The Philippines is ranked 130th and Russia 152nd in the Reporters Without Borders 2021 World Press Freedom Index. The Philippines and Russia also ranked 7th and 10th, respectively, in the Committee to Protect Journalists 2021 Global Impunity Index.
While the media situations in both countries deserve scrutiny, the Philippines is a peculiarly interesting case. The Philippine press is commonly perceived to be among the freest in Asia, but it remains one of the most dangerous places in the world to practice journalism. Press freedom and human rights defenders continue to denounce the prevailing culture of impunity that the government claims ended under the administration of Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte.
The cases filed against leading online media organisation Rappler and its CEO Maria Ressa made global headlines. Duterte criticised Rappler for being peddler of ‘fake news’ and its license was revoked in 2018 — ironic given Ressa’s investigative work exposing disinformation on social media. In June 2020, Ressa and former Rappler journalist Reynaldo Santos, Jr. were convicted of cyber libel.
Like the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos who ordered broadcast network ABS–CBN’s closure in 1972, Duterte said in 2019 that ABS–CBN would be ‘out’ when its franchise expired in 2020. In a House of Representatives vote in July 2020, the broadcast network was shut down.
Under the Duterte administration, news media organisations and journalists have been red-tagged or accused of being communist sympathisers, and at least two journalists have been arrested and detained. There have also been cyberattacks launched at the websites of news media organisations in an attempt to prevent them from doing their work. While the distributed denial-of-service attacks — which overwhelm servers with too many data requests to shut it down — have been happening since 2018, the most recent attack on two news media organisations was carried out by the Philippine Army.
At least 190 journalists have been killed since 1986, 21 of them under the Duterte administration. The prevailing climate of media repression sends a chilling message to journalists and media workers in the country that they should toe the administration line.
National and local elections in the Philippines will be held in May 2022. It is uncertain to what extent the state of press freedom will be raised as an election issue.
Candidates are expected to mouth the usual rhetoric about preserving democracy, including the importance of a vibrant press. As might be expected, Duterte and his supporters have denied media repression. They claimed that ABS–CBN’s shutdown and Rappler’s legal woes are isolated cases that do not affect other news media organisations in the country.
As certain government officials continue to engage in red-tagging journalists and news media organisations, government agencies argue that their officials are merely expressing their personal opinions and not official policy. The Philippine National Police denies the existence of a culture of impunity that violates the rights of journalists and other sectors of society.
Journalists, media workers and other concerned groups need to push for press freedom to be an election issue. Candidates in the 2022 polls should explain clearly where they stand, beyond the usual rhetoric of defending democracy and basic freedoms.
For a president who is known for joking about serious matters, Duterte now finds it awkward to congratulate Ressa. His spokesperson belatedly acknowledged Ressa for being the first Filipino Nobel Peace Prize awardee while trying to downplay notions that the award was a ‘slap’ in the government’s face. It’s not credible for Duterte sincerely to congratulate Ressa, whose journalistic achievement is borne out of fighting the repression he perpetuates.
In the Philippines, threats to press freedom are real. It should not be reduced to a mere joke, especially for those who claim to be defending it while engaging in repression.
Danilo Araña Arao is Associate Professor at the Department of Journalism, the University of the Philippines Diliman, Special Lecturer at the Department of Journalism, the Polytechnic University of the Philippines Santa Mesa, Associate Editor at Bulatlat Multimedia and Editor at Media Asia.
Could you explain how with Rappler’ licence cancelled and ABS-CBN shutdown they are both still operating. A quick Google shows stories from both. I watch ABS-CBN news every day and read Rappler stories every day. Fact check stories before publishing?
It’s only now that I read your comment, hence this delayed reply. Two points: (1) Rappler can still operate because the SEC decision is not yet final and executory. (2) ABS-CBN’s cable channel and Internet platforms are still airing but its free radio (DZMM & MOR) and free TV (ABS-CBN Channel 2) are now off the air due to the denial of the broadcast franchise. These points are clearly mentioned in the hyperlinks I cited. Thank you.
is the author funded by the NED too?
Maria Ressa – awarded the Nobel Peace Prize – is promoted by the Western media as a heroic, brave, independent journalist standing up to the government of the Philippines and its president, Rodrigo Duterte.
What is left buried in articles about Maria Ressa is that she’s actually an American citizen funded by the US government through the National Endowment for Democracy and her media platform – Rappler – is a purveyor of anti-China rhetoric serving US interests at the cost of the Philippines’ own best interests.
The ultimate irony of Ressa winning a “peace prize” is that Rappler’s propaganda aims at stirring up conflict – not avoiding it – but considering the politically-motivated nature of the Nobel Peace Prize in recent years, Ressa’s winning it comes as little surprise.
Just for the record, I am not funded by the Washington-based NED. From what I know, Maria is a dual citizen (making your “American citizen” claim misleading as she is also a Filipino). That Rappler is a “purveyor” of a certain narrative is a good subject of discourse/critical analysis. On a related note, you should provide evidence of your claim that it uses “anti-China rhetoric serving US interests” lest it be dismissed as troll-like behaviour. The same applies to your accusation of the Nobel Peace Prize. You should avoid making accusations without presenting evidence.