking about us being responsible enough not to incite the anger of everyone and make it a battle between the bloggers vs. Cabral or anyone who files a libel suit against a blogger for that matter.
As defined by wikipedia:
Cyberbullying “involves the use of information and communication technologies to support deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior by an individual or group, that is intended to harm others. -Bill Belsey”
Have I harmed you? Do I have any intention of doing so? Did I accuse you in any way?
***… THOSE WHO HIDES FROM THE PUBLIC USING ALIASES THAT CANNOT BE VERIFIED LIKE YOU DO.
There you go pointing fingers.
Going back to the point being raised, we have to be cautious about speaking for the “entire blogging community” because this issue’s being used by solons and people in the media as a landmark case that may shape our country’s cyber platform, our internet law
I am just saying that we should focus on the merits of Ella’s case vs. SEC. Cabral and not make it the flag-bearer of the blogging community’s cry for internet freedom.
***why level it up to racism? this is not about racism. unless you want to call a chicken a duck.
I likened it to racism in that one person’s issue against another is being pushed to be accepted as the battlecry of the entire community.
Cabral didn’t file a case against Ella because she’s a blogger, she filed a case because of the content of the blog entry and the imputations it carried.
Thus so, we should let the dice roll and see justice unfold and not incite the blogging community to make the case their own.
Let’s not add fuel to the fire.
As i’ve stated earlier:
Please do not make this an issue between the entire blogging community or the net community for that matter VS. the one filing the case. If we do that, we are glossing over the fact that we indeed need to be responsible of our actions whether be it on the net or offline.
****while Sec. Cabral has the right to file her libel case, it is also clearly defined in our own laws why Ella the blogger should NOT be held liable.
Why?
i’m sorry but you read that wrong. it was NOT a violent reaction. was only pointing out the obvious.
while we obviously are on the same track about being responsible on what we say, we are different in another way. we put our nme on the line, i.e. we can get sued like ella had been sued. anonymous commenters like you don’t because you hide from aliases and won’t even put your valid email addresses, not even a phony one.
if we go back to the subject, and if you may kindly so read my article, i was trying to point out the lack of merits of the case, and quite obviously, have you read it right, is in no way tantamount even to the minute of term, inciting to hate.
racism is an entirely different level, and a struggle for or against it is, again, incomparable to the mater at hand. this is just a libel case for crying out loud.
and your last question, why?
why, read the article, middle. ground.
Update:
Solons defend blogger sued by DSWD for libel
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/nation/view/20100125-249403/Solons-defend-blogger-sued-by-DSWD-for-libel
***we can get sued like ella had been sued. anonymous commenters like you don’t…
Again, we are getting sidetracked, you are focusing on me, not the issue at hand. Anonymous or not, I haven’t posted anything that merits the table being turned on me, what with the reaction “cyberbullies are not those who are hiding in aliases but clearly and evidently shows who they are”.
Using aliases in the net space may be for varied reasons and one of those would be to set boundaries on people who get too caught up in their emotions and make everything personal, taking offline the issues they can not settle online. We call that sensibility, net guidelines, net wisdom.
As long as we do not hide behind aliases and do bad and mean things intent on causing people harm, never can you equate net anonymity and cyberbullying.
Cyberbullying is the act of bullying in cyberspace plain and simple, yes made rampant by the anonymity provided by the net, but still would be curtailed if we make it a point that stricter cyber laws would be ratified, which is the very point i am making.
Carefully-deliberated cyber guidelines will safeguard responsible bloggers and net people, be they anonymous or not. Well mapped-out cyber laws can cut off cyberbullies’ talons, whether they’re anonymous or not.
The point is as net people, our responsibility lies in defending internet freedom and shaping it in such a way that would protect not only us or other netizens, but even those who lack knowledge of it thereof.
You said: “i.e. we can get sued like ella had been sued”. Let it be noted that she had been sued despite the alias. Anonymity is not the issue here then, but responsibility. Her responsibility… which the courts will determine, when the case moves forward.
***if we go back to the subject, and if you may kindly so read my article, i was trying to point out the lack of merits of the case,
How can you determine the merits of the case? Do you have all the info that you need?
