News or feature reports on Red-tagging, other forms of hate speech (advance notice of bonuses, Media Monitor)

News or feature reports on Red-tagging, other forms of hate speech (advance notice of bonuses, Media Monitor)

      A review of news stories or feature reports on Red-tagging and other forms of hate speech or verbal attacks (whether as jokes, speeches, interpersonal communication) based on gender or gender identity, race, religion, ethnic origin, national origin, disability, physical appearance, etc.

     An example is the following news feature (a GOOD EXAMPLE) on Philippine Star:
From Philippine Star “For Lumad schools, even holding class is a struggle” by Jonathan de Santos ( – July 11, 2018 – 11:33am at

is a news report on Red-tagging by President Duterte against the Lumads. The news feature is a GOOD EXAMPLE and illustrates the following SPJ provisions:
“-Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable. Give voice to the voiceless.” (SPJ 2014)
“– Boldly tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience. Seek sources whose voices we seldom hear.” (SPJ 2014)
Here are portions of the article (set here in itals) :
    President Rodrigo Duterte, a year ago, threatened to bomb Lumad schools—volunteer-run schools for indigenous peoples’ communities in remote parts of Mindanao—for, he said, indoctrinating children into socialism.
     “I will use the armed forces, the Philippine Air force. I’ll really have those bombed… because you are operating illegally and you are teaching the children to rebel against government,” he said in remarks that were later walked back after criticism from rights groups and from representatives of the communities themselves.
    xxx Often set up in what the Department of Education calls Geographically Isolated and Disadvantaged Areas that government schools may not be able to reach, the Lumad schools provide lessons in numeracy, literacy and skills like carpentry, sewing and agriculture.
      xxx Education, not assimilation
       But indigenous peoples’ education—and the Lumad schools—is not new, nor necessarily a form of rebellion. It requires, however, a shift in perspective that is, in a way, a revolution away from a one-size-fits-all curriculum.
      One way to look at IP education, Maria Lourie Victor with the Department of Education’s Indigenous Peoples Education Office said, is through the monggo and gumamela.
      For generations of Filipino students, they were the go-to learning aids for lessons on plants. Their use, though, takes for granted that these are available and familiar across the country’s more than 7,000 islands.
     Victor said in an interview with that although the old curriculum worked, it was prescriptive and not always culturally appropriate.

     Beyond the choice of teaching aids, she said, the old curriculum risked erasing an IP group’s own culture and history. xxx (From the Philippine Star)

Other bonus topics include:

A review of news stories or feature reports, opinion, etc. on the “Buwan ng Wika) (please render the discussion in Filipino)

    A review of news stories, feature reports, etc. on superstition and the occult (illustrating Article 13 of the KBP Broadcast Code


   (the list of bonus topics will again be provided when the window for the media monitor is opened next week). 



(UPDATED) 12th Media Monitor here with new, additional bonus topics


The 12th Media Monitor here with new, additional bonus topics

if on mobile device, optionally, pls click “Listen in browser” on the soundcloud pod below to play “a traditional Jamaican song about dock workers who worked throughout the night loading bananas onto ships” originally performed by Harry Belafonte (this is a cover)


     (UPDATED) The  12th Media Monitor (either regular or bonus) can be posted here, with deadline extended to Friday May 4 at 5pm. Exams will push thru as scheduled and as announced two weeks ago.

    The following are additional, new bonus topics that can be used for any media monitor post provided that a bonus topic can be taken up only once:

