As the 2025 National and Local Elections (NLE) looms closer, personal campaigns and interviews sporting statements that either make or break electoral aspirants take the spotlight.
Yet, beyond it all, this season likewise marks what seems to be the exacerbation of the already worsening case of misinformation—with answers bended with miscontextualization and careless lines of questioning highlighting interviews to pursue the not-so-truth-centered agenda of certain bodies.
In the “Tanong ng Bayan” senatorial interviews by GMA, it headlined “PH had no gain from women leaders Cory, Gloria,” summarizing labor leader and activist Leody De Guzman’s response to the latter’s response on the question of if he stands by his belief that the country had no gain from Corazon Aquino’s and Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s presidencies—both serving post-EDSA revolutions.
For De Guzman, this change in register through the said headline painted him instead as a “misogynistic.” For him, the said reporting is also a “violation” of journalistic standards if actual reporting turns out to only be sloppy or, worse, malicious.
“Kung ito ay sadya o hindi, kung malisyoso o pagiging “sloppy” lamang (na kasalanan sa sinumang taga-media na sumusunod sa pinakamataas na journalism standards) ay kayo lang ang makapagsasabi,” the senatorial aspirant said in his Facebook statement.
Aside from De Guzman, the interviews also featured inquiries thrown to incumbent Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT-Teachers) Party-list Representative France Castro and former Bayan Muna Representative