I remember going to this year’s Metro Manila Pride with an almost naïve sense of optimism. This year’s theme was “Resist Together,” with an emphasis on Pride being a protest, so the tibak (activist) in me couldn’t wait to wield the placard I made and see my activist peers. 

Turnout was good; the number of people doubled from last year, and I saw people calling for the end of endo (end of contract) and other social issues intersectional with LGBTQ+ rights. 

But I was yet again disappointed. These people were ignored by the other thousands that attended. Some even went so low as to criticize them on social media, saying their calls were inappropriate and required a venue separate from Pride. 

And that was when it hit me again why the queer rights movement here in the Philippines has remained stagnant (as exhibited by the slow progress of the bill supporting Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and Gender Expression or SOGIE): because people do not understand intersectionality. (READ: EXPLAINER: What you need to know about SOGIE)

Intersectionality as a concept dictates the many layers of oppression a person may experience, depending on their membership to a minority. For example, a queer Muslim woman may be oppressed because of her womanhood, her SOGIE, and her religion. 

In the Philippines, mainstream queer activism remains focused on the middle-class living in urban areas, neglecting those in rural areas and/or those who live in poverty. As activists, we tend to talk about SOGIE concepts only within our circles, inside the academe, using language and methodologies only educated people may understand. Thus, this neglects those in rural areas and urban poor areas, where most people have not had access to higher education. (READ: Life without bullies? Why Senate must support anti-discrimination bill) 

When we are asked to imagine a transwoman or a lesbian, we tend to think of a college student, or office peers, or someone we see on the streets of BGC or Cubao. We rarely picture a gay or trans farmer, or a lesbian indigenous person. We forget and sometimes ignore the fact that queer struggle is also a topic of class struggle, and that queer liberation cannot be fully fulfilled without an analysis of class struggle. (READ: [OPINION] It's not a cockfight between farmers and queers)

Perhaps the reason why we fail as queer activists is because most of us haven’t had the opportunity to know what it’s like to be a landless farmer, or a fisherman living in poverty, or a worker not receiving fair wages and working conditions, or an indigenous person driven away from their ancestral land, and so on. We are so focused on our own experiences as queer people that we forget those extra vicious layers of oppression our other queer siblings experience. We fail to understand that discrimination for us means something else for another. (READ: Growing up Tboli and gay) 

Pride shouldn’t be reduced to a mere Instagram event, social gathering, or opportunity to find your next partner. It shouldn’t just be for us living in urban areas, who have the privilege of proper information access and support. Pride should be for those who cannot attend it. 

I pray every year that all attendees of Metro Manila Pride see the true essence of Pride amid all of the extravagance and bright colors – that while we enjoy the festivities, other queer Filipinxs are abused, bullied, and killed because we fail to recognize them and invite them to our group. 

I hope that we can, as advocates, finally understand intersectionality and bring the conversation and the advocacy closer to people, so that it may no longer be self-serving, but rather serve its purpose of making the country a better place for all queer Filipinxs. – Rappler.com

Lean Miguel Novero, 21, is a queer activist and feminist from Bulacan. He works closely with farmers and indigenous peoples as a development worker and volunteer for PUP Kasarianlan, a LGBTQ+ student organization in his alma mater the Polytechnic University of the Philippines.

The third millennium began in the United States with medical marijuana legally sold in 33 states and the District of Columbia, the country’s power center. It was 1999 – two decades since Washington DC waged a simultaneous war with communists and “mind-bending” drugs derived from the natural world, like the marijuana shrub and its sister hemp. Demonizing cannabis eventually led to the death penalty for mere possession.

But America’s worldwide war against marijuana, coca, opium, and mescaline ironically revived far older indigenous medical traditions in the American continent and beyond. The government itself stirred the pot of powerful sacred drugs, including tobacco, as part of ancient religious practice, converting many young people to the old American Indian ways of communicating with invisible reality. In many cases, such communication strengthened the peacemaking of conscientious objectors in a country forever at war.    

By 1999, wonder of wonders, small producers and sales outlets for cannabis sativa oil, cannabidiol, were growing by leaps and bounds. The war against marijuana was going the opposite direction from its origins. State ignorance about the real nature of this “enemy” was revealing itself.

Historical forces tilted back in those two decades that led to the third millennium. Many countries that criminalized cannabis sativa under US influence gradually decriminalized it. Simple possession became a non-criminal offense similar to a minor traffic violation.   

Tracking the legality of cannabis sativa in these countries and subnational jurisdictions in those years is like peering into a fast transforming mind map of cultures and subcultures. Instead of all-out prohibition we see limited prohibition in many countries like Spain and the Netherlands, where the sale of cannabis is now allowed in licensed establishments. 

Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Germany, Greece, Israel, Italy, Jamaica,Lithuania, Luxembourg, North Macedonia, Norway, the Netherlands, Switzerland, New Zealand, Peru, Poland, and Thailand all legalized medical marijuana. Countries with more restrictive laws allowed the use of certain cannabis-derived pharmaceutical drugs. The District of Columbia legalized medical cannabis but kept it prohibited at the federal level even for medical use. 

This checkered policy is doubtless rooted in cannabis’ euphoric effect, clumsily described as “recreational.” Marijuana’s gravitas gradually emerged as it was next reported to kill cancer cells, help epileptics recover from seizures, maintain steady blood pressure, and fight a number of neurological ills, mostly in older people. Science also found a way to remove the “euphoria factor” from medical marijuana.

Criminalizing instead of studying and regulating cannabis sativa’s benefits has been a negative reflex all along. It has allowed crime syndicates to make millions with protection rackets and blackmail from the drug trade worldwide. Successive headline scandals like the Philippine police in cahoots with drug lords making millions on the manufactured drug metamphetamine aka shabu is only one more example of this evil template. (READ: Best practices: How other countries dealt with drug problems)

On the other hand

Possible blessings to human health and added years to life with medical marijuana parallel a possible economic boon if government policy and public opinion on marijuana were reversed. Today the costs of the government’s war against its production and sale in the Philippines are a dramatic gauge of possible benefits-become-a-curse, thanks to ignorance, prejudice and greed.

In contrast, a recent marijuana industry report by Grand View Research, Incorporated in the United States says: “Growing adoption of cannabis as a pharmaceutical product for treating severe medical conditions, such as cancer, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, arthritis, and other neurological conditions is anticipated to drive forthcoming years…. Increasing need for pain management therapies and growing disease burden of chronic pain among elders is also expected to boost demand.” 

Talk of big money. “The US legal cannabis market valued at USD 11.9 billion in 2018 is expected to grow 24.1% from 2019 to 2025. The global legal marijuana market size is expected to reach USD 66.3 billion by the end of 2025…. It is anticipated to expand at 23.9% during the forecast period,” Grand View Research speculates. 

Grand View also projects increasing legalization and use of marijuana in medical as well as “recreational” applications with everyone going at their own pace. Stringent regulations for cultivation and sale may limit overall growth for the global market in Europe, but “promising markets for cannabis” are seen in Australia, the UK, Germany, Poland, Colombia, Uruguay, and Israel. 

Thailand is creating its legal structure for cannabis, and will soon allow its citizens to grow cannabis at home to sell to the government. Countries like South Africa and New Zealand are discussing legalization and may emerge as viable markets for medicinal marijuana in the forthcoming years, Grand View adds.

As for the Philippines, clandestine marijuana harvests worth millions of pesos have been burned every year for the past 4 decades – or so the police and media would have the public believe. But the suspicion is always there that some of it was burned for publicity while the rest of a perfectly good marijuana harvest went to line law enforcers’ pockets instead.  

Significant indeed is the Philippine congressional majority passing a bill on the legalization of medical marijuana on third and final reading last January 2019 – 6 months before the US House of Representatives passed its own marijuana legalization bill in July 2019. 

Isabela representative Rodito Albano, author of House Bill 6517, offers hope in its stated purpose and very name: “The Philippine Compassionate Medical Cannabis Act that seeks to provide compassionate right of access to medical cannabis and expanding research into its medicinal properties." 

Albano observes that medical marijuana has been used to alleviate pain in people suffering from cancer or seizures, and to bring back the appetite of people suffering from HIV/AIDS. These are the people he wishes to help. "It's expensive – about a thousand dollars. It's not affordable. It's not accessible. That's why we're making this law.  It would allow the government to grow and research marijuana's medicinal properties under very strict regulations.” 

Not for a minute has the congressman forgotten marijuana’s history in the Philippines. “Recreational use, growing, or possession of the marijuana plant would still be banned under the proposed measure,” he says.

The next step will be for the Senate to pass its own version of the bill and for the two chambers to meet in a bicameral conference committee to ratify the legislation. 

The rest of the world is moving on with the challenge of cannabis sativa. Now is a good time for Filipinos to finally arrive at a sound collective understanding of marijuana as a gift from the plant world. (READ: Why the Catholic Church OKs marijuana for the terminally ill)  

Doctors on both sides of the Pacific have opposed medical cannabis, saying its efficacy has yet to be confirmed.  This is true in some cases, just as it is false in some cases with epileptics and cancer patients healed. In short, there is enough evidence on both sides to take our time on this. 

To add to marijuana’s surprises, the roguish President Duterte, whatever his reason, has expressed support for this bill in the midst of his war against illegal drugs. – Rappler.com

Sylvia L. Mayuga is a veteran feature writer and columnist in Manila, with 3 National Book Awards to her name.

The war on drugs is becoming unmistakably revealed for its confused, incompetent, and arbitrary prosecution, thanks to President Duterte himself.

It began once he passed the generalship of his war to Vice President Leni Robredo, a miscalculation apparently proceeding from the assumption that she would not be suckered into taking the job, but that her refusal would all the same make her look cowardly or derelict. In fact, people around her had viewed the offer automatically as a trap leading to worse situations than any she had been put in by Duterte.

First in line to succeed Duterte in case he quit, became incapacitated, or died, she makes him uncomfortable. He likes instead Ferdinand Marcos Jr, the son of the dictator he has always professed to idolize; with Bongbong succeeding, he feels reassured he will not be hounded out of retirement or the grave for wrongdoing. Never mind that Robredo is an oppositionist – not a few of her party colleagues have been co-opted into the Duterte regime – but, on her own, she is just too independent-and righteous-minded to be co-optable.

She has been vocal, if dispassionate, in her criticism of the draconian ways of the regime in general and the conduct of the drug war in particular, and has been marginalized for that. Not only has she been kept out of the Cabinet; her office has been starved of budget, thus forced to rely on philanthropy for its projects, aimed mainly at providing the most forgotten of the poor access to services so basic as power and potable water and their children better opportunities for education.

She is, moreover, persecuted along with other critics and steadfast oppositionists, like Senator Leila de Lima, in detention for more than a thousand day now for concocted drug cases, and ex- Senator Antonio Trillanes IV, himself taken to court on all sorts of whimsical charges. With both of them and others, including some of the religious, Robredo is accused of plotting against Duterte.

So, why would Duterte, a can-do-no-wrong case, yield the running of his centerpiece campaign to Robredo, thus implying that he could not hack it himself? It’s all about character and capacity, ironically the exact same things that define Robredo, except that, with her, they do so in normal and positive ways.

The misogynist and narcissist that he is, Duterte cannot stand being upstaged by a woman, not in particular one merely, officially second to him. As for capacity, hugely diminished as it is in his case by a certified disorder, he is afforded little or no sense of what happens next.

And what happens next after Robredo surprised him by taking him up on his tricky offer – which certainly looks more like a piqued loser’s dare than an SOS – is a blowback. For an idea how very bad, indeed, that blowback is and how fatefully eventual it was, we have to go back to the beginning of his war.

His count of drug traffickers and users has been changing constantly. For some time, it did stay at 3 million. At 4 million, Duterte asked to be given until the end of his term to eliminate them, and that was after he had moved his self-imposed deadline from 3 to 6 months to one year. Actually, before trying to trick Robredo, he already had implied he could not win his war within his 6-year term.