    Additional new bonus topics (part of the list already provided: choose any topic from the list provided, including the following) A) A review of any social media post of any netizen on the recently concluded student council elections (see details below) B) a review of the media coverage of the May 1 Labor Day activities (see details below); or of any outdoor media in connection with Labor Day activities (see details below):
        A)Bonus topic on social media: A review of any social media post of any netizen, whether identified or anonymous, whether group or individual (on FB or Twitter or IG or WordPress or YouTube, etc) on the recently concluded student council elections, University or college level, using the FB community standards, Twitter rules, etc, such as:
      FB Community Standards which include the following: “We are committed to removing content that encourages real-world harm, including (but not limited to) physical, financial, and emotional injury… we will allow content that might otherwise violate our standards if we feel that it is newsworthy, significant, or important to the public interest. xxx Violence: We remove content, disable accounts, and work with law enforcement when we believe there is a genuine risk of physical harm or direct threats to public safety… Terrorist activity, Organized hate, Mass or serial murder, Human trafficking, Organized violence or criminal activity. xxx SAFETY xxx We remove any content that identifies and negatively targets victims or survivors of self-injury or suicide seriously, humorously, or rhetorically. xxx We do not allow content that sexually exploits or endangers children. xxx we remove content that depicts, threatens or promotes sexual violence, sexual assault, or sexual exploitation, while also allowing space for victims to share their experiences. We remove content that displays, advocates for, or coordinates sexual acts with non-consenting parties or commercial sexual services. xxx Hate speech. We define hate speech as a direct attack on people based on what we call protected characteristics — race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, sex, gender, gender identity, and serious disability or disease. Bullying. We will remove content that purposefully targets private individuals with the intention of degrading or shaming them. We recognize that bullying can be especially harmful to minors, and our policies provide heightened protection for minors because they are more vulnerable and susceptible to online bullying. In certain instances, we require the individual who is the target of bullying to report content to us before removing it… Our bullying policies do not apply to public figures because we want to allow discourse, which often includes critical discussion of people who are featured in the news or who have a large public audience. Discussion of public figures nonetheless must comply with our Community Standards, and we will remove content about public figures that violates other policies, including hate speech or credible threats. xxx. Harassment.We do not tolerate harassment on Facebook … Our harassment policy applies to both public and private individuals because we want to prevent unwanted or malicious contact on the platform. Context and intent matter, and we allow people to share and re-share posts if it is clear that something was shared in order to condemn or draw attention to harassment. In addition to reporting such behavior and content, we encourage people to use tools available on Facebook to help protect against it. xxx Privacy. Privacy and the protection of personal information are fundamentally important values for Facebook… You should not post personal or confidential information about others without first getting their consent. We also provide people ways to report imagery that they believe to be in violation of their privacy rights. Graphic violence. We remove content that glorifies violence or celebrates the suffering or humiliation of others because it may create an environment that discourages participation. Cruel and insensitive.We have higher expectations for content that we call cruel and insensitive, which we define as content that targets victims of serious physical or emotional harm. Misrepresentation. … That’s why we require people to connect on Facebook using the name they go by in everyday life. xxx False news. False News. Reducing the spread of false news on Facebook is a responsibility that we take seriously. We also recognize that this is a challenging and sensitive issue. We want to help people stay informed without stifling productive public discourse. There is also a fine line between false news and satire or opinion. For these reasons, we don’t remove false news from Facebook but instead, significantly reduce its distribution by showing it lower in the News Feed.”
        Twitter Rules which include the following: “Abusive behavior. xxx we prohibit behavior that crosses the line into abuse, including behavior that harasses, intimidates, or uses fear to silence another user’s voice… Context matters when evaluating for abusive behavior and determining appropriate enforcement actions. Factors we may take into consideration include, but are not limited to whether: the behavior is targeted at an individual or group of people; the report has been filed by the target of the abuse or a bystander; the behavior is newsworthy and in the legitimate public interest. xxx Violence: You may not make specific threats of violence or wish for the serious physical harm, death, or disease of an individual or group of people. xxx Abuse and hateful conduct.Abuse: You may not engage in the targeted harassment of someone, or incite other people to do so. We consider abusive behavior an attempt to harass, intimidate, or silence someone else’s voice. xxx Unwanted sexual advances: You may not direct abuse at someone by sending unwanted sexual content, objectifying them in a sexually explicit manner, or otherwise engaging in sexual misconduct. xxx Hateful conduct: You may not promote violence against, threaten, or harass other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease. xxx Hateful imagery and display names: You may not use hateful images or symbols in your profile image or profile header. You also may not use your username, display name, or profile bio to engage in abusive behavior, such as targeted harassment or expressing hate towards a person, group, or protected category. xxx Private information: You may not publish or post other people’s private information without their express authorization and permission. xxx Impersonation. You may not impersonate individuals, groups, or organizations in a manner that is intended to or does mislead, confuse, or deceive others. xxx”