***and quite obviously, have you read it right, is in no way tantamount even to the minute of term, inciting to hate.
Take this intro for example:”This is the day a miniscule blogger was picked on by a pea-size brained Philippine government official…”
Blogger vs. government official? David vs. Goliath? Brainy vs. not?
Describing the blogger as miniscule and being picked on by somebody from the Philippine government whose brain is pea-sized – from where did you glean those contention?
Is Ella miniscule because she’s a blogger? Is Ella miniscule against the Philippine government official? Has she been picked on?
In what way?
Let’s not even focus on your aspersion against said official. Your view of her mental prowess or the mental prowess of government officials (since you referred to her as the pea-sized brain government official, not pea-sized brain Cabral) is irrelevant to the point at hand.
Putting biases aside, who indeed is miniscule? Who has been attacked and by whom, and by what large a multitude of people? What platform of attack is being used?
Media? The web? Whos’ using it?
Law? Proper authorities? Who’s taking this course?
Let’s not forget what put Pres. Obama in his place. Being net people, we so very well know the power of the web and its capacity to shape global opinion. Let us then be responsible on how we present or characterize a person, nay, our country and our government officials online.
If we so wanna use the web as our platform, then let’s at least practice responsible journalism and ask others to spread truth not our aspersions, not our suspicions. For an issue that can cause such aglobal uproar, do we not even owe government departments some web space so they can air their side before we go ranting about what we think is happening?
***racism is an entirely different level, and a struggle for or against it is, again, incomparable to the mater at hand. this is just a libel case for crying out loud.
Again, let me spell out that inciting an entire community to fight against someone who’s filing a case against someone who so happened to be a member of that community is what racism is all about. It’s not the entire blogging community against all government officials. It is Ella, who’s a blogger vs. SEC. Cabral, a government official.
And also, you can check on some urban dictionary and see how “racist” is being coined now. It’s now being used a a form of slang to describe someone who’s biased against a certain group of people. That’s why I used ” ” when I used the word. I also explained what I meant by it when you made it a point of discussion.
****and your last question, why?
why, read the article, middle. ground.
Why in reference to your statement:”it is also clearly defined in our own laws why Ella the blogger should NOT be held liable.”
I was asking about your legal basis on saying so.
Plus, shouldn’t we just let the courts decide on the merits of such case?
Which leads me to my original premise: let the courts decide on Ella’s case. Let us not stoke the fires of the bloggers’ ire and make it seem like the entire blogging community is being bullied because in actuality it’s not.
middleground,
i am with you on being responsible. but you are clearly not with me. like what i said in my article, if i call sec. cabral a stupid moron, that is an opinion. because clearly i do not know her personally to present a valid claim.
i can call you a narrow-minded soul as well, because not only don’t i know you, you are also anonymous. at least benigno, how ever detach he is from reality and we mostly are on the other side of the discussing tables, has a verifiable alias.
and it is as clear as the skies that this is a david vs goliath scene. cabral is a Philippine cabinet secretary, ella, however you want to portray bloggers as BIG, is just a blogger. and you don’t call this bullying?
since you are so fond of wikipedia pages, you might want to check the meaning of bullying as well.
i just wonder why you kept on raising the issue of racism as a comparative discourse when clearly it is way out of the line. if you insist on claiming that we incite hate against a particular group, it is clearly not true.
if you think cabral is not larger than ella, you need to rethink you you qualify terms.
dear, i am not a lawyer, but i believe I already discussed the legal basis on why i believe the case being dismissed by the court of law. and i can assure you it will be dismissed.
but let me point it out to you.
1. it is an opinion
2. it is a fair comment on matters of public interest
3. the plaintiff is a public figure
4. it is the truth
since when is criticizing a government official comparable to racism?
***i can call you a narrow-minded soul as well, because not only don’t i know you, you are also anonymous. at least benigno, how ever detach he is from reality and we mostly are on the other side of the discussing tables, has a verifiable alias.
This borders on being foul but if you translate anonymity as a license to heckle insults at another person, so be it.
All I know is it is possible to be anonymous and responsible, respectful of other people’s opinions, without resorting to throwing aspersions and allusions.