Of course, he can’t, not in less than a millennium even at the brutal-enough rate of admitted police kills – around 4,000 in the first year – and at constant factors, without accounting in particular for newcomers to the stubborn illicit trade. At the more credible kill rate of 20,000, also in the first year, which the police would only concede if the excess were ascribed to vigilantes, not them (as if the vigilantes were fighting a different war, marching to a different drumbeat, inspired by a different muse), the efficiency is quadrupled: all 4 million are dead in a mere 200 years.

Robredo, though, prefers a corrective, thus more benign, strategy, one that seriously considers the cultural, economic, and health dimensions of the drug menace. She also intends to seek help from countries that have had some success fighting it and international organizations that have contributed to that success. Characteristically prompt and serious, she lost no time in calling on the agencies enlisted in the campaign and is now trying to sort the wildly conflicting facts and figures she got from them – the estimates of the number of drug victimizers and victims, for instance, go from 1.8 to 7 million.

But what has got her in decisive trouble with Duterte, and given him an excuse to undo her before she could get going, is her request for his list of “high-value targets.” As much touted as it is, the list is supposed to be too sensitive to be put in the hands of someone too cozy with outsiders, particularly with foreign outsiders. What makes all this very curious is that no one on that list of big fish has been caught and that Duterte himself happens to be the subject of an inquiry undertaken to determine whether he deserves to be tried by the International Criminal Court  for his cruel war.  

Not surprisingly, the regime is closing ranks to continue to keep Robredo out. There’s absolutely no question that Duterte has realized that by passing his war to Robredo he put himself on the road toward self-incrimination. But he is reluctant just so soon to take his war back, the same war that, admittedly, he couldn’t hack, for it will make him look doubly dumb. So, he passes that problem, too, and one underling has been only too eager to grovel up.

General Aaron Aquino, director-general of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency, says Robredo knows nothing about drugs (“Wala siyang kaalaman sa ilegal na droga”) and therefore does not deserve to be co-chair with him on the interagency committee in charge of the war.

The war actually has been going well, without her, he adds. Apparently, he feels it safe to contradict the President on his appointment of Robredo now that he has realized he needs to be rescued from it.  

As it happens, there’s no worse rescuer than Aquino. Only recently he was revealed at Senate hearings as having gone too easy on police officers – comrades-in-arms – who had stolen confiscated drugs and sold them for personal profit. Instead of prosecuting them, he simply reassigned them, at the request of their complicit chief.

Being part of the problem, Aquino has lost every right to lecture to Robredo, indeed to have anything to do at all with the drug war. But, again, he’s just the sort of perfect fit in the Duterte regime that Robredo is not.

At any rate, if it’s Aquino who is retained and Robredo who is ousted, still a good unraveling will have already happened on her account. – Rappler.com

From time to time, I would see a post on social media about pocketbooks, specifically stories originally published on Wattpad. The post would often criticize the plots, which are usually regarded as convoluted. Some posts even express dismay over how these books are not very substantial. In my experience, I too find some truth in those perceptions, but in defense of Wattpad's published books, there are benefits to actually reading them.

I had expressed these ideas in my undergraduate thesis in Library and Information Science. There, I interviewed librarians, teachers, and high school students on why they think Wattpad is beneficial or if they think pieces from it should even be worthy of being read.

The librarians expressed a positive response towards pocketbooks and Wattpad-published stories, though they wanted some form of censorship. This is because some stories may be graphic or may contain scenes not appropriate for children. (READ: Why I became a librarian)

The teachers, meanwhile, gave two opposing responses. Some teachers did not want these types of books to be read, and preferred that students read works that have already been deemed masterpieces. They believe that this kind of genre fiction would not stand the test of time the way masterpieces have. Some teachers, however, recognized the value of students enjoying reading. Some students have even tried their luck in writing stories of their own, and some have even won awards doing so. (READ: How a school principal is winning the battle vs illiteracy, malnutrition in Sorsogon)

The students I interviewed love reading these stories. It thrills them the way popular young adult/teen books do. In my research, I even saw that some of them had established communities and book groups for discussion. Even those who defined themselves as introverts have engaged in these communities.

"Each reader his book," Ranganathan, one of the cornerstone figures of librarianship, once said. Simply put, preference changes from person to person, and the development of a reading culture starts when an individual discovers their preferred genre. This becomes a way for individuals to develop a love for reading. After a while, for instance, students who had been fond of reading Wattpad eventually transitioned to reading local and foreign classics in literature. (READ: No barriers: Kids in far-flung village learn to love reading)

The other advantage of Wattpad is that students also develop a love for writing. This avenue can be used as an educational tool for sentence construction, plot development, grammar and proofreading, and the like. 

Finally, having a love for reading expands one's opinions about the world.

As a librarian, in light of November being Library and Information Services Month, we uphold our duty to encourage a love for reading among the youth. Whether you love realist fiction, horror, sci-fi, or even Wattpad, read on! – Rappler.com

Gillian Reyes is a registered librarian who works at the University of the Philippines Diliman. He often writes stories for children, and hopes to build a library for kids someday.

The climate crisis is called a crisis for a reason. It's no trivial task trying to undo all the things humanity has done to damage this planet. Most of us take pride in saying that we have indeed begun the process of cleansing the Earth, but are we truly trying our best? I'd like to think we aren't, or at least not yet.

Picture an empty plastic bottle in your hand. It's light, isn't it? It wouldn't hurt someone if you threw it at them. Now picture a million of them, lined up side by side. How might a million bottles do you any harm? How long would such a trail of bottles even be? It's hard to imagine these things because not so many people have seen a million plastic bottles all at once. But that is the dilemma: we cannot even begin to picture the mess we are putting ourselves in. A million new plastic bottles are bought every minute, almost all of which are thrown within the same day, yet hardly anyone can see how much trouble that's causing us. It's hard to act against a problem when we barely know its full extent.

In a sense, that's what's wrong with half of the world. They cannot assess the gravity of the situation simply because they have not experienced the repercussions of their actions. Throw away a plastic bag in Canada, and it's bound to end up somewhere in the Philippines. Somehow, first-world countries don't (yet) know what it's like to be swimming in a blackened river full of plastic, but they aren't the only ones to blame.

Consider the other half of the world, which does experience the harsher side of things. In India, the Ganges River flows with an eerie blackness, which Indians know as the river's only color. They use it to bathe, and to the Hindus it is sacred nonetheless. In China, some children grow up never knowing that the sky gleams a blue hue and is never gray. The people living in these countries were born into a world where they are complete strangers to the problems already surrounding them. They experience the shifts in weather all the scientists are talking about, but they just don't know that something wrong is actually happening. Their ignorance renders them incapable of acting against these.

Now, doesn't it seem obvious how everyone can try harder, and why we still aren't doing the best we possibly can? The first world is unaware of the urgency of the problem, while the third world is ignorant of what is taking place. There is a huge disconnect between these two sides, and this creates a hindrance to solving the global problem. Bridging the gap between the opposite halves of the world is no easy task, but it's the key to getting both sides to do more than what they already are. The climate crisis is very serious, and humanity cannot face such a huge problem when it is divided; we have to find ways to work together and accomplish something greater than what anyone could have done alone.

Fortunately, the media is capable of spreading awareness, and I cannot count how many businessmen have had their minds changed after watching a clip featuring the have-nots on the other side of the world. The spread of the internet has also allowed quality education to spread with it; now, even people from the farthest corners of the world can learn about the afflictions of this planet and how to act against them. Awareness helps us understand what's plaguing us, and it can help us know the best way to conquer these problems.

If you were alive back in the '70s, you might vaguely remember smallpox still being a thing. It's amazing how we, humanity, were able to work together to eradicate a disease that has plagued us for millennia. We all took preventive measures, and awareness was spread. Not a single person was left uninformed of what was happening and what everyone was trying to do. If we could only do the same thing today, then it really isn't impossible to solve the climate crisis. After all, it still isn't too late to fix the Earth.

Alone, we can do some things, but together, when all are willing and all are optimistic, we find the drive that pushes us to do the best we can to get the most of what we want. After all, do we not feel motivated to act when everyone around us is doing the same thing? We can only say humanity is truly doing its best once every single person is doing theirs. – Rappler.com

Mo David is currently a Grade 9 student enrolled as a scholar of the Philippine Science High School Main Campus. He wishes to pursue a course in computer science in the near future.

Political persecution and killings of activists and human rights defenders have been consistently at the top of the government's agenda since Rodrigo Duterte assumed the presidency in 2016. To date, more than 2,000 human rights defenders have already been attacked through various forms including threat, intimidation, harassment, trumped-up charges, and extrajudicial killing. The massive crackdown against activists has transformed the Philippines into one of the most notorious countries for civil society.

War against dissent

The administration has been successful in orchestrating a systematic and organized campaign against dissenters and members of the opposition. The purest form of the strategy, which populists like Duterte use to stifle dissent, is the process that we call "othering" – a process of social exclusion, separating the "us" from "them." To put it simply, the government made it a norm to exclude individuals or groups who are against the state's policies and direction as "enemies" of change, and as a response, the government must get rid of them.

Drug dependents who have fallen prey to the war on drugs are victims of the process. The public has been conditioned to believe that those who are engaged in drug activities, especially those who engage in small-scale drug transactions, are irreformable. Any attempt to rehabilitate them would mean wasted state resources.

The same process is being used against dissenters and activists through red-tagging or branding them as communists. Only recently, offices of national democratic organizations were raided and their members were arrested.

Activism is a right

The right to association and freedom of expression are fundamental human rights. The mere exercise of these rights is essential in a democracy where varying opinions and political inclinations must exist. The substantial and relevant participation of civil society actors are encouraged in many successful democracies, and ultimately, a flourishing democracy is necessary for a country's development.

It is the duty of the state to protect the civic space where people can just go and express their support or contrary opinion on issues that affect them. If the citizens see the mass transport crisis as an issue, let them speak out. If the nurses feel that they are underpaid, let them speak out. If innocent lives are being threatened, let the activists speak out.

Role of judiciary in a democracy

In the midst of this erosion of basic liberties and attack on human rights, we expect that the last bastion of democracy – the courts – could step in and shield our most cherished rights and check the excesses of power. Sadly, they were not spared from the impunity brought by this war. At least 43 judges, lawyers, and prosecutors have been killed under Duterte's regime. Many point that the motivation behind their killing is related to the exercise of their duty. These grim murders are not just attacks on individuals; they are a direct attack on the very system of justice in the country itself.

Courts and their workers comprise the third branch of government. Said to be the weakest of the 3 branches, the judiciary's main source of legitimacy is found not in elections, but in the fairness and reasonableness of its written decisions. Courts do not have an army or police force, but they can strike down a law. This ability to function as an independent judiciary, however, is now being undermined relentlessly. Attacks on judges and lawyers send a chilling effect throughout the judiciary that masked men can take the law into their own hands and escape with brazen impunity.

With this dangerous situation, judges could not be expected to write their decisions free from fear and intimidation and lawyers have to turn away the poor whose cases threaten the privileged position of the powerful. This further feeds the marginalization of the many who need the law, but at the same time, strengthen the privilege of the few who could not be touched by the law. 

The rule of law crumbles under the weight of this imbalance. With an intimidated court, our nation's arbiter retreats. And with it comes the creeping distrust from the people who need the law. This distrust is dangerous as it diminishes the people's options for peaceful resolution of conflict. Vigilantism breeds in a sea of distrust and dysfunction of a legal system. And like a vicious cycle, it feeds more violence and more distrust and ultimately eats our democracy from within.

By going after the human rights defenders who are working directly with the masses and judges who are upholding the rule of law, Duterte is committing one big mistake. If he thinks that activists will be silenced, he is wrong. If he thinks that killing activists will paralyze the movement, he is wrong. The human rights community exists for a reason and it will not cease to exist – even if tyrants like him become powerless. – Rappler.com

Christian Gultia is a student of MA Philippine Studies at the University of the Philippines Asian Center. He is the chairperson of Youth for Human Rights and Democracy-Philippines.

Ernesto Neri is a human rights lawyer and educator. He handles pro bono cases for laborers, children, and victims of the drug war.