       B)Bonus topic on Labor Day: A review of the media coverage of the May 1 Labor Day activities applying the KBP Broadcast Code, the MTRCB Standards, the the SPJ, PPI Codes, etc.; or a review of outdoor media (live performances, outdoor public assemblies, billboard/streamers/tarp/effigy/posters in connection with Labor Day activities applying the following  principles of ethics of advocacy work derived from a leading internationally known public relations society as applicable to advocacy work (quote the paragraph you are using as basis of your review/evaluation)
    ADVOCACY (as stated: for outdoor media, do not use this for reviews of news reports)
Strive to serve the public interest by acting responsibly for the sectors they represent.
Provide a voice in the marketplace of ideas, facts, and viewpoints to aid informed public debate.
Adhere to the highest standards of accuracy and truth in advancing the interests of the sectors they represent and in communicating with the public.
Acquire and use responsibly all specialized knowledge and experience.
Advance one’s skills and work attitude through continued professional development, research, and education.
Build mutual understanding, credibility, and relationships among a wide array of institutions and audiences.
Provide objective advice to the sectors they represent.
Be accountable for one’s actions.
Be faithful to the sectors they represent, while honoring the obligation to serve the public interest.
Deal fairly with the sectors they represent, with competitors, peers, the media, and the general public.
Respect all opinions and support the right of free expression.
Do not repeat bonus posts or bonus titles.

      Stay refreshed: Always protect your skin from the sun and carry a bottle of clean, drinking water!

11th Media Monitor here (regular or bonus) w additional new bonus topic: Advertisements

if on mobile device, optionally, you may click “Listen on browser” on the soundcloud pod below to play this week’s OPM: Hale, “Blue Sky”…



The 11th Media Monitor can now be posted here (either regular or any of the bonus topics), provided only one post per week will be credited for the week; a late post will be recorded under the next week’s score sheet and will not be counted for the current week (if late); provided further that a bonus topic can be discussed only once by a class member and any “repeated” bonus topic will be credited as a regular and not a bonus post.

    The deadline for this week is extended to Thursday April 26 at 5pm.

    The additional new bonus topic is: An original review of a current advertisement of any consumer product, or of a public service announcement, or of a publicity material including outdoor media; the subject or material should be current or being shown/exhibited right now.

     Stay hydrated and ventilated, and wear light, soft clothing everyone!


10th Media Monitor here (deadline extended to Friday up tp 5pm Apr20

if on mobile device, optionally, you may click “Listen in browser” on the soundcloud pod below to play the OPM chosen for this post… 



     The 10th Media Monitor can now be posted here with deadline extended to Friday up to 5pm of that day April 20, 2018. (Late posts, as stated before, will be considered submitted for the next media monitor and are a forfeit for the current one — to be fair to class members who meet deadlines and are diligent).

    A regular or a bonus post may be submitted but not both. Only one media monitor post per week will be credited.

     No repetition of  bonus topics will be allowed (the second “repeated” bonus topic will be credited as a regular and not a bonus post).l 

    The following is an additional bonus topic/title, and it is not a review of media content but a critical analysis on your part of Facebook-Rappler-VeraFiles team-up to fact-check content on Facebook. In particular, please evaluate the process by which the factchecking will be done, as reported in Rappler, as follows:

      “Rappler and Vera Files will review flagged stories. These will be placed lower in the News Feed and will be less visible.” (from Facebook partners with Rappler, Vera Files for fact-checking program”, Apr. 12, 2018, at  )

(my notes: The fact-checkers will determine “falsehood” and will most probably rank the stories based on determination of “falsehood”: Those with a low ranking will be less visible in the News Feed of “friends and followers”).
FIRST GUIDE QUESTION FOR YOUR COMMENTARY: Do you see any problem with your post not appearing in the News Feed of your friends and followers based on being ranked as low in terms of “truthfulness” and “falsehood”? Explain using the theories of the press.
      The process is further described as follows: “People who will try share a fake story will receive a notification that the post has been determined by the fact checker to be false.
“For pages that frequently share false stories, their post distribution will be reduced and their ability to monetize and advertise will likely be removed.” (Ibid)
SECOND GUIDE QUESTION FOR YOUR COMMENTARY: Using the many layers and standards of the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics (under “Seek the truth and Report it”, which includes accuracy, context, avoiding oversimplification, identifying sources, striving for balance and fairness, etc.) do you see any tricky issues in simply determining “falsehood”, or determining that a post is false? Explain using examples.

     Now is the time to show your critical discourse savvy in your commentary, for bonus points. 

      Happy discoursing!