And it’s quite possible to carry a so-called name online and go on hurling insults at people.
Peace out.
****dear, i am not a lawyer, but i believe I already discussed the legal basis on why i believe the case being dismissed by the court of law…
but let me point it out to you.
1. it is an opinion
Loud and clear. As all our contentions are.
2. it is a fair comment on matters of public interest
Is it? This matter is for the court to decide.
3. the plaintiff is a public figure
They are actually both public figures in their respective areas of endeavor.
4. it is the truth
Is it?
From Manuel Quezon:
BACK in October last year, I said Esperanza Cabral having to justify her actions during “Ondoy”—because of questions raised in a blog, http://www.elleganda.com—was a healthy exercise in accountability. She was able to prove, more so because no one accused her of such, that she hadn’t committed theft or used her office for private gain. There was no pilfering, or looting, of relief goods in DSWD warehouses: something of an achievement considering the low standards of governance of the present dispensation.
From Ella:
Relief goods na ayaw yata ibigay sa mga nasalanta. Halatang-halata.
Susulpot din siguro ang laman ng mga mahiwagang kahon at mapapasakamay din ng mga tao…sa ARAW NG ELEKSYON.
Ella herself turned around and said “It was never my intention to villify Sec. Cabral, or the good people at the DSWD.” after being called on her accusations. But then again, see how these lines imply otherwise:
Here are some photo captions in Ella’s blog:
- Marami pang pabubulukin
- Sige, ideretso ‘nyo ulit ‘yan sa DSWD warehouse. Para AMAG naman ang abutin ng biskwit… at sapot ng gagamba.
- Do you mean “do not delay ang dati nang delayed”
- Sabay tatahiin na ang sako. O di ba, parang asong tinapunan ng buto ang mga nasalanta?
- Relief goods na ayaw yata ibigay sa mga nasalanta. Halatang-halata.
Her Conclusion:
Susulpot din siguro ang laman ng mga mahiwagang kahon at mapapasakamay din ng mga tao…sa ARAW NG ELEKSYON.
…and i can assure you it will be dismissed.
Again, I am not arguing whether the case will be dismissed or not. If the case moves forward, then it does. If Ella gets acquitted, she wins. If found guilty, Cabral wins. Whatever the result, justice wins hopefully.
Let’s focus on the issue that is: letting the courts rule and not stoking the fire of the blogging world.
***since when is criticizing a government official comparable to racism?
When you call on the whole blogging community to see it as a fight between a government official and the bloggers as a whole/
***and it is as clear as the skies that this is a david vs goliath scene. cabral is a Philippine cabinet secretary, ella, however you want to portray bloggers as BIG, is just a blogger. and you don’t call this bullying?
Ella is the daughter of a pillar in the media industry, the editor of various Philippine newspapers and tabloids and global online publications as well.
Ella is a journalist herself. Her articles are splayed all over the net.
If you do not realize how powerful the media is in this country, the 4th estate as powerful or even more powerful than the 3 government branches, then I just do not know if we are on the same side of the globe.
The media seats the people in power. It can shape public opinion. it can “expose” untruths, cover up and hide facts.
Sec. Cabral on the other hand is an appointed official. She is co-terminus with whoever has appointed her.
While her so-called “power” as you put it has started a few years back and may end soon, Ella’s and her family’s influence on the other will be there as long as the media is there.
Who’s more powerful and who’s less powerful notwithstanding, let’s focus on what’s actually happening.
However much power we want to accord Cabral, it should be based on what we see her doing in response to the issue at hand, not on what preconceived notion we have in lieu of her being a public official.
How is she using the Goliath power you believe she has?
Hasn’t she but taken the course us ordinary citizens are supposed to take? She sent a reply to Ella to state her side, she asked for NBI’s help so she can find out who the actual person is behind the alias on the net, she filed a case after she got the necessary information.
Why should we see taking the ethical and legal course of action as “picking on a miniscule blogger”?
Ella isn’t just a blogger.
She is an internet marketing professional, the web arena her actual bread and butter. She very well knows the power of social media. She knows how to tap into it. She fully understands the webscape and how influential it can be.
She grew up a media baby, well-entrenched in the system, completely aware of the journalistic power and responsibilities that come with this influential turf.
