Ethics Second Media Monitor, regular or bonus but not both (see instructions stated in the discussion under the First Media Monitor) with deadline on Feb. 16, 2019 at 11:59pm (this is to give a heads up to everyone especially to class members who were absent and could not avail of the points for the topic under the First Media Monitor).

   For the regular post: Please evaluate any media content using the SPJ Code of Ethics, the Philippine Press Code of Ethics (PPI)  (you may either read in advance or wait until we discuss the topic this week) or the Philippine Press Expanded Code of Ethics.

    For the bonus post: Please choose one from any of the Bonus Titles (see list provided under  the discussion on the First Media Monitor), provided that no class member may use the same bonus topic more than once (for example, do not keep posting on advertorials, your extra posts (the second and succeeding on the same repeated bonus topic will be graded as regular posts, not as bonus).

   As stated repeatedly, late posts will not be given points for the week — which would be considered defaulted if late. The late post however will be considered for the next week as “advanced”, subject to the limit of only one post per week shall be given points. The one weekly post may either be  regular or bonus but not both — any extra post will be moved to the next week for points.

      Advanced non-commercialized Happy Valentines!

(Photo provided by Pexels from the WordPress Free Stock Photo Library)


10 thoughts on “Ethics 2nd Media Monitor (regular or bonus but not both) Deadline Feb.16

  1. [2nd Media Monitor – Bonus – News Coverage of the Elections]

    Grab Philippines prohibits election campaign ads on cars

    On the 2nd of February 2019, Rappler released a news report about Grab Philippines prohibiting campaign ads on their drivers’ cars. According to the report, Grab iterates that they are “a non-partisan company” and thus prohibit political promotions that can associate the company with any political color. The report also shows sourced photos displaying examples of said political advertisements which include faces of political figures.

    The news report, unfortunately, did a mistake; it did not state where did they source the photos. It only said that the photos were sent to Rappler. According to the SPJ Code of Ethics, it is important to “identify sources clearly” because “the public is entitled to as much information as possible to judge the reliability and motivations of sources.” It is possible that the photos were sent to frame up senatorial candidates, so it is important to state where the photos were sourced specifically.

    What the news report did right, though, was to “provide context” according to the SPJ Code of Ethics and to “scrupulously report and interpret the news, taking care not to suppress essential facts nor to distort the truth by omission or improper emphasis” according to the Philippine Press Institute (PPI) Code of Ethics. While one can argue that the news report failed to get the side of the driver, there is no need since the driver was not identified anyway. Furthermore, the news report included the following statement from Grab Philippines public affairs head Leo Gonzales: “While we respect our driver-partners’ political preferences, we reserve the right to take corresponding actions to any violation of our company policies.” This illustrates that the driver, and not the candidates themselves, are responsible for the infraction.

    The news report can be found at

  2. 2nd Media Monitor – Bonus – News Coverage of the Elections

    Duterte officially endorses 11 chosen candidates for May 2019
    link to the article:

    Rappler published an article last Febuary 14, 2019 about the endorsement of candidates of President Duterte. In the article, an issue was raised because former senator Jinggoy Estrada whom President Duterte previously endorsed, was not at all mentioned as one of his senatorial bets. The journalist asked the president about this and have quoted his answer in the article.

    In the 2014 SPJ code of ethics, “fair and accurate” reporting is given importance. In this case, having another figure as a topic in the article, Rappler must have also tried to seek former senator Estrada’s opinion and stance and must not have stopped by citing one side of the story to avoid misrepresentation and to maintain the reportage’s balance.

  3. Media Monitor 2

    TV Patrol Episode 13 Feb 2019; reporting of “Pulis tinambangan habang nagmamaneho sa Makati”


    The reporting talked about the murder of a police officer by a riding-in-tandem in play daylight. The reporting was done by Zian Abrosio. The news scoop clearly stated the facts of the incident by describing the scene, and even giving a background of the victim. Though the news scoop tried to be as objective as possible by getting sides of all possible parties – friends and workmates – there are still no solid indicated and proven motive. I even felt that the reporter was forcebly leading by insisting that the crime was drug-related even though there was no clear indication thereof. There was a slight blur of the verification of information, a clear violation of SPJ’s code of ethics. Furthermore, the report focused more on possible motives than that of possible suspects that may contribute to the resolution of the case.

  4. For Trisha: Thank you for your media monitoring. By the way, “serve as watchdog” is not a bonus topic — this would be considered as a regular post and not a bonus post. Tnx. -marichu
    xxx xxx xxx
    BONUS TITLE: Serve as watchdog over public affairs

    Newsbreak, the investigative and research arm of Rappler, published an article detailing the different attacks on press freedom and use of political power to muzzle journalist-critics since Duterte assumed presidency. The data released was the news organization’s response to Duterte denying his being a dictator and stating that he “welcomes criticisms as part of the realm of politics.” According to the Rappler research team, the minimum of 85 press-related attacks under his administration far exceeds the cases recorded in previous administrations. Journalists denounced attempts to discredit their work by being called “presstitutes” and “dilawans” among many other derogatory terms which have become viral. Aside from cyberattacks launched against news institutions by troll netizens, there were also numerous instances of politicians lambasting the media which were shown to have cultivated negative sentiments against critical journalists. This also serves as a challenge for the readers to be protective of press freedom as it is a pillar of democracy.