Kahiya-hiya. Ito ang napapailing na bulong ng maraming Pilipinong sumusubaybay ngayon sa nalalapit na pagbubukas ng Southeast Asian Games dito Pilipinas.

Ang mga football player ng Timor Leste tatlong oras pinaghintay sa airport – nakatulog na nga ang mga atleta sa mga upuan sa NAIA – at pagkatapos ay dinala sa maling hotel. Ang football team ng Myanmar, naghintay din umano ng "matagal" sa paliparan. Pagsakay nila ng bus, "hindi komportable" at masyadong masikip para sa mga atleta ang mga upuan.

Ang team naman ng Cambodia, naghintay din bago naka-check in sa kanilang mga kuwarto dahil hindi pa handa.

Ang mga Thai naman nagreklamo rin dahil pinagsiksikan ang 3 atleta nila sa mga kuwartong pandalawahan. Masama rin ang loob nila dahil napilitan silang magkansela ng ensayo. Napakalayo ng itinalagang football stadium na pagpapraktisan nila (Biñan) sa kanilang hotel sa Makati.

Ang Philippine women's football squad, naghintay rin nang matagal bago mabigyan ng kuwarto at mapalad pa nga ang mga Thai sa kanila: nagsiksikan ang 5 atleta sa kuwartong pandalawahan.

Sabi sa social media ng isang Pinoy na atleta: "Nakalulungkot na kami ang host team pero ganito ang trato sa amin. Hindi ko ma-imagine ano ang nararamdaman ng ibang mga bansa."

Humingi ng paumanhin ang Philippine Southeast Asian Games Organizing Committee (PHISGOC).

Hindi ba't nakapanliliit na ang pambungad na pahayag ng mga organizers ng Pilipinas ay "welcome" na may kakambal na "sorry"?

Sabi naman ng tagapagsalita ng Pangulo na si Salvador Panelo, what's “more important and more pressing is PHISGOC has committed to do better.” Ano raw? Hindi po ito pa-liga sa barangay, Ginoong Panelo.

Cramming, Philippine-style. Ang Rizal Memorial Complex at Philsports Arena sa Pasig – kinukumpuni pa. Ang skate park, BMX track race, under construction pa rin. Kalakaran sa ganitong mga internasyonal na patimpalak na magkaroon pa ng kaunting panahon ang mga manlalaro upang makapag-ensayo at magamay ang mga pasilidad, pero maraming mga dayuhang atleta ang nagkuyakoy na lang.

Hindi handa, nagkukumahog, kalat-kalat.

Totoong masalimuot ang isyu, at isa sa pangunahing ugat ay ang bangayan ng mga pinuno ng sports sa bansa na inuna ang pulitika at hindi ang ikabubuti ng mga atleta at ikagaganda ng imahe ng bansa. Limang buwan bago ang palaro, nagre-regroup pa lang ang Philippine Sports Commission. (BASAHIN: Isang bagsak para sa mga atleta, isang batok sa mga opisyal)

Marami ring tanong nang nag-take over si Alan Peter Cayetano at binuo ang PHISGOC. Bakit kailangan pa itong buuin? Hindi raw kinaya ng budget department, Philippine Olympics Committee, at Philippine Sports Commission ang trabaho, kaya binuo ang isang “multi-stakeholder” foundation.

Paano nangyari na nawalan ng public bidding para sa P1.5 bilyong mga proyekto para sa SEA Games?

At kamakailan lang, sinabi ng Office of the Government Corporate Counsel na kuwestyonable ang P11-bilyong kasunduan ng Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA) at Malaysian firm MTD Capital Berhad para itayo ang New Clark City sports facilities sa Capas, Tarlac.

Most expensive campfire. Andiyan din ang tinawag ng komentarista sa sports na si Bill Velasco na "pinakamahal na campfire sa kasaysayan ng bansa" – ang cauldron na nagkakahalaga ng P55.9 milyon.

Makapagpapatayo ng 55 silid-aralan ang tinustos sa minsan lamang na gagamiting cauldron, sabi ni Senador Frank Drilon. Sabi nga ng isang nagkomento sa social media, puwede naman daw gawing palangganang panlaba o kawa para sa paella pagkatapos ng palaro. Mukhang panibagong white elephant na naman ito. Hindi na tayo natuto sa karanasan ng APEC ni dating pangulong Fidel Ramos.

Habang inaatupag ng mga opisyal ang "image-building," ayon din sa impormasyon ni Velasco, marami pang mga equipment ang hindi pa nao-order dalawang linggo bago ang Games.

Hindi naman lingid sa kaalaman ng mga pinunong nangampanya na Pilipinas ang mag-host ng SEA Games 2019 na hindi handa ang pamunuan at mga pasilidad – at lalong kapos sila sa management skills upang madiskartehan ito nang hindi mauuwi sa isang higanteng face palm.

Sa traffic pa lang na susuungin ng mga delegado, tingin ba nila'y matutuwa sa Kamaynilaan ang mga kapit-bahay natin sa ASEAN? HIndi nga masolusyonan ang traffic sa ordinaryong payday Friday, paano na kapag dumagsa ang mga banyagang koponan?

Puro dada, sabit sa gawa. Mula lohistika hanggang pasilidad, mukhang pinatutunayan ng Team Duterte (na bukod kay Cayetano ay kabilang si Senador Bong Go, ang coach niya na si BCDA Chairman Vince Dizon, at kapatid ni Cayetano na si Senador Pia Cayetano) na wala itong kakayanang maglunsad ng world-class event. 

Malupit na kombinasyon ang incompetence at hokus-pokus sa pinansya. 'Yan ngayon ang naka-showcase sa SEA Games 2019. Kahiya-hiya. – Rappler.com 

It was too good to be true. VP Leni Robredo had accepted the President’s dare to lead the regime’s flagship campaign on drugs, and yet she was denied vital cooperation, information, and the resources to tackle the task that had taken the President more than half his term without much success.

Now barely 3 weeks into the job, President Duterte, true to form, had again changed his mind and uttered the inevitable, “You’re fired!”

Push back against the dumbing down of politics

The signs were there for all to see. All the President’s men seem to have conspired to set up all kinds of obstacles, employing a torrent of critical views even as Robredo had barely begun her work of first listening to different institutions that had experience in drug issues, and to the stakeholders who were engaged in the work and needed to align their facts and pursue a more effective approach.

But such is the “dumbing down of politics” in our midst, that one after another the allies of the President were singing from the same hymn sheet and falling all over themselves in nullifying VP Leni’s efforts of getting up to speed on the historic task she had decided to take on. Thus, when the President himself pointed out the VP's “missteps” in her first weeks as co-chair of the inter-agency dealing with drugs, insinuating that he never trusted her anyway, it was clear even before he uttered the words that he had decided to let VP Leni go.  He was never ready for a VP Leni to lead the charge in a campaign that he had boasted was to be his regime’s signature achievement. (READ: Robredo writes Duterte: Make my role clear so I can work)

VP Leni was right all along: they were not ready for her!

As VP Leni ran the gauntlet, she did not flinch; and, as one brave woman who thrives in the heat of battle, she never for a moment thought of retreat or resignation. It was she who framed her acceptance by announcing that she was ready to work on the task ahead, hoping to save at least even one human life. She knew all along the limitations she faced. Indeed, she said it best: “I am ready, but the question is: Are you ready for me?” (READ: The gamble of Leni Robredo)

Apparently, the President and his minions were afraid of the systematic and rigorous methods that VP Leni was bringing to the task. She was data-driven, engaging in an evidence-based process, consulting widely, ensuring inclusivity in her approach, bringing together a constituency and igniting a “conspiracy of hope” that had hitherto been absent in the campaign against illegal drugs. Here was a woman with rock-solid credentials, geared to bring together the elements of a sustainable program. (READ: PNP: We saw nothing wrong during Robredo's weeks in ICAD) 

VP Leni was making a difference even before she could put together all the elements of a strategic plan that was to be the result of reasoned reflection dealing with drugs. 

But, I suspect, President Duterte was not really interested in the success of the campaign against illegal drugs. He was more interested in the uninterrupted pursuit of the “war on drugs” and the VP be damned if she was to be another casualty of this so-called “war without end.” (READ: [EDITORIAL] Ang patibong para kay Leni) 

It is now time for our youth to be heard

VP Leni’s focus was on the future, and the future belongs to the young. It is for this reason that now is the time to address our youth. The line has been crossed, and what the President’s actions have demonstrated is that what we are engaged in is a struggle for the soul of our country; we must strive to retrieve what is best in the Filipino. We can no longer be taken for a ride, and the issue is bigger than the fate of VP Leni – no matter how brave and noble she is. 

It is now time for every citizen who refuses to be cowed and defeated, and strives to recapture the spirit of our heroes, to take a stand and do what must be done. Courage! – Rappler.com

Ed Garcia is a framer of the 1987 Constitution, a former professor at the Ateneo and UP, and a consultant for formation at FEU. He has worked at Amnesty International and International Alert in the UK.

Another recent episode of Raffy Tulfo in Action has gone viral. In this episode, the grandmother and parents of an elementary school student reached out to Raffy Tulfo to complain about alleged child abuse committed by a teacher. According to the complainants, the teacher allegedly subjected the child to corporal punishment and public humiliation on different occasions. 

Tulfo’s team facilitated a phone conversation between the complainants and the teacher, during which the teacher apologized for the said actions. Eventually, Tulfo offered the teacher two choices: to bring the complaint to court, or to give up her teaching career and lose her license. The teacher chose the latter. A Facebook post from a certain lawyer reveals that both sides have met and have settled the conflict privately.

Many netizens have expressed their sentiments over the issue, which are largely sympathetic to the teacher. There are those who castigated Tulfo because the teacher was seemingly subjected to trial by publicity and the production team had set aside due process. Others even posted about similar experiences they had while in school and claimed to have learned from or enjoyed such experiences. Some used the occasion to highlight the sad state of the justice system in the Philippines while branding the whole spectacle as “Tulfo justice.” (READ: Policy reforms pushed to address 'teacher-shaming' after Tulfo episode) 

In loco parentis

Schools serve as second home to students while teachers serve as their second parents. This is the reason why educational institutions act “in loco parentis” (in the place of a parent). Teachers and administrators take on some functions and responsibilities of the parents when children are in school. This reinforces the lesson the African proverb “It takes a village to raise a child” wishes to convey. In other words, it is not the sole responsibility of the parents to cultivate the child to become a good citizen, but the community’s responsibility.

As part of the community, the philosopher John Dewey argues that the school has a responsibility to educate students so that they may become good citizens. Accordingly, teachers are not only expected to transmit knowledge and sharpen skills but also to build the character and strengthen the moral compass of their students. (READ: [OPINION] A teacher's voice)

This, of course, raises important questions regarding the aims of education as well as the extent and limits of educational institutions in disciplining a child.

Discipline and punish

Although proven to be ineffective on multiple occasions, parents and teachers unwittingly practice the basic tenets of behaviorism – reinforce good behavior through rewards and eradicate bad behavior through punishments. In schools, when students display discipline and good study habits, they are often rewarded with commendations and high grades. When they fail to follow school rules or score low in examinations, they are scolded or, worse, subjected to various forms of corporal punishment.

Filipino culture expects that if a child is educated, the child will turn out to be disciplined. Many schoolchildren have experienced being asked by adults, “Iyan ba ang natututunan mo sa eskwelahan?” (Is that what you learn from school?) during a reprimand. Evidently, parents regard instilling discipline as one of the aims of education. This may be true since schools of thought in education such as theistic realism, romantic naturalism, and progressivism, among others, highlight the importance of values education in schools. Unfortunately, it is an oft-forgotten fact that values education begins at home. (READ: WATCH: Why do teachers teach?)

If discipline is an expected outcome of education, then how ought teachers instill discipline? If teachers act in loco parentis and parents practice corporal punishment at home, is it acceptable for teachers to enact similar punishments in school? Is it right for parents to expect that their children are taught discipline in school if these children do not see the same discipline (or values) being practiced in their respective homes and communities? Do parents have a say on how teachers should manage their classrooms? Can sending children to school to be subjected to its rules and expectations be regarded as a form of punishment in itself? Can values be taught? (READ: Amid 'teacher shaming,' DepEd says PTAs proper forum to resolve conflicts)

The subject-matter of teaching discipline in schools is ripe with multitudes of questions that, unfortunately, deal with a lot of gray areas. Having children stand under the sun due to a wrongdoing may be labeled as child abuse, but having the same children stand under the sun to watch a parade, listen to a guest speaker, or practice for a field demonstration may just be brushed off as just another school activity. Making students memorize information so that they can pass their standardized exams is just normal while asking questions that go beyond the lecture to see if students can extrapolate from what they know is frowned upon because “it was not included in the lesson.” 

Simply put, there is a great deal of work to do if discipline is expected to be learned in schools. The work, however, is not the teachers’ burden alone to bear.

It takes a village to raise a child

It is difficult to teach discipline if the child experiences cognitive dissonance. This means that if schools are expected to instill discipline in the child, then the practice of such discipline should also be present in their respective homes and communities. For this reason, the responsibility to educate does not rest on teachers alone but on all the members of the community.

To this end, there may be a lesson that can be learned from Philosophy for Children (P4C) regarding communities. P4C aims to build communities of inquiry and one of the essential elements to build a successful community is practicing respect. If all the members of the community of inquiry are respectful, then the inquiry of the community will prosper. Accordingly, if the members of the community practice mutual respect, then discipline in the community will thrive. Arguably, some say that respect is something that is earned. However, imagine a world where respect is something that is freely given. Wouldn’t it be a better world? – Rappler.com

Leander Penaso Marquez teaches Philosophy at the University of the Philippines Diliman. His research interests include epistemology, ethics, philosophy and education, philosophy for children, and philosophy and popular culture.

Vice President Leni Robredo’s ingenuity caught Rodrigo Duterte’s regime off-guard – twice.

The first time was when Duterte and his chief mouthpiece Salvador Panelo taunted Robredo into leading the regime’s so-called “drug war” by becoming the drug czar. Political allies warned Robredo about caving in to the Duterte men’s drivel, calling it a trap that was meant to humiliate her, and a plot on the government’s part to legitimize the murderous anti-narcotics drive.

But Robredo eventually accepted it, positioning herself as the besieged leader who would rather lose her political capital if it meant saving another innocent life from Oplan Tokhang – the “drug war” brainchild. Duterte’s senators – Bong Go and Ronald Dela Rosa, the latter the first police chief to oversee Tokhang’s bloody instigation – scoffed at her femininity and heckled her, but to no avail. (READ: Robredo: 'Mother's instinct' made me accept anti-drugs post) 

Robredo stood her ground, and because of that, Duterte’s show was doomed to fail, and fail it did.

Tensions ensued as Robredo plodded on, specifically after she requested the Duterte regime to declassify the list of high-value targets in the illegal drugs scene.

The tyrant’s men started howling. Contrary to Panelo’s own declaration days earlier regarding the regime’s “support” for Robredo (“Why should [Robredo] not have access? We will give her all the support”), Duterte’s men displayed hesitation in allowing Robredo access to pertinent documents and classified information regarding the “drug war,” asserting that Robredo’s role in the opposition made them doubt her objectives. 

But whose intentions should be rigorously scrutinized? Common sense confirms that hiding is a guilty man’s go-to option to evade accountability. If, indeed, the Duterte regime is free of any direct involvement in either the illegal drugs trade or in the mass murder of innocent Filipinos and small-time criminals, why is there a need to fear or doubt Robredo’s approaches? The Duterte regime’s wailing can speak for itself. (READ: The gamble of Leni Robredo)

Another excuse was the regime’s supposed concern for “national security.” Certainly, allowing a China-backed telecommunications company to build infrastructure near military and police camps won’t raise national security issues, but sharing “drug war” information with Robredo does? This, despite that fact that the Constitution gives Robredo equal right to national security briefings from the government’s security cluster, if indeed this involves national security. 

Interior Undersecretary Ricojudge Echiverri’s words, in particular, hinted at Malacanang’s dread: “Huwag sanang mangyari na kung may malaman na impormasyon, sana ay walang laglagan (Hopefully, nobody gets thrown under the bus should certain information be revealed)." These words emphasized the fear the President’s gang harbors. Robredo’s discoveries might implicate no less than the Duterte regime itself in the perpetuation of the criminal narcotics trade, and the regime’s culpability in Tokhang’s 30,000 murders. (READ: In Bataan town, drug reformists get second chance in life)

The second time Robredo’s cleverness gobsmacked Duterte was when she publicly dared the Chief Executive to fire her if he sensed discomfort in this entire exercise. Panelo then just framed Robredo’s sacking as the President’s response to Robredo’s dare.

By firing Robredo, Duterte indirectly confesses to complicity in both the illegal narcotics’ trade and in extrajudicial killings. This only substantiates the idea that no drug war had ever existed since 2016, and that it was instead a war against the poor. With the Vice President out of the crime scene, the International Criminal Court might even be convinced all the more that Duterte’s regime hides smoking guns that necessitate formal investigations. 

Duterte had found himself and his cronies in a Gordian knot: if he allowed Robredo to stay, her determination to burrow deeper into the regime’s chasm of secrets might reveal something incriminatory to the public; but if Duterte fired her, public suspicion as to what he was hiding from the public would heighten. (READ: [EDITORIAL] Ang patibong para kay Leni)

Whether this regime exploited this off-the-cuff decision as a smokescreen to distract from the SEA Games mishaps is immaterial, because Robredo had already checkmated Duterte. 

In the final act, Duterte not only lost the political chess match, but it’s obvious that he fears the discovery of the country’s drug Godfather.

The question left is why. – Rappler.com

Karl Patrick Suyat is currently the editorial head of Fiat Publication (the official publication of University of Perpetual Help Systems-Jonelta campus), the Laguna provincial spokesperson for Youth UNBOUND-ST, and a national democratic activist staunchly advocating against historical revisionism, fascism, and injustice.

After nearly 6 months of social and political unrest, the people of Hong Kong went to the polls on Sunday, November 24. By early Monday morning, it was clear that in the biggest voter turnout in decades, the voters had sent an unmistakable message to the Hong Kong government and to Beijing.  

The electoral contests centered on the District Council seats that were being contested in the 18 districts around Hong Kong. The results indicated that the pro-democracy candidates won 385 out of a total of 452 seats. The pro-democrats also won resounding majorities in 17 of the 18 districts. While these offices do not carry much power, and the district councils deal mainly with municipal matters, this election is the only chance that Hong Kong people have to vote for a legislative body as a whole. As such it is the single opportunity for the voters of Hong Kong to have their voices heard.  The reason for this can be found in the way in which Hong Kong’s post-1997 government was established in its mini-constitution or Basic Law.

The more influential Legislature Council (or LegCo as it’s known) of Hong Kong is an unusual and somewhat corrupt mix of seats which only 50% are elected directly by the voters, and other seats are elected by various economic sectors, such as the insurance industry, the tourism and hotels sector, the construction industry, etc. All of these seats can be counted on to be pro-Beijing candidates. This means that the pro-establishment camp is guaranteed a majority in Legco. 

As for the executive branch, Hong Kong’s Chief Executive is chosen by 1,200 “electors,” nearly all of whom are handpicked by Beijing.  The results since 1997 have been a series of failed leaders, from a pro-China shipping tycoon, Tung Chi-hua who resigned after his failed attempt to ram through a hotly contested security ordinance.  Second was Donald Tsang, a career civil servant, who became involved in a corrupt land deal and was later sent to prison.  Then there was C.Y. Leung, who also was involved in a murky transaction from the Chinese ZTE Corporation and whose refusal to even hold a dialogue with the Umbrella protesters earned him praise from Beijing and contempt from Hong Kongers.  

The most recent leader was Carrie Lam whose signature policy initiative was an attempt to enact an amendment to the Fugitive Offender’s Ordinance, which would have allowed courts on the Mainland, demand that those individuals that they designated as criminals to be extradited to the PRC. 

The entire attempt at this legislation, which began in February 2019, resulted in increasing levels of concern, not only from NGOs and human rights groups, but also from a number of chambers of commerce, former judges and even the Hong Kong Bar Association.  Ms Lam’s consistent response to this alarm was that all of these groups “didn’t properly understand the bill.”  Her single-minded efforts to ram the bill through the legislature eventually resulted in current protest movement, which has persisted for nearly 6 months. 

So after thousands of arrests, hundreds of deaths, injuries, sexual assaults and police beatings, the people of Hong Kong finally went to the polls on Sunday.  Out of deference to the elections, there were no protests held during the weekend.  On Sunday, it was the voters’ turn to speak for themselves, on their own.      

Sunday saw record turnouts in all of the districts of Hong Kong, making it clear by mid-morning that this was going to be a significant election, if only for the massive turnout, which by the end of the day was estimated at around 74% of voters. There were many other factors at play as well. The newly appointed chief of police, Chris Tang ordered riot police to be present at all of the voting stations in Hong Kong, in an effort at “protecting the voters.”  Of course, given the level of apprehension with which most people now view the police, this was seen by most as a form of voter intimidation.   

There were long lines. In many cases, voters in most voting stations around Hong Kong waited for over 90 minutes to cast their ballots.  As the day wore on, fears arose of vote buying, especially in the New Territories, a traditional bastion of support for the pro-Beijing DAB Party.  This time, videos came to light of elderly voters getting off buses and being given “red packets” as well as elders receiving gift bags and electric blankets. The fears also continued to grow that there would also be ballot box stuffing and other forms of cheating such as through voter intimidation, especially in the Yuen Long constituency of Junius Ho, the pro-Beijing legislator with close ties to local triad gangs.   

The voting went on until 10:30 pm. The results weren’t available until early Monday morning, and when they were announced, it was a stunning victory for the pro-democratic candidates and a massive rebuke to the pro-Beijing incumbents, and of course to the government of Carrie Lam.   

The euphoria is still in the air, and people were popping open bottles of champagne on the streets of Central.  So after the champagne, what comes next?  For a start, the results will not bring about any meaningful policy changes or any direct challenge to Carrie Lam’s unelected government.  The 18 District Councils across the territory only deal with local issues, such as potholes, streetlights, and the allocation of public money for civic improvements.   

However, given that the District Council elections are the only opportunity for the voters of Hong Kong to make their unfiltered demands to be known, and as was seen on Sunday, the people took their civic duty very seriously.  The first message is that the narrative Carrie Lam and her government have been repeating for the past 6 months, that a “silent majority” of Hong Kong people support the government has now been shown to be wrong.  The government’s message that the “rioters” are merely a fringe group of radical and disaffected young people, is now also revealed as a deception. That the protest movement is widely supported was borne out by the voters, who have elected many of those who have been involved in the protest movement.

The “silent majority “ story being debunked is more significant than it appears at first blush.  Whereas previously, the Hong Kong government and their pro-Beijing backers could always claim that the protest movement was either the result of the disaffection of the young (or alternatively that it was the result of a nefarious CIA plot) at this point, they must deal with the fact that 74% of the voters have spoken and they have overwhelmingly rejected the policies of the Hong Kong government and the leadership in Beijing.  The protest must now be seen not as a young people’s movement, but as a grassroots rejection of Beijing’s rule.   

In the coming days and weeks, there will inevitably be calls from the leadership in the pro-Beijing parties for Ms Lam’s resignation, as the defeat of the pro-Beijing candidates must be seen as defeat for Carrie Lam herself.  I suggest that this will become a problem for not only Carrie Lam and her government, but also for Beijing itself, which up until now has steadfastly continued to support her.   

But here’s where the unique status of Hong Kong casts an entirely different light on what might be ordinarily seen as a massive repudiation of an incumbent government.  Given that Hong Kong is controlled by the PRC, and as such, any signs of discontent must be a reflection of discontent by the voters of the leadership of the PRC itself.  However this kind of thing isn’t supposed to happen in China.  There must never be any sign whatsoever of any dissent or disagreement with the Central Leadership.  This is especially true now as Xi Jinping has over the past several years tightened his grip on all forms of expression and public life to the point that China can only be referred to as a totalitarian state.  

And yet, here we have seen in full view of the international press, an overwhelming popular rejection of everything that the Chinese Communist Party stands for. It is highly likely that this seemingly innocuous election result will be viewed with great alarm in Beijing. So the question now, is where does Beijing go from here?

Those outside observers, who have raised the scenario of a Tiananmen style crackdown, seem to have been proven wrong (at least for now).  Beijing remains in a dilemma partly because of the ongoing trade negotiations with the United States administration.  The use of military force would likely preclude such a deal.  However, there also seems to be little room for Xi Jinping to simply accede to even some of the protesters’ Five Demands, even the most viable one, which is the demand for an independent judicial led investigation into the police violence.  

The reason that Xi won’t or can’t make this concession is that compromise and cooperation is not how the CCP operates. The only way that it deals with any form of dissent or disagreement is through suppression, violence and total control of the wider narrative.  Yet, here, they seem to have lost that control. At this point, it’s not clear as to when and how the CCP is to try and wrest that control from the hands of the people of Hong Kong, and back into their own hands, but for now at least, the people of Hong Kong made their voices heard by the whole world. – Rappler.com

James A. Rice is an Assistant Professor of the Department of Philosophy at  Lingnan University in Hong Kong. He obtained his Master of laws at the University of Cambridge. He is the author of Take Your Rights Seriously – A manual on the legal rights of migrant workers in Hong Kong and the politics involved.

Mali ka ng akala. Hindi ito tungkol sa mga naglipana at nakakatawang “Mahal ka ni Ninong” memes sa social media hinggil sa nalalapit na Pasko. Bagamat masasabi kong tungkol din ito sa aginaldo, pero ang mas malalim at nakasisira sa lipunang aginaldo. 

Ganito kasi iyon. Sa loob lang ng 3 araw, kasama na ang araw habang ginagawa ko ito, 3 malalaking isyu ang nagkapatong-patong sa news feed ko.

Una, iyong tungkol sa pobreng teacher at ang kanyang pagbibitiw para maisalba ang kung ano mang natitira pang dangal dahil, alam naman natin, ginawa siyang social media specimen sa isang public affairs radio and television show na nagpapanggap ding instant katarungan vending machine.

Ikalawa, ang kapalpakan – at ang napipintong mas malaking kapalpakan! – sa hindi pa man nagsisimulang SEA Games. (BASAHIN: [EDITORIAL] Ang higanteng face palm na SEA Games 2019)

At ang huli, ang pagkakaalis (o pagkakasibak, baka ito ang mas preferred mong termino, depende kung saan traditional political yard ka kabilang) sa puwesto ng ating bise presidente bilang co-chairman ng Inter-Agency Committee on Anti-Illegal Drugs.

Inaasahan ko na ang dalawang huli na mangyayari simula pa lang. Political gut feel. Instinct. 

Ang kay VP Leni, ramdam ko namang hindi sincere ang alok ng administrasyon na makipagtulungan simula’t sapul. Kaya nang kasahan ang alok na puwesto (sorry, na inakala ko talagang pang-aasar lang ng mga taga-Palasyo), ang hinihintay ko na lang talaga ay kung kailan siya tatanggalin. Tapos in less than a month – higit na maikli sa ipinangako dating 6 na buwan. 

Iyong sa SEA Games, simula pa lang nang ilabas ang bilog-bilog na logo at sago-sagong mascot noong nagdaang taon, alam ko nang magkakaganito. Icing on the cake na lang ang kaldero sa New Clark. Ang bilis ng mga pangyayari. Ambilis sumambulat sa social media. Hindi makasabay ang news feed ko sa mga balitang sumisingaw sa bawat oras na sumisilip ako para alamin kung may notification akong dapat malamang mas mahalaga pa kesa magkamit tayo ng gintong medalya at kaldero sa biennal sports meet ng rehiyon. Nakakapagod ang mga ganitong update. Nakakahiya, even. Pero wala eh, they’re bound to happen. 

Sa kabila ng aberya, mariin pa rin naman ang pagsuporta ko sa mga atletang Pinoy kahit pa parang lamang lang nang kaunti sa inter-barangay high school athletics competion ang pag-oorganisa ng mga nilalang sa likod ng biennal games na ito ng rehiyon. 

Palagay ko naman ay marami pa ring mapasasaya ang SEA Games. Maraming kuwentong tagumpay ang aanihin, lalo kung mapapanood natin nang live. 

Dahil sa kuwento ng tagumpay ang pangunahing dahilan ko kung bakit masarap tumangkilik ng sports sa kabuuan. Kaya tara, suportahan pa rin natin ang mga kababayan nating atleta. (BISITAHIN ang SEA Games 2019 site ng Rappler.com.)

***

Bueno, iyong sa pinakauna, iyong katarungan vending machine via radio and TV show, mas nauna kong nahiwatigang mangyayari iyon. Mas naka-embed na kasi sa kultura natin ang mga ganitong uri ng extra-judicial justice dispensation – ang mga ganitong uri, lalo na, ng pamamadrino. 

Oo, padrino sa kahit anong proseso hindi lang sa paghingi ng katarungan.

For better or for worse, kasama na kasi itong sa ating cultural DNA. May tawag pa nga tayo rito: padrino system.

May negatibong konotasyon agad sa ating lipunan ang salitang “padrino.” Sa ating bansang laganap ang krimen at korupsiyon, maraming “padrino” ang nilalapitan ng kung sino-sino para humingi ng pabor. Kung ayaw sumunod sa proseso at may kilala naman sa loob na magpapabilis sa transaksiyon, bagamat ilegal o imoral, gagamitin ang “padrino.” Hindi ba imbes na magreklamo sa kinauukulang ahensiya ng pamahalaan ang mga magulang, sa padrino sila lumapit? Ang bilis nga naman ng hatol.

Palakasan din sa puwesto o promosyon ang kasingkahulugan ng padrino system na bahagi ng ating kultura. Ibig sabihin, basta may kapit ka sa makapangyarihang tao sa sistema, mapo-promote ka, makukuha ang kontrata, o mapipili ka sa isang posisyon kahit pa hindi ikaw ang pinakakalipikado. Ito ang iyong aginaldo buhat sa iyong padrino. Sa nangyayaring SEA Games brouhaha, may napapansin ba kayong pamamadrino?

Kaya naman nakakainis na makarinig na may padrino ka sa isang ahensiya ng gobyerno. Na para bang ipinagmamalaki mong kaya mong mapadali ang isang gawain; na kaya mong hindi sumunod sa proseso.

Neutral na termino naman talaga dapat ang salitang Español na “padrino” mula sa salitang Latin na “patrīnus,” na ang literal na ibig sabihin ay “ng ama” o “of a father” sa Ingles. Pero mas pamilyar tayo sa pangkaraniwang ibig sabihin ng padrino: godfather o, sa Filipino, iyon na nga, ninong. Kaya “Mano po, Ninong!”

Kung paanong naging “ninong” ang “padrino” ay maaaring sa paraan natin ng pagbigkas, na sa katagalan, umikli at nagkaroon ng, sa linguistics, ay morpho-phonemic changes. 

Sa ating bansa, mayroong salitang ninong at mayroon pa ring salitang padrino. Iisa ang kahulugan kung pagbabatayan ang literal na ibig sabihin. Pero kung sa paraang figurative o patayutay, hindi. Ang maging ninong sa kasal o binyag ay karangalang maging ikalawang magulang na magpapayo o tutulong sa inaanak. Ang maging padrino ay maging kasabwat.

Pero, hindi ba, iyon naman talaga ang isang tungkulin ng ninong? Ang tulungan ang inaanak? Hindi ba bago ang binyag, ipinapaliwanag ng pari ang mga gawain ng ninong na malaya namang tinatanggap ng mag-aanak sa binyag, kumpil, o kasal?

Ang malungkot, mayroong ninong na gusto ring maging padrino. May mga magulang na kumukuha ng ninong – nakakatawa ito, pero ganito talaga ang kayarian ng pangungusap na ito! – para maging padrino ng anak. Redundant? Sa kulturang Filipino, hindi. 

Ngayon, kung ang padrino ay sa ninong, saan naman galing ang salitang “ninang”? At ginagamit din ba ito sa ating kultura sa parehong may negatibong konotasyon gaya ng padrino?

Galing sa salitang Español na “madrina,” na buhat sa salitang “madre” o “mater” sa Latin. Halos pareho lang din ng salitang padrino na naging ninong ang pagbabagong morpo-ponemiko. Pero pansinin, hindi tayo masyadong pamilyar sa salitang madrina, hindi ba?

Ang paggamit kasi natin ng salitang “padrino” ay gender neutral. Maaaring magpadrino sa iyo ang babae man o lalaki. Ninong o ninang. Hindi nagsasabi ang marami sa atin na may “madrina” siya sa loob ng isang ahensiya ng pamahalaan. Padrino pa rin kahit na babae. Pero ang higit na malungkot na usapin sa paksang ito ay ang katotohanang usong-uso at namamayagpag pa rin ang padrino system sa bansa. Patunay? Magbasa o manood lang kayo ng balita sa pahayagan, telebisyon, at news feed. – Rappler.com 

Bukod sa pagtuturo ng creative writing, pop culture, research, at seminar in new media sa Departamento ng Literatura at sa Graduate School ng Unibersidad ng Santo Tomas, research fellow din si Joselito D. delos Reyes, PhD, sa UST Research Center for Culture, Arts and Humanities. Siya ang coordinator ng AB Creative Writing Program ng Unibersidad ng Santo Tomas. 

People with disabilities (PWDs) are everywhere. Most are constrained in homes, while others are left with no choice but to beg in the streets.

Many of those who are home choose to be home, mainly because of the hassles of the daily commute. Let’s face it: Many establishments (even government facilities) are not PWD-friendly. And those living in the streets choose to ask for alms not because of their disability, but because they are not given opportunities to make a living.

I have a disability but I pretty much live a "normal" life in the sense that I can go around whenever I want to and do what others do. 

When I was 7 years old, I started to lose my sight. I first had blurry vision and was sent to different hospitals for diagnosis and treatments. Eventually, things worsened and I became completely blind. Doctors told me that retinal detachment caused my blindness. 

This may seem hard for others, but as far as I can remember, things weren’t as difficult for me then. I had time adjusting to the changes, given that I was still young when I had to deal with the transition. And an even better advantage for me was the fact that I have very supportive and loving family members and friends. 

I never missed school. I finished my primary, secondary, and tertiary education. Though there were a few challenges along the way, I somehow figured my way through it all. I finished Bachelor of Science in Computer Science from STI Recto in 2015. 

I thought finishing my degree would be my greatest ordeal, but I was wrong. Finding a job was and still is the most difficult thing. I know finding employment is a universal problem, but for us PWDs, it is our lifelong trial. (READ: PH still far from becoming PWD-inclusive, says UP study) 

After my college graduation, I was fortunately offered a job, but the company closed after 7 months since it couldn’t meet the demands of the competitive digital businesses. 

That was when I started my quest for a job. Job hunting in Manila isn’t supposed to be a problem for me given my qualifications, but because I am blind, I still have an obvious hurdle.

I have applied for more than 30 jobs around Metro Manila. –  all office-based jobs, so it meant going through a lot of excruciating commuting just to get to their locations. And while I would always pass the first and/or second screening, I would never bag the final screening. (READ: The number 1 thing employers want to hear about in a job interview)

As soon as I reach the face-to-face interview and they see my condition, I get lines like, “I’m sorry we could not give you the facilities you need" or “We are not PWD ready-yet" or “You are really good but we don’t know if we could accommodate you.” Over and over I’d hear these lines of rejection from one employer after another. I was rejected not once, not twice, but more than 30 times!

And the truth is, I don’t need any special facility! I have a laptop with a screen reader, and these are the only things I need for my job. They don’t have to restructure their whole building just to accommodate one blind employee. I understand that they are concerned for my welfare, but pitying me or being sorry won’t make any difference. I need a job! So why can’t they hire me if they know I’m qualified? (READ: #HustleEveryday: 5 things NOT to do when looking for a job while still employed)

Rejection after rejection lowered my self-esteem and sent me into depression, which I never had before. I never knew that being rejected from job applications could cause so much trauma and emotional pain. So, I stopped my daily routine trying to find employment on JobStreet. JobStreet should have the disclaimer, “PWDs are NOT allowed!” At least that way I would not hope at all, instead of being given false hopes just to have them killed along the way. 

When a friend told me to consider becoming a virtual professional, I was hesitant at first because I didn’t have any prior experience. But a year later, since I didn’t have any other options, I decided to join the training for it. There, I gained new friends and rebuilt myself. I learned the digital and communication skills I needed to be a good fit for many jobs online. 

Now I’m embarking again on another journey to find employment. I’m still waiting for the acceptance of my applications, but at least this time, I know I have better chances. (READ: #HustleEveryday: The 4 most common job interview questions)

I am crossing my fingers and sincerely praying that I won’t be rejected again. – Rappler.com

Billious Boquila is a bachelor whose passions are music and history. He is visually impaired but can see the world differently through technology.

The challenge posed by Education Secretary Leonor Briones at the launch of Sulong EduKalidad was to look at the quality and status of education for "what it is." This, along with the Philippines' dismal results in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), hit me hard.

Being part of the Philippine education system for almost 20 years now – 14 as a student and 5 as a professional – I have witnessed how Filipino students have grown to become fearless and careless when they get bad grades. They have become sure they will not be seeing bold red marks on their report cards.

Though it is commendable that we braved being ranked among 79 countries in the international assessment, the results were just disheartening. We placed 79th in reading comprehension and 78th in both mathematics and science. This is a bitter pill we have to swallow and a reality we have to work with. (READ: [ANALYSIS] Dismal PISA rankings: A wake-up call for Filipinos)

While the Department of Education (DepEd) aimed to prioritize and provide access to basic education and supported the No Filipino Child Left Behind Act of 2010, how schools have interpreted the DepEd's goals was the problem. (READ: Senior high school: No youth left behind?)

Just because no one should get left behind doesn't mean that we should embrace pasang-awa (barely passing) culture.

According to Briones, our students' low proficiency levels in science, math, and English are not because of the implementation of the K to 12 curriculum, like what some perceive, but because we have come to tolerate the students who exhibit low proficiency levels instead of working harder with them.

In our conscious effort to support and abide by the DepEd, we have also unconsciously misinterpreted their plan, accepting substandard outputs even if we know our learners can do more, especially with added upgrades to the Basic Education Curriculum (BEC).

Fortunately, the education department already urged educators to stop promoting non-readers to the next level. This was in response to a study by the Philippine Institute for Development Studies, which analyzed the challenges and pressures public school teachers face, and how these impact the quality of the BEC. (READ: Beyond the classroom: Advocates discuss how to make PH education more accessible) 

Despite this plea, however, the culture still reigns, with only 3 months left before another school year ends.

How can this pasang-awa culture stop if it forms part of the system itself? Although there are many valid factors that determine a child's knowledge acquisition, some children, if not all, still fall victim to this degrading tradition.

It is time to focus on quality over quantity in terms of education – now more than ever. It takes a village to raise a child, however, which means that this is not just the DepEd's responsibility, but also the responsibility of stakeholders, local government, the community, and parents. We need to look past the pasang-awa culture and perform what is expected of us – para sa bata, para sa bayan (for the child, for the country). – Rappler.com 

Pamela G. Garcia is a licensed professional teacher in Junior High School-English at Ligao National High School in Ligao City, Albay.

Anyare?! Paanong mula sa pagiging tagapaghatid ng balita ay naging buntunan ng sisi ang media sa mga nangyaring kapalpakan sa pagsisimula ng Southeast Asian Games 2019? Paanong naipihit ng gobyerno (sa tulong ng online propaganda machines nito) ang sisi mula sa organizers ng SEA Games papunta sa media na nagbabalita lang ng mga pangyayari?

Inaral ng Rappler ang isang linggong galaw ng mga social media platforms na kilala bilang propaganda machines na sumusuporta sa gobyerno. Nakita kung paanong ang focus ng balita mula sa iba’t ibang problema sa pagsisimula ng SEA Games ay biglang natuon sa mga tagapaghatid ng balita: ang media. 

Hindi naman bago ang modus na ito. Tulad ito ng organisado, systematic, at tuloy-tuloy na atake sa mga lehitimong media sa nakaraang 3 taon. Kadalasan, nag-uumpisa sa isang problema (o mga isyu) tungkol sa kapalpakan ng gobyerno o mga opisyal nito. May mga totoong tao na nagrereklamo, at bilang trabaho nila, irereport naman ng media kung ano man ang sinabi ng nagrereklamo. Tapos hihingin ng media ang panig ng gobyerno. (BASAHIN: Propaganda war: Weaponizing the internet) 

Pero sa ilalim ng administrasyong Duterte, hindi tugon ang makukuha ng media kundi atake. Imbes na sagutin (puwede namang i-deny lang nila), pupulaan lang ang mga reporter na nagbalita. Maglalabas ng quotable quote ang Palasyo, at ito ang nagsisilbing hudyat sa propaganda machine para sa kanilang messaging. Uulit-ulitin ang soundbite. Sa pamamagitan ng social media platforms at ilang batalyong accounts na kilalang supporters ng Pangulo, kukuyugin ang mga posts ng legitimate media at pupulaan ang mga report ng media at sasabihing fake ito – kahit wala silang ipinapakitang ebidensiya. Sa huli, ang objective ay birahin ang nagbabalita, gawing katawa-tawa ang kanilang mga report, at mawala ang focus ng mga tao sa tunay na laman ng balita. Galit, panghihiya, at pagmumura lang ang puhunan ng trolls. (BASAHIN: Fake news in the Philippines: Dissecting the propaganda machine) 

Nitong mga araw bago magbukas ang 30th SEA Games, ganun pa rin. Mga halimbawa ng report: “Hindi sapat ang pagkain na inihain sa hotel para sa mga atleta,” “Ilang oras na pinaghintay sa airport ang mga bisitang atleta…at sa maling hotel pa naihatid,” “Mga volunteers ng Palaro, litong-lito na sa kawalan ng sistema,” “Pinuna ng senador ang gastos sa pagpapagawa ng kaldero,” “Ilang araw na lang magbubukas na ang Palaro, pero hindi pa tapos ang venues.” (BASAHIN: The devil's in the details: 10 logistical blunders at SEA Games 2019)

Ang isasagot lang ng online Duterte supporters ay: “Hindi totoo 'yan, 'yung kakilala ko ay nakakain naman!” “Walanghiya ang volunteer na 'yan; hindi ganyan ang naranasan ko!” “Mga talangka talaga kayo, kayo pa ang nagpapahiya sa ating bansa!” “Sana tumulong na lang kayo, puro kayo nega!” “Gusto 'nyo talagang matalo ang mga atletang Pinoy!” “Mga dilawan!” “Fake news 'yan!” atbp.

Wow.

Hello?

Kailan pa naging trabaho ng media ang baguhin ang nakalap na balita para lang pabanguhin ang gobyerno?

Kailan pa naging kontra-atleta ang pagre-report sa mga puna na galing mismo sa (o problemang naranasan mismo ng) mga atleta o coach? 

Hellooo??! Ilang bilyong pera ng bayan ang gagastusin d'yan sa Palarong 'yan, tapos gusto 'nyo tahimik lang ang media sa mga kapalpakan ng organizers? Ano kayo, nanalo sa lotto? Eh kahit nga nanalo sa lotto hindi nakakatakas na maging balita eh.

Anyway, 'yun na nga. Inaral ng Rappler ang isang linggong galawan ng mga information (sa totoo: propaganda) machines na supporters ng gobyerno at kung paano nila sabay-sabay na ipinihit ang mga balitang tungkol sa mga problema sa SEA Games para sa dulo, ang media ang palabasing may kasalanan. Sa ganitong paraan, mawawalan ng audience ang tunay na media at puro “magagandang balita” na lang ang ipapakain sa tao.

May basis ba ang claim na ipinihit ito? Yes naman. Pinag-aralan ng Rappler ang mahigit 1,500 na mga balita mula November 18 hanggang 29, 2019. Gamit ang natural language processing, pinagsama-sama ng Rappler ang mga istoryang lumabas sa media ayon sa tema nila at habang nagsusulputan ang mga reklamo tungkol sa SEA Games. Tatlong clusters ng balita ang nakita:

1. mga report tungkol sa mga atleta at mga sports nila
2. mga report tungkol sa mga paghahanda ng bansa bilang host ng SEA Games
3. iba pang report na related sa Games, tulad ng traffic reports, security, atbp.

Hindi totoo na puro “bad news” lang ang inireport ng media. Ang dami kayang “feel-good” at inspiring na kuwento ng mga atletang lalahok sa SEA Games. 

Kailan ba nag-umpisa ang sinasabing mga “bad news” na pakana raw ng media? November 8 'yun, nang isiniwalat ni Senador Franklin Drilon ang tungkol "kaldero" (cauldron) na sisindihan sa SEA Games sa New Clark City sa Tarlac – nagkakahalaga ng P50 milyon lang naman! Siyempre, nanggalaiti ang mga tao! Siyempre kumalat 'yun! Kasalanan ba ng media na 'yun ang isa sa pinaka-shared na istorya sa social media? Naku naman! (BASAHIN: 'Kaldero ng Diyos': Netizens shocked by P50-million SEA Games cauldron)

At hindi nasagot nang maayos ng organizers at gobyerno ang isyung 'yan.

Pero umpisa lang pala 'yun. Noong November 24, sumambulat na ang maraming balita ng kapalpakan sa pag-welcome ng mga atleta mula sa iba’t ibang bansa na maagang dumating sa Manila. Halos lahat ng media groups (hindi lang Rappler) ay nag-report sa mga reklamong malayang ibinigay ng mga na-interview nilang mga bisita o witness. Siyempre, news-worthy 'yun. Nakakahiya man, balita pa rin 'yun. Mula sa balitang naghintay nang matagal sa airport bago nasundo, hanggang sa report na sa maling hotel inihatid, hanggang sa mga hotel na hindi pa pala handa ang mga kuwarto para sa mga atleta, kaya may mga natulog sa sahig at upuan, hanggang sa kung ano ang kinain nila sa breakfast, at marami pang iba. Lahat 'yun ay kuwentong galing sa mga bisita mismo – hindi fake, hindi gawa-gawa ng media, sila lang ang nag–report. (BASAHIN: Hotel denies shabby treatment of SEA Games athletes) 

Karma nga naman.

Habang lumalabas ang mga report tungkol sa kapalpakan, umuugong sa reactions, emoticons, shares sa social media. Totoo naman 'yun ah: bad news travels fast! Nag–trending ang hashtag na #SEAGamesFail mula November 25 hanggang sa mga sumunod na araw. (Hindi rin naman galing sa media ang hashtag na 'yan, 'noh?)

Bilang chair ng Phisgoc – ang private entity na binasbasan ni Presidente Duterte mismo para maghanda sa SEA Games – nangahas maghanap ng masisisi si Alan Peter Cayetano. Sinisi niya sina Senator Drilon at ang oposisyon na dahilan daw kung bakit may mga kapalpakan sa arrivals at sa accommodations, pati na sa mga SEA Games venues na hindi natapos on time, atbp. Kasi nga raw, sina Drilon at ang dilawang oposisyon ang umipit sa budget. (BASAHIN: Drilon questions inclusion of P7.5-B SEA Games budget in DFA) 

Laos. 

Walang kumagat. 

Walang naniwala na sina Drilon ang may sala.

The next day, November 27, ayan na. Umentra na ang isang bagong karakter sa mala-telenovelang takipan at sisihan: si Congressman Ron Salo ng Kabayan Partylist. (Kilala 'nyo ba siya bago ang SEA Games? Kami rin hindi.) Siya (at siyempre, si Alan Peter Cayetano) ang nagsabi na may mga grupo ng media na nagkakalat ng disinformation at fake news kung kaya’t maraming bad news daw, at dapat daw imbestigahan ng Kongreso. Sa puntong ito, parang inihudyat na nina Cayetano at Salo (pati na rin ni Phisgoc COO Suzara) nang todo ang pag-atake ng propaganda machine sa bagong scapegoat: ang media. (BASAHIN: Don't blame media for SEA Games woes - NUJP) 

Media raw ang may kasalanan. 

Media ang may kasalanan. Media ang may kasalanan. Media ang may kasalanan. 

Paulit-ulit na mantra nila magmula nung araw na 'yun.

Diyan nag-umpisa ang surge sa social media ng bagong narrative: Media ang dapat sisihin. Hindi ang SEA Games organizers. Hindi ang Pangulo. Media daw.

Sa pag-momonitor ng Rappler (tingnan ang gumagalaw na graph sa ibaba), malinaw na ang gobyerno at ilang mga tagapagsalita nito ang nagbigay ng signal sa mga social media groups nila na iisang narrative ang dapat lumutang. 

By November 27, napa-trending na ang hashtag na #SEAGamesnotafailure pati na rin ang #WeWinAsOne para sabihin ang dalawang bagay:

1. na media lang ang gumagawa ng bad news
2. bilang Pilipinong mapagmahal sa bayan, dapat (daw) suportahan na lang ang mga atleta at tigilan na ang puna.

Pilit nilang ibinaon ang mga isyung dapat panagutan ng mga organizers. Saka na raw ang sisihan. 

Pero ang gusto nilang naratibo: media ang sisihin sa bad news. 

Sino-sino ang pro-government influencers at online propaganda groups sa social media na dating tulog lang tungkol sa mga kapalpakan ng SEA Games ang biglang nagising at naging active na naman para ikalat ang bagong mensahe na media ang kaaway? Kilala na natin sila. The usual names. Sa mga pages: CrabblerPH, Mocha Uson Blog, at DuterteToday. Duh. Sa mga content producer naman: sina Krizette Laureta Chu at Mark Lopez ang pinakaaktibong magsulat ng kung ano-ano, na ikakalat naman ng mga kapanalig nila (tao man o bot). Nung kasagsagan ng mga isyu sa SEA Games, sumali pa ang notoryus na DOJ prosecutor na propagandista din (sumikat minsan dahil gusto niyang ipapatay na parang ipis ang mga “Dilawan”/ kritiko) – si Darwin Cañete. Kung pagsasama-samahin ang kanilang pagpapakalat ng mga propaganda tungkol sa kung sinong dapat sishin sa SEA Games, sina Chu, Lopez, at Cañete ay nakapag-generate ng 107,690 interactions sa loob lang ng isang araw. (BASAHIN: State-sponsored hate: The rise of the pro-Duterte bloggers) 

Parang may switch na pinaandar lahat ang kanilang network sa social media. Ilang oras pagkatapos sabihin nina Cayetano at Salo ang mensahe na “media ang dapat sisihin sa bad news,” matagumpay na dinala ng mga pro-Digong social media groups, pages, at accounts ang mensaheng ito. Kahit wala ni katiting na ebidensiya. Basta ikalat lang na media ang may kasalanan. Nalampasan nila ang iba pang news organizations sa pagkakalat ng balita. (Tingnan ang network map sa ibaba kung saan makikita ang pagsambulat ng mensahe tungkol sa media: mula sa mga content creators hanggang sa “linkers” na nagpapakalat nito sa ibat-ibang grupo online. Hanep!) 

(Click and drag slider to move between slides)

Nakita din ng monitoring ng Rappler kung paano ang mga lehitimong news organizations ang nasa sentro ng mga magkabilaang usap-usapan sa social media: sa isang banda, sini-share ang mga SEA Games posts/content nila ng mga kritiko ng gobyerno, at sa kabilang banda, sila ang tinutukang atakehin ng mga online propaganda networks na pro-Duterte. 

Batay sa obserbasyon ng Rappler sa mga pro-government propaganda networks na mino-monitor nila, November 26 pa lang (bago pa maisip ni Cayetano na media ang gawing scapegoat sa SEA Games “imperfections”) ay naabot na ng mga ito ang 1.1 million total engagements sa loob lang ng isang araw. Huwaw! Buhay na buhay po sila.

Kagaya sa Facebook, ganoon din ang naging pihit sa Twitter. November 27 din nag-peak ang pag-atake sa media. (Tingnan ang mga cluster ng mga tema ng posts sa Twitter: parehong mensahe ang ikinakalat para sisihin ang lehitimong media sa kabila ng kawalan ng ebidensiya.)

Ang galing, di ba? Mula sa pagiging tagapaghatid lang ng balita, naging root of all evil ang media! Magical pihit. Masaheng malupit. Hindi matanggap ang mga report mula sa mga totoong mga taong nagreklamo, at mga retratong di nagsisinungaling (na kinokontra lang nila ng mga bagong retrato, kasi nga naman minadali nang tapusin ang mga venues pagkatapos ulanin ng puna), at biglang...tadaaaaa!...media ang dapat sisihin. Media ang may kasalanan ng lahat ng ito. 

Again, hindi naman na ito bago. Ilang taon na rin itong nangyayari. Itong monitoring ng Rappler ng galaw ng news at information (at propaganda) online ay muling nagpapatunay lang kung saan nanggagaling ang mga mensahe na ikinakalat bilang propaganda, kung ano-anong content-creators at ilang linkers ang magkakakabit na nakakapagpa-trending ng mga hashtag para lang matabunan ang ilang mga isyung hindi matanggap ng mga dapat managot, at kung paanong patuloy pa rin ang giyera laban sa media para tuluyan nang mawala ang isang daluyan ng mga lehitimong puna at kritisismo ng taong bayan.

Ron Salo, tingnan mo ang mga graph at baka nandito ang hinahanap mong "organized inauthentic online behavior.” Mas marami nang di hamak ang nagpa-trending sa mga akusasyon mo laban sa media kesa sa sinasabi mong paninira na gawa-gawa lang ng media. Congrats at viral ang naging mensahe mong walang pruweba. – Rappler.com

Gus Cerdeña is an NGO worker (or a "social development worker," if you go by the job he writes on his departure cards). Lately, he realized that his unarticulated dream is to be a tabloid writer. His favorite pastime is to troll trolls online. What he writes, though, online or anywhere else, has nothing to do with his NGO work; they’re a product of his own frustrations. He is NOT a morning person.

MANILA, Philippines – Ilang araw na lang, Pasko na!

Kaya heto ang regalo namin sa inyo: isang episode tungkol sa gifts, at sa pagbibigay at pagtanggap nito sa kapamilya, katuwang sa buhay, o kaopisina.

Meron ding ibang usapan, mula sa weird categories sa Kris Kringle, mga corny na regalo, hanggang sa "parusa" sa mga baguhan sa office tuwing Christmas party.

Pakinggan ang lahat ng ito sa isa na namang makulit na episode ng Laffler Talk. – Rappler.com

I’m Alexis Casayuran, husband to Lannie and father to Adrian and Abby. My wife and I are members of the Missionary Families of Christ (MFC, formerly CFC-FFL), and I’m a licensed physical therapist (PT).  

Just like most PTs, the plan was to work abroad and settle down there with my family. Everything had been going according to plan, with a job in a Texas hospital waiting for me – I just needed to pass the State Board Exam. (READ: Long shifts, low pay are part of a PH nurse's reality)

But in 2007, during the course of my review, I got very sick. I acquired dermatomyositis, an autoimmune disease under the lupus family. My world was shattered because I knew it was an incurable disease.  The tides had changed; from being a physical therapist, I was now the patient who had to be lifted from bed.

Aside from my physical weakness, I became photosensitive. I could only go out shaded by an umbrella or only when it was dark, unless I wanted to turn violet. As if the burden of my physical weakness was not enough, I began to feel shunned by society. People would look at me from head to foot and evade me as if I had an infectious disease.  

In 2009, my body felt stronger and my doctor gave me clearance to take a qualifying test in Hawaii.  Midway into the online test, however, I knew that my body was giving out on me. I received the call at the hotel confirming my fate and I went home with great mental anguish. How would I sustain my family? I had become a useless part of society – a man who could not provide for his family.

Upon returning home, my journey continued to go downhill. In 2010, I had a hemorrhagic stroke two months after our youngest was born. In 2014, I underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy and an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatograph because of gallbladder problems. In 2015, I had multiple lacerations inside my stomach from an unknown reason, causing me to lose blood. I underwent blood transfusions. In 2018, I had two shockwave procedures because of kidney stones, as well as a cataract procedure.

All of this was topped off with the silent disease called depression. It was a daily battle, and if not for the support of my family, friends, and MFC, I wouldn't be alive today. (READ: Selena Gomez opens up about depression, anxiety: 'Scariest moments of my life')

All these events made me think that God was a bully who didn’t love me. Why me? I had lived a healthy lifestyle. I didn’t smoke, drink, or do drugs, and I never flirted with girls. Yet, He allowed this to happen to me. I began to seek my true purpose, my real mission. How is it that I survived all this? Why am I still alive?  

As far as my roles as a father, I continue to be the priest of the family. Though I am not physically able, I can still protect my family with words of prayer and wise counsel. I am also able to provide for our family as a non-life insurance agent, but since I can’t go out of the house to meet new clients I only have my friends as clients. (READ: Lessons from my father: 'Be happy, be brave')

As our children grew older, so too our expenses. We needed an additional source of income, and through the advice of a former high school friend of mine, also a person with disability (PWD), I applied at Virtualahan. Though I was skeptical at first, I had been pointed to an online community that equips PWDs with skills to enable them to work and provide for their family.

I was quite tentative at the start, but I looked forward to my online classes. Virtulahan opened my mind to possibilities, new ideas, and skills vital for our future jobs. Admittedly, I was slow in terms of computer knowledge and skill, but because of the encouragement of my classmates it became a breeze. I felt no pressure, just love and understanding. 

My coach once told me during a wellbeing session, “Your name reveals who you are. Alexis means ‘Helper’.”  I may not help my team physically, but I always pray for our members, coaches, and really, everyone. I have learned that even though we are wounded physically, we can overcome our fears through the support we give to each other and the community. (READ: What makes the Filipino family special)

The wind may have blown me off course, but God has the wheel. My vision may have changed but my mission is still the same. I’m heading in the right direction. – Rappler.com 

Alexis Casayuran is married to Lannie Casayuran, and they have two kids: Adrian and Abby. Alexis was a licensed physical therapist but stopped practicing since getting diagnosed with dermatomyositis in 2007.

If Rodrigo Roa Duterte fancies himself to be a modern-day Achilles, his heel must definitely be his misogyny. He cannot take criticism, most especially from women, probably because his youth was controlled by a dominant mother. When Vice President Leni Robredo made her observations on the drug war known to the public – as she should, being the second highest official of the land – quite predictably, Duterte could not restrain himself from a misogynist kneejerk response. He threw a challenge in Robredo’s way, for her to take the reins as anti-drug czar and try to solve the drug problem in 6 months. 

A thousand things wrong

There were a thousand things wrong with Duterte’s challenge. In the first place, nobody made any promise about doing the job in 6 months. Only he did. Secondly, it took him more than 3 years before throwing up his hands in abject surrender to the fact that he could not do it at all, whether in 6 months or 3 years. To therefore challenge anybody who never made a 6-month promise to solve the drug problem, or any national problem for that matter, is a testament to Duterte’s brand of leadership. It is the kind that does not accept responsibility and accountability for anything, least of all fulfilling promises and having a word of honor. 

Taken by the public as another one of his tantrums, Duterte’s offer appeared as a joke. Robredo humored the President and Sal Panelo by asking them to put the offer in writing. This was to be the start of the macho gambit that cost Duterte his bravado, and gave Robredo the face of a serious political challenger to the Duterte legacy (whatever that might be). Duterte appointed Robredo as ICAD co-chair using rare Malacañang stationery.

Again, there were a thousand things wrong with this appointment if Duterte’s dare to Robredo was to be taken seriously. There was no such position to speak of. The ICAD did not provide for the position of a co-chair to the PDEA Director. Second, it was not clear what power and authority were vested by law on an ICAD co-chair, especially one who joins the inter-agency committee without any government portfolio, or agency to represent. Third, the appointment did not comply with Duterte’s own conditions when he threw the challenge at Robredo. There were no full powers assigned to Robredo to take charge of solving the drug problem in her own way. It also did not give her the power to appoint key law enforcement officials to implement the direction she wanted for the anti-drug campaign to take. For all intents and purposes, it was a lame duck position, and from day one it was apparent that this was how Duterte intended it to be.

The joke turned against the jokers 

Then came the clincher. To everyone’s surprise, including Robredo’s own allies in the opposition, and despite its equivocal character, Robredo accepted the appointment. Malacañang was obviously stunned, especially Duterte’s closest allies, including Senators Bong Go and Bato dela Rosa. All of a sudden they could not offer Duterte a clever comeback, except undermine Robredo from day one by saying she could not possibly kill drug lords (Go) or have the experience to handle the physical violence the job entails (Dela Rosa), as if Go had already killed a drug lord and Dela Rosa accomplished anything through violence. 

From thereon, the ersatz nature of Duterte’s appointment of Robredo as “anti-drug czar” unraveled as a gamble that Duterte could not simply win. On day one after accepting Duterte’s challenge, Robredo came out slugging like a boxer prepared for a 12-round bout. Malacañang was simply not prepared for this challenger. In the first place, Duterte’s dare was mainly a boast that was never intended to be taken seriously. 

Thereafter, for every day that she met with foreign officials, drug rehabilitation advocates, law enforcement officials, and community leaders, Robredo looked every bit “presidential,” taking charge of things where the Duterte administration has only fumbled. She had to be attacked. When that did not work, she had to be intentionally frustrated by putting up roadblocks to her every move. 

This is what pushed things to absurdity. In what could only be described as a ridiculous move to contain Robredo to the fake mandate Duterte conferred on her, PDEA Director Aaron Aquino refused to give her the list of drug lords in the ICAD’s order of battle. Aquino said the supposed anti-drug czar did not need to see the list to fight the drug lords. Social media exploded with sarcastic comments on Aquino’s logic that was uncannily Dutertarian, ie, self-contradictory and outlandish in its dismissive absurdity. 

Malacañang realized it could not go on every day blocking and frustrating Robredo without also looking like clowns. To top it off, Robredo could not simply be frustrated. She went on attempting to fulfill a mandate that was simply a joke that turned sour for the administration. And in taking this joke seriously, Robredo had Duterte’s sycophants realize that the joke was already on them. It was the joke that kept them crying. By now, it was already apparent that Duterte and his minions were in panic. Something had to be done fast. 

Made to look like the idiots that they are 

After barely 3 weeks as ICAD co-chair, Duterte fired  Robredo. Malacañang wove a tapestry of incoherent reasons to explain the President’s action, but by now it was already clear to the whole nation (except of course to the regular die-hard zombie DDS fanatics) that the real reason was the fact that the whole Duterte administration was starting to be seriously threatened by Robredo’s rise to presidentiable stature in such a short period of time. Suddenly, Robredo’s single platform as ICAD co-chair, a position that did not even have real powers, was worth thousands of Go’s recycled Malasakit Centers in launching a presidential candidate. And to think also that Sara was still sulking in Davao, devoid of any national relevance, relegated to criticizing the choice of “Manila”  as the opening song to the SEA Games ceremony, and reminding us of her relation to the ghostly figure that desperately tried to look alive dancing to the same song.

Go, Dela Rosa, and Panelo were already banging their heads against the wall for going along with such a stupid idea as challenging a woman a hundred times more capable than all of them put together. The Davao clique may get away with idiotic governance in the political culture of Mindanao. But they could not have possibly thought that they could assume national office without exposing their ignorance and poverty of mind.

In the end, Robredo not only made Duterte, et al look like idiots – in such a short period of time and for such negligible exertion of potential, Robredo was able to remind Filipinos of what a true leader looked like and what real leadership meant. Her actions were in contrast to the smoke-and-mirrors pageantry that is the Duterte government, and gave a glimpse of the genuine statesmanship and leadership that a nation truly deserves. Robredo taught not only Duterte, et al, a lesson on Machiavelli, but all of us a refresher on Voltaire and Rousseau. 

This is just a Robredo chapter in the epic that has begun. –  Rappler.com

Senator Leila de Lima, a fierce Duterte critic, has been detained in a facility at the Philippine National Police headquarters for more than two years over what she calls trumped-up drug charges.

When my editor asked me to write about books on any of these subjects – security, foreign policy, and governance – as part of a package of year-end stories, I went over my groaning bookshelf and found 3 that I have partly read, with bookmarks still on the pages where my attention stopped and veered to other books.

I returned to these trio which have one thing in common: they are all written by academics in engaging prose, appealing to a wide audience. Isn’t it good news that journalists face competition from academics? After all, the world is a complex place and the colors and hues of issues are changing. There’s a lot to make sense of. 

Two books make geopolitics an accessible subject with both authors navigating the world: one through the lens of the Silk Roads, the other through the vast oceans. With their expansive views, rich wisdom and clear prose, Oxford University history professor Peter Frankopan and former dean of the Fletcher School (Tufts University) James Stavridis help us understand global changes.

China’s rising star

In 2018, Frankopan wrote The New Silk Roads: The Present and Future of the World, an epilogue to his highly successful book, The Silk Roads: A New History of the World.  He takes us away from the old centers of power where Trump and Brexit are causing isolation to the cities where decisions that matter are being made – like Beijing, Moscow, New Delhi, Islamabad, Ankara, and a host of others. 

The central theme of the book is this: Silk Roads, the region lying between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Pacific, are shaping the world’s future and China, with its wealth, power and size, takes star status. Countries in this area are getting together, mainly China with its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Frankopan borrows a quote to describe the BRI – “the   Baskin-Robbins of partnerships, offering flavours for everyone” – so this gives you an idea of the easy prose. 

The chapter, “The Roads to Beijing,” is most interesting as it is an experience that is closest to our part of the world. The author explains China’s aims in undertaking the massive BRI project, among others: 

• China is developing sources of for its domestic needs primarily energy, and also ensures future food supply.
• It needs to deploy its excess capacity in steel, metals, and cement abroad, including its workforce.   
• The BRI raises prospects for Chinese businesses to open up new opportunities for the future.

In other words, the BRI serve’s China’s interest and, along the way, it spreads its influence  through massive loans for infrastructure, buying its way to nations in need. 

‘Sea is one’ 

Stavridis, a retired admiral and former Supreme Allied Commander for Global Operations at NATO, had me by the first pages of his book, Sea Power: The History and Geopolitics of the World’s Oceans (2017). He sailed the Pacific and Atlantic oceans as well as its major tributaries, including the South China Sea, in his younger years with the US Navy. 

To give you a taste of his lyrical prose, here are lines from his opening chapter: “…it [ocean views] is like looking at eternity; to gaze upon it for an hour, a day, a month or a lifetime reminds us gently that our time is limited; and we are but a tiny part of the floating world…warning us not to overimagine the importance of our own small voyages on this earth.” 

Stavridis reminds us that over 70% of the globe is covered by water and that all the great oceans are connected. These facts, which pull us out of our landlocked minds, are why oceans matter in global politics.

First, he says, there’s international trade, 95% of which moves across the oceans. Second, nations contend for influence over these seas – and he devotes a chapter to the South China Sea. Third, the sea is a crime scene as well, where piracy, narcotics and weapons smuggling, illegal dumping of toxic substances, and illegal fishing take place. I particularly find his chapter, “The Outlaw Sea,” highly instructive.

Stavridis  prescribes policy directions for the US on managing tension in the South China Sea: maintaining open communications with China, strengthening its relationship with allies, signing the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and exercising Freedom of Navigation operations which means “overflying Chinese territorial claims and sailing US ships through China’s claimed waterspace.” He ends the book with a chapter on naval strategy for America in the 21st century.

How dictators retain power 

Political scientists Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and Alastair Smith, authors of The Dictator’s Handbook: Why Bad Behavior Is Almost Always Good Politics (2011) offer us an insightful read which can be amusing were it not for the reality that a number of countries, including ours, are under the rule of strongmen. 

They lay down basic rules of politics, backed by examples, anchored on two premises. First, leaders do not lead unilaterally; no leader governs alone. Second, the support of the winning coalition is essential for the leader to survive. 

Here are their rules: 

• Keep your winning coalition as small as possible. Fewer means “more control” and “more discretion over expenditures.” 
• Keep your nominal selectorate as large as possible. This refers to everyone who can vote. The authors write: “...a large selectorate permits a big supply of substitute supporters to put the essentials on notice that they should be loyal and well behaved or else face being replaced.”
• Control the flow of revenue. 
• Pay your key supporters just enough to keep them loyal. 
• Don’t take money out of your supporter’s pockets to make the people’s lives better. Otherwise, they will feel cheated and gun for the leader.

By learning these rules, the hope is citizens can work around these to trounce dictators in the next election. There’s time left, a little over 2 years, for the Philippines.

These books are not exactly stuff to read over the holidays. Still, happy reading! – Rappler.com

(This piece was expanded from remarks the writer gave at the recent Media Nation, an annual conference of news-media practitioners devoted to stock-taking.)

Let me say, first off, that my concern here is not the corrupt press, not the press silenced or coopted through bribery; its salvation lies elsewhere, not within the institution itself. The duty of the press to society is so critical and so pressing it is afforded no time to rehabilitate its own lost souls; indeed, it should have nothing to do with them at all.

Where the press is expected to lose no time is in bringing down its weight, as an independent institutional watchdog on government and all other centers of power, upon falsehood propagators and wrongdoers. With a role so demanding and an adversary so formidable, the press is better off focusing on its redeemable troops, in this case journalists rendered timid, or cowed even, by the current bully regime, and putting them in sharper and sharper fighting form, thus making them increasingly self-assured and resistant to intimidation, every time they go back to action.

The notion that a journalist alone makes his or her own good or bad journalism is ignorant and presumptuous. No journalist is an island, and that is constantly evident in the rigorous filtration process through which every piece of work produced by a journalist, whether reporting or criticism, goes for factual, legal, ethical, and moral vetting, not to mention for editing for clear, lean, and easily understood writing.

At the most fundamental level, the entire news organization takes the credit or the blame for its journalism. Its sense, brand, and style of journalism make for its overall quality, and that quality is rated by 3 basic measures – skill, aptitude, and courage of conviction. And all the elements that make for good or bad journalism are assimilated hierarchically: a lousy owner begets a lousy publisher who begets a lousy editor who begets lousy reporters. And that holds true as much for being lousy as for being cowardly.

Any deficiencies, whether in craft or in conviction, can only proceed from a lack of understanding of the news profession and its place in the larger democratic arrangements. Thus, a susceptibility to intimidation should be correctable by a proper steeping in the values imposed on the profession.

These deficiencies are manifest in the questions that go unasked because they will make a news subject cross, in the falsehoods that go unrectified and implausibilities that go unchallenged, in the running stories that go unpursued to the end, and in reporting so bereft of context and perspective that news consumers get meaningless isolated facts and are afforded no practical understanding of the issues that affect their lives.

A regular beneficiary of this default is the presidential spokesman, Sal Panelo, who, for all his patently simpleminded rationalizations, gets a pass from reporters at his every press conference. No wonder, even on that one day in his life that, on a dare, he decided to commute and was proved shamefully wrong about the traffic crisis he had always minimized, he did not seem humbled one bit.

Surely, if one looked more extensively and purposefully one would find many more illustrations of such shortcomings; even I, by my mere force-of-habit observation, find them not uncommon at all.

I don’t know that in good time our press could be raised to such quality of craft and conviction as to make it worthy of its duty as seeker and teller of the truth in the public interest. All I know is that the effort has to be made – and made now. – Rappler.com