Hiding that fact and making it look like the ones who are speaking on her behalf do not even know the person behind the alias is an affront to journalistic responsibility.
Making it look like the one who has filed a case against her is the one using the media to harass her goes beyond the realm of journalistic decency.
What news content are we seeing online and off? Who’s being defended, who’s being painted as a bully? Who’s attacking who?
All I’m asking is we be fair.
In her blogging life, Ella inadvertently started a battle that’s hers to fight, let her fight it.
Let’s not call on bloggers’ sympathy by convincing them they’re being bullied, when in reality, they’re not. We do not wanna make another uproar focusing on a bloggers vs. govt. officials fight. We cannot shape a responsible webosphere with fair and secure safeguards that way.
Let’s just let justice take its course.
middleground,
i am not trying to hurl insults. i’m sorry if you are as sensitive as sec. cabral, clearly i was trying to make a point across. and indeed it did.
but on second thoughts, why can’t you at least make up a fictitious email address so at least i am discussing with a somehow legitimate person with a face rather than an anonymous one. why hide?
the truth is, cabral mnight not be colluding to corruption (and ella nevber said she was in the first place) butwas caught red-handed on NOT doing her job.
since you caution on taking responsibility, don’t you think making this issue comparative to racism irresponsible?
and yes, an issue of one blogger is an issue against one blogger when it pertains to someone’s rights to speak. we do not stop anyone from filing libel cases, do we?
and even if ella is the daughter of the PDI publisher, it does not matter. she is still small comparted to a government official. much more a cabinet secretary.
if you think a cabinet secretary is on tyhe same level as ella, again you need to requantify your terms because clearly you are not only mistaken but out of touch with the realities in our government.
taking on the same “responsibility” task that you so espoused about, it is my moral responsibility to make sure that my government do its job. because not only I do pay for their salaries, it is also their commitment to me and the whole country.
it is also my moral responsibility and belief to defend people’s rights to free expression. and if these expressions are illegal as you and cabral thought, then so be it, sue. nobody is stopping anybody from suing.
i can call it as a cabinet secretary filing a libel case against a blogger. but i also call it as I see it is, this is a cabinet secretary bullying a blogger.
and yes, this is blogging vs. a government official. the same way as it is free expression vs. suppressing it.
the only way we can responsibly shape the blogosphere is to continue what we have been doing, that is ARGUING. only in discourse would people like you and me, able to sift all the details on issues that we care about, like say, responsibility.
if bloggers and people are afraid to say their minds, where then are the safeguards, and in the major scheme of things, safeguards to democracy are we saying?
peace out to you too.
I sent you the links which will help shed light on some details of the issue. The posts are moderated and are still unapproved. I hope in the spirit of fairness, they will be.
i am not an admin on this site, just a writer. maybe you got too much links in there so it automatically was held for approval. otherwise, your other comments wouldn’t show up here.
but thank you for the links, whatever they are, but i certainly don’t need them.
***i am not trying to hurl insults. i’m sorry if you are as sensitive as sec. cabral…
there you go again.
don’t make everything too personal, we are discussing issues, you need not brand me.;P
saying “i’m sorry if you are as sensitive as sec. cabral” sensitivity is negative, i indeed am sensitive and being likened to SEC. Cabral is something someone has to be sorry abot.
if we go thru our discussions, it’s apparent i haven’t thrown any such aspersions and i am focusing on the matter at hand. what i’m saying is we can go discussing things without the need to resort to letting our biases kick in.
when i say insults, what i’m saying is you can dissect an issue without hurling insults like “pea-size brained” on someone who doesn’t do what you expect her to do or say “i can call you a narrow-minded soul as well” just because you do not know my name.
to each his own though. whatever floats your boat. i just thought discussions that do not derail us off a mature discussion of an important issue would be more preferable.
but on second thoughts, why can’t you at least make up a fictitious email address so at least i am discussing with a somehow legitimate person with a face rather than an anonymous one. why hide?
Why is my identity such a big issue for you? Does the legitimacy of the points i raise change just because you can’t see my face? I assure you whether I am anonymous or not, I will be holding the same views.