  5. Media Monitor 2: Ilocos Norte Vice Gubernatorial bet Mariano Marcos II dies – News coverage of Inquirer in their website – February 16 2019


    Proper context was given, Inquirer relayed who the person was, provided his whole full name, his age, his family background (son of the brother of Ferdinand Marcos) and why he is newsworthy/important. However there was one throw-away line about Marcos’s supposed itinerary that they said came from ‘sources’. These sources were never attributed nor named. Other sources were attributed, saying that they came from Marcos’s office itself.


    Covering death in news stories is a tricky subject so that is why I chose this news story. Inquirer was brief and to the point with the facts they presented. They just relayed when he died, where he died, and the cause of death. They didn’t describe the scenario, nor did they give any platitudes. They named his widow and relayed he left 3 children behind.

  6. MEDIA MONITOR 2 – Bonus
    Reporting on Surveys

    “Bong Go Breaks into May 2019 winning Circle – Pulse Asia”

    The news article, written by Camille Elemia from Rappler, reports about the survey conducted by the Pulse Asia in January 2019. The title and the lead of the article are focused on the well-known right-hand man of the president and a current senatorial candidate Bong Go who made it to the 6th-12th spot from his previous ranking of the 14th-16th spot. This huge leap may be the reason why the journalist decided to focus the lead on Go. The report has followed the Expanded Philippine Journalist Code of Ethics and Guidelines on Reporting Survey from AP 2018 Style Book (Source: The journalist clearly stated who conducted the survey, when it is conducted, the method of the survey, and the sample size which is 1 800 adult respondents. The error of margin was also mentioned and the comparisons from previous surveys were valid since all are conducted by only one agency, which is the Pulse Asia. It is also appropriate that the news article included the issues during the time of the survey that might have an influence on the respondents’ answers at the end of the report.

    The journalist has mostly followed proper ethical rules in reporting surveys; however, it failed to state the question/s that was asked. The question/s is important in reporting surveys since it is where the respondents’ answers were based so it must be therefore mentioned in the news article.



    On January, Rappler posted an article about how senatorial bets are faring in Pulse Asia’s December election survey. The article interpreted data from the survey (identified the ‘Magic 12’), and compared it to past surveys. Since this report made use of surveys, I will assess how it used surveys through the Code of Professional and Ethical Conduct of the Philippine Press Institute.

    The article indicated who conducted the survey (Pulse Asia), and provided a graph to easily compare data from past surveys but failed to indicate the latest survey’s sampling size, and margin of error. Since the report interpreted the data, it also considered the rule in considering a candidate as a lead in elections (more than twice the margin of error). The report also successfully explained the data clearly, since scientific polls can be hard to understand by the general readership.

    With a few considerations, it can be concluded that the report generally made use of the survey ethically.


    Link to the article:

    On the 2nd of February 2019, published a news article about Kontra Daya, an election watchdog group, which claims that nearly half of the party-list groups have connections with powerful politicians and business figures. On the other hand, many party-lists that were organized by those who actually belong to the marginalized sectors were not given a chance to participate in the upcoming elections.

    The article, however, lacks many details regarding the topic. According to the SPJ Code of Ethics, it is important to “verify information before releasing it”. The news report only relied on the information given by Kontra Daya. It would have been better if they consulted other watchdog groups or conducted their own investigation regarding this matter. Furthermore, the SPJ Code of Ethics also stresses out the need to “diligently seek the subjects of news coverage to allow them to respond to criticism or allegations of wrongdoing.” did not report the side of the mentioned party-list groups and politicians nor created a follow-up article of their responses. The news report also failed to provide a proper context and seemed to be oversimplified. only provided 4 names of the alleged party-list groups. Given the limited information, it violated not only the SPJ Code of Ethics, but also PPI’s which is to “fight vigorously for public access to information”.

  9. Media Monitor 2 – Bonus:

    “Reelectionists, pro-admin candidates in top 15″ – Feb. 16, 2019

    Read more: 

    Reporting on Surveys –

    On Seeking the Truth And Reporting it: Survey reports have to constantly be accurate. This article provides a good nuancing of the credibility you would find on a Pulse Asia Survey on elections. It provided margins of error, and other survey percentages were explained. The article also talked about Di Lima’s appeal and insight on the flaws of the election being a “popularity contest” a different perspective was introduced.

    On Citing Sources – The article should have, however, tackle on how exactly the demographic was picked, instead of simply dismissing it as ‘nationwide’. The article could have been better if it carefully reported on the voting counts of Luzon, Visayas, Mindanao, as well as Brackets A-E, to craft a nuanced explanation of the survey.

  10. For Trisha: Thank you for your media monitoring. By the way, “serve as watchdog” is not a bonus topic — this would be considered as a regular post and not a bonus post. Tnx. -marichu

If the comment posted does not appear here, that's because COMMENTS WITH SEVERAL HYPERLINKS ARE DETAINED BY AKISMET AT THE SPAM FOLDER.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.