BACOLOD CITY — With my piece last Saturday on Congressman Monico Puentevella’s bill to compel media to air or print the side of any one who has been criticized or accused of doing wrong, media friends twitted me.

They told me, while others ignored Monico and don’t give a hoot to his bill, there I was reacting which I should not, like others who said if the bill is passed into a law, this can be easily declared unconstitutional by the Court.

It’s very painful to be ignored, as if you are nothing. I would rather honor Monico with a reaction that the bill will not help the politicians, even granting without admitting the Constitution is wrong when it says, “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, expression or of the press.”

In Manila, except The Philippine Daily Inquirer, I did not read about it in other papers. One media man said, probably Congressman Puentevella only wants to scare local media. But will scaring work with media?

* * *

Monico’s bill penalizes violators with up to P200,000 fine and an imprisonment of up to 30 days, a publication to be shut down for a month. His bill calls for “fair play” and “equal treatment.”

Fair play and equal treatment are the foundation of the success of media organizations. Without it you will not get the public support.

The public knows whether a paper is giving fair play or not. It also knows whether it is a mouthpiece of someone. Otherwise politicians have their publication. You can’t fool people.

I have seen papers come and go. Those which folded up lost readership. And they lost readership because they lost credibility. They could not stand up to political pressures.

* * *

My point here is, even if you take the unconstitutionality out, the proposed law has impracticalities. The Inquirer editorial called the bill a “Poisoned Chalice.” The term means something that works to one’s disadvantage. This is used in literature.

In Shakespear’s “Hamlet,” a poisoned chalice was given to Hamlet but Gertrude drank it and died.

That’s why I am telling the Congressman despite some people telling me to ignore him. He might tell me later, why didn’t I tell him?

An example of Inquirer: if a story is published that merits a banner line derogatory to Puentevella, his reply once delivered has to be a banner line, too, and not even a nuclear explosion in Metro Manila can nudge it away from a prominent space in the front page.

And, added Inquirer, if a columnist criticizes him, the space is surrendered to him and the columnist forfeits his way.

* * *

But as a columnist, I will be different. I will give way to him. I am even inviting him to reply, of course in writing, to my columns, in full but not to exceed the space of the column.

Then I will answer him. And he will answer me and we will keep on answering each other. People will be interested to read them.

The only problem is can he sustain it? I sustained writing a column six days a week for the last 26 years.

I will not accept the answer of other people. It must be his and signed by him. And supposing all columnists attack him, Monico must answer them, too?

They will ask Monico to answer them reasoning out they are afraid of the P200,000 fine, the imprisonment of 30 days and the suspension of their publication. You see the impracticality?

Everyone will enjoy getting answers from Monico.

Most probably they will keep quiet and shut out Monico in their publication. But that is bad for a politician and unfair to media.

* * *

Now, the editorial that criticizes. The answer which is actually a letter to the editor will be used as editorial. This will be fun too.

Especially if you get a witty editor. He will publish the letter but one witty retort can make the letter writer a laughing stock.

Actually that’s what I am afraid of. They make a laughing stock of our Congressman.

But I am not stopping Congressman Puentevella from his advocacy. Let him pursue it. It’s just enough that I say my piece in the honest belief that it will help him.

But if he considers this piece and the one last Saturday as not to his liking, I welcome his writers answer and I will give him equal space.

Later I will write about how experts in communication among earlier politicians handled naughty, antagonistic, uncooperative media people with finesse.

Leave a Reply