The only reason i am raising my take on the issue here is because i too am concerned about how this will affect the webosphere and our cyber laws.
I, however, limit my net interaction to the stuff that I feel the need to raise my views on. If i start net interaction thru e-mail, etc and not reply later, it would just be impolite.
****if you think a cabinet secretary is on tyhe same level as ella, again you need to requantify your terms because clearly you are not only mistaken but out of touch with the realities in our government.
I can’t help but smile when I read this. If that’s how you would describe someone who doesn’t share the same views as yours, then I respect that.
Let me say though that if you but notice (more so if the details I posted on the reply I sent was approved and posted), I base my take on facts and I try to be as balanced as I can. This much I can say, people are according too much power on cabinet secretaries, or government officials, for that matter.
***and even if ella is the daughter of the PDI publisher, it does not matter. she is still small comparted to a government official. much more a cabinet secretary.
Again, I respect your opinion if that’s how you see it. I, however, have a different idea on that matter and it didn’t just come out of thin air.
***if bloggers and people are afraid to say their minds, where then are the safeguards, and in the major scheme of things, safeguards to democracy are we saying?
who’s saying we can not speak our minds? we can but we should do it responsibly and with due consideration of truth, justice and the people we’re at opposite ends of the table with.
***the truth is, cabral mnight not be colluding to corruption (and ella nevber said she was in the first place) butwas caught red-handed on NOT doing her job.
Here are some photo captions in Ella’s blog:
- Marami pang pabubulukin
- Sige, ideretso ‘nyo ulit ‘yan sa DSWD warehouse. Para AMAG naman ang abutin ng biskwit… at sapot ng gagamba.
- Do you mean “do not delay ang dati nang delayed”
- Sabay tatahiin na ang sako. O di ba, parang asong tinapunan ng buto ang mga nasalanta?
- Relief goods na ayaw yata ibigay sa mga nasalanta. Halatang-halata.
Her Conclusion:
Susulpot din siguro ang laman ng mga mahiwagang kahon at mapapasakamay din ng mga tao…sa ARAW NG ELEKSYON.
****since you caution on taking responsibility, don’t you think making this issue comparative to racism irresponsible?
I don’t understand why you’re pushing this.
Again, i reiterate (that’s redundancy there since I have answered you on this several times):
In urban parlance nowadays, being “racist” can translate to being biased against a group of people or promoting bias by a certain group on another community.
Note that I mentioned using quotes because I already considered the fact that racism may be boxed as a battle of one race against another alone.
The latter, nonetheless, is still a working analogy. You would not want anyone attacking someone just because he’s a Filipino. You know it’s not right.
In the same manner that bloggers shouldn’t attack Sec. Cabral just because she’s a government official, ergo, “too powerful”.
We also would not want Sec. Cabral attacking any blogger just on the grounds of him being a blogger.
If we but open our eyes, if we but be fair, we can see that Sec. Cabral isn’t attacking the blogging world. She filed a case against Ella. She filed it based on the entries posted on her blogs.
Inciting the whole blogging world and making them see this issue as a government official bullying a blogger just because the aggrieved party has decided to file a libel case sends off the message that bloggers should be invincible.
The title: You’re Not in Kindergarten, So Stop Bullying and the content:
… encapsulates that very premise.
***the same way as it is free expression vs. suppressing it.
Free expression doesn’t translate to freedom sans culpability.
Filing a libel case isn’t tantamount to suppression of another person’s freedom. On the contrary, it is actually an act of recognizing that a person has the right to be heard in court. It is an act surrendering the desire to take matters into one’s own hands and recognizing a higher authority who can weigh the merits of both sides.
The verdict can go both ways, you know. Just because she has filed a case doesn’t mean she’ll automatically win.
What’s important is where Ella has decided to take her suspicions about DSWD’s intention directly to the people (“Susulpot din siguro ang laman ng mga mahiwagang kahon at mapapasakamay din ng mga tao…sa ARAW NG ELEKSYON.”), Sec. Cabral chose to let the matter be discussed in the proper forum.
Let us let justice take its course.
yes, identity is a big issue when it comes to me. i wouldn’t want to talk to a ghost. the validity of what you say might be important, but it is not the case, why we gave a fuss about being anonymous.i put my name on the line when we say and write things. the likes of you don’t.
you are just wasting cyberspace here. pls don’t copy and paste points you’ve already raised on your previous comments.
aptly, i think i am back in kindergarten. becuase the way i see it, however way you say that cabral is exercising her right to file cases (which i already said is her right), i still see analyze it as an act of bullying a blogger.
i am not forcing, not even asking, anybody to share my opinion. it si mine and mine alone. if you have yours that is different than mine, i don’t have to spell it to you, i respect yours too.
and again, i am not the one pushing the racism comparative here. duh.
“We also would not want Sec. Cabral attacking any blogger just on the grounds of him being a blogger.”
But of course, that would be just plain stupid.
for all you know, rotting goods and “Susulpot din siguro ang laman ng mga mahiwagang kahon at mapapasakamay din ng mga tao…sa ARAW NG ELEKSYON.” is a common occurence in the Philippines. you know that don’t you? if you don’t then you need to spend more time on the ground.
“Free expression doesn’t translate to freedom sans culpability.”
Pls. check my earlier comment. There is no absolute freedom.
the other things yoyu raised have been discussed. mostly we agree on it anyway. fairness, responsibility, freedom is not absolute, sec. cabral’s right to file a case.
and on those that we do not agree on, i already answered it on my earlier comments.
so if you have new things to say, save the space for some other legit commenters.
if you want, you could browse on this site’s archives, for all you know, you can find some more issues we can not agree on. don’t get fixated in this post.
***and again, i am not the one pushing the racism comparative here. duh.
Please read back and note that all I’m saying is you keep pushing that i shouldn’t have used the racism comparative because you see it differently.
I am answering because you can’t seem to let go of “racism” as an analogy. I explained to you what i meant by it. You keep on bringing it up, pushing that I shouldn’t compare it.
Seems like you’re not even willing to entertain the thought of “racism” being used in its current urban context, plus it being used as an analogy.
“We also would not want Sec. Cabral attacking any blogger just on the grounds of him being a blogger.”
But of course, that would be just plain stupid.
By stating:
… you are actually claiming that the NBI, ergo Sec. Cabral, is threatening bloggers just because it pursued a case against Ella.
What does this translate to then? That they shouldn’t have filed the case in the first place?
You say filing a case against Ella is bullying. You say they should refrain from going after “amateur bloggers” (“amateur” your word, not exactly the case here.
Yet when I call you on that statement and say Cabral has the right to file a libel suit and that it isn’t tantamount to bullying, you change your tune and say:
aptly, i think i am back in kindergarten. becuase the way i see it, however way you say that cabral is exercising her right to file cases (which i already said is her right), i still see analyze it as an act of bullying a blogger.
You say it is her right, yet you don’t want her to exercise it? You’d rather see it as an act of bullying a blogger and choose to use your platform to profess this bloggers vs. cabral dictum?
I understand your site’s tagline is: Imbalanced news. Biased views! Keep Social Climbing Alive! but i was honestly hoping it was but a marketing strat, not a disclaimer preempting and justifying what was to come.
Forgive me for hoping we could discuss the issue focusing on the core theme: blogging responsibility, without bias.
Also forgive me for wasting your web space by copying and pasting and believing that the best way to dissect and discuss issues is to quote what has been actually stated so as to limit misinterpretations and misunderstanding.
I cut and paste my previous comments because you seem to miss on the explanations and choose to push your point despite me having addressed it earlier. My copying and pasting is synonymous to saying “I already addressed that, see right here.” I just wanna show you that I already answered it, you just need to read what I’m saying and not impose your interpretation on my own.
I cut and paste your statements and references from Ella’s blog because I choose to let you see where I am basing my contentions. I prefer to focus on details/facts, and try to understand what you or Ella is saying before I spin off my own opinions.
***yes, identity is a big issue when it comes to me. i wouldn’t want to talk to a ghost.
Point taken. I will refrain from replying after this, Buraot.
I prefer to hold discussions or arguments. If it goes the way of a debate, then it’s time to stop.
Thanks for the discussion.
If you’re keen on the case and its merits, here are some links you may wanna factor in:
http://jlp-law.com/blog/libel-e-internet-libel/
In Philippine jurisdiction, the truth is not always a defense. While something is true, if the purpose is to besmirch, then liability still exists. To be liable for libel, the following elements must be shown to exist:
(1) the allegation of a discreditable act or condition concerning another;
Here are some photo captions in Ella’s blog:
- Marami pang pabubulukin
- Sige, ideretso ‘nyo ulit ‘yan sa DSWD warehouse. Para AMAG naman ang abutin ng biskwit… at sapot ng gagamba.
- Do you mean “do not delay ang dati nang delayed”
- Sabay tatahiin na ang sako. O di ba, parang asong tinapunan ng buto ang mga nasalanta?
- Relief goods na ayaw yata ibigay sa mga nasalanta. Halatang-halata.
Her Conclusion:
Susulpot din siguro ang laman ng mga mahiwagang kahon at mapapasakamay din ng mga tao…sa ARAW NG ELEKSYON.
(2) publication of the charge;
http://www.ellaganda.com/?p=1759
(3) identity of the person defamed; and
http://www.ellaganda.com/?p=1759
(4) existence of malice.
Legal malice is a term that refers to one party’s intention to do injury to another. Malice can either be expressed or implied.
- Expressed malice occurs when the party gives outward notice that they intend to commit a crime or some other wrong towards another.
From Ella’s blog:
Nagpalabas ng directive ang pangulo. Individuals, private companies and other nations were ENCOURAGED to send their donations to DSWD. I blogged about it here (blog entry not found ).
This PGMA directive sounded suspicious to me then. Now I know why.
Here’s the story.
A group of eight people, your ate Ella included, went to one of DSWD warehouses to help in repacking relief goods. We know they need volunteers pero hindi namin akalaing WALANG TAO TALAGA SA LOOB NG WAREHOUSE!
***Ella suspected PGMA’s directive. She went to volunteer and took photos expressly violating the instruction not to do so. She displayed these on her blog with the captions earlier mentioned.
- Implied malice occurs when one party causes death or injury to another during the course of unlawful or disreputable actions.
From Ella:
Pinagbawalan kaming kumuha ng pictures sa loob ng warehouse. I wonder why.
***She took photos and later displayed it online with the captions mentioned.
Malice generally involves the intentional infliction of physical, mental, psychological, or financial damage to another party.
Now how do you determine intention?
1. Do you base it on the blogger’s action in response to her suspicion?
This PGMA directive sounded suspicious to me then.
***She volunteered then took photos inside the warehouse.
2. Do you base it on the accused and the accuser’s history and connections, if any?
There are aspersions as to Cabral’s being an alter-ego of President Arroyo, in other blogs.
If there’s an allusion to intentions then because of political connection, let’s investigate this further by reading:
http://www.bulatlat.com/news/6-32/6-32-libel.htm :
42 Journalists Face Libel Raps from Arroyo’s Husband
Bandera (six counts, Tulfo’s column “On Target” inilabas noong Jan. 26, May 23 at 27, June 6,8 at 17)
27. Eileen Mangubat (publisher)
28. Beting Laygo Dolor (editor-in-chief)
29. Jimmy Alcantara (associate editor)
30. Raymond Rivera (circulation manager)
The Beting Laygo Dolor :
Of Philippine News Online:
http://philippinenews.com/article.php?id=5380
who started PCIJ (Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism ) alongside Sheila Coronel, Malou Mangahas, Lorna Kalaw-Tirol, Howie Severino and David Celdran.
http://preciousanne.blogspot.com/
Editor- of:
1. Bandera
2. Prime Asia and Pinoy Global Access
http://www.upjournalismclub.org/gallery/photos/suit-of-cards-a-forum-on-libel/
3. Playboy Philippines
http://www.bworldonline.com/Weekender072508/main.php?id=focus1
4. Business World
http://www.grabeh.com/forum/index.php
CONTRIBUTING EDITOR of:
http://www.filglobe.com/files/augpage22forum.pdf
Same Beting Laygo Dolor who released this:
http://philippinenews.com/article.php?id=5380
Donated goods sitting in DSWD warehouse
Published, October 23, 2009
… after Ella released this:
http://www.ellaganda.com/?p=1759
Aanhin pa ang damo kung patay na ang kabayo? (A special report from a volunteer)
Published, Oct 21st, 2009
Same Beting Laygo Dolor who co-wrote the articles appearing here:
http://pinoybsn.blogspot.com/2006/10/arroyo-to-nurses-retake-board-test.html
http://bolanon.com/forums_topic_view.aspx?page=1&tid=3363&fid=2929&=desc
…with the girl whose name appears here:
http://services.inquirer.net/mobile/10/01/22/html_output/xmlhtml/20100121-248693-xml.html
…and whose identity is confirmed here:
http://forums.seo.ph/showthread.php?t=10191
Re: DSWD vs Jade? – 01-22-2010, 11:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kickmoko
teka maihabol ko lang..member din ba dito si jade?
Yes. Si vlette
3. Do you base it on the snowballing imputations the blog entry has spawned?
a. Like the blog entries of her fellow bloggers:
http://gurlalien.blogspot.com/2010/01/para-kay-ella.html
Wow… di maka get over? bakit kaya? well… ang sabi niya, hindi daw dapat palampasin ang mga ganitong ‘paninira’ sa gobyerno. huh? pero bakit? Alam mo madam, kung di ka talaga guilty, dapat madali kang makaka move-on. eh bakit parang hanggang ngayon eh hurt na hurt ka pa din sa mga nabasa mong blog post? dahil ba the truth hurts? at kahit pa na hindi na ikaw ang mei hawak ng DSWD eh nag file ka pa din ng kaso?
yung mga againsta kay ella, obvious na obvious na related sa DSWD. kung makapag post eh damang dama nila every word.
Whose alias appears here:
http://forums.seo.ph/showthread.php?s=81b8794c5836bf5d9aae7608177a1b3f&t=5216
b. Or the published articles of media men like:
Ramon Tulfo
Whose article: It pays to be honest
http://services.inquirer.net/mobile/10/02/01/html_output/xmlhtml/20100130-250222-xml.html
states:
FORMER SOCIAL WELFARE and now Health Secretary Esperanza Cabral is reportedly using her office to harass a blogger…
The same group also allegedly went to the Parañnaque residence of the Dolor family, as Cabral was reportedly convinced that Ella was a member of that family.
Same Tulfo who curiously appeared here:
42 Journalists kinasuhan ng Libelo
Bandera (six counts, Tulfo’s column “On Target” inilabas noong Jan. 26, May 23 at 27, June 6,8 at 17)
27. Eileen Mangubat (publisher)
28. Beting Laygo Dolor (editor-in-chief)
29. Jimmy Alcantara (associate editor)
30. Raymond Rivera (circulation manager)
http://zumel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14&Itemid=2
As confirmed from this column:
http://tulfo.net/column1.htm
wow, dami links. you really researched this whole thing. made me think why you are so interested. anyhoo, the juices have stopped flowing.
let’s move on dot org.
as i said over and over, i am not pushing the “racism” issue. just letting you know that your comparative analogy is fallacious.
i am not saying you stop from arguing. and nobody is stopping you. as i said, arguments are essentially good. and even if you’re anonymous, i also didn’t stop from answering your comments right?
but this is going on and on forever, there’s no more juice left to it. like you said, it is now on the hands of the courts.
let’s move on to other topics then. but don’t let this argument spoil our fun. pls check our archives so we can find more articles to argue about.
[...] Siete shares a similar point First, the blog article in question, as we can find in most blogs, is a matter of [...]
[...] Inihayag ng Barrio Siete ang kaparehang pananaw: Una, ang pinag-uusapang blog, na makikita rin natin sa iba pang blogs, ay isang purong opinyon. Kung ang isang tao ay magbibigay ng pahayag, na sabi nga ni Cabral, na salungat sa katotohanan, ay hindi rin maituturing na libeloso. Sa kabilang banda, ang isang pahayag ay maaaring kakitaan ng katotohanan o pananaw depende sa kung ang taong nagsasaad nito ay nasa posisyon para malaman ang mga sinasabi niyang bagay. [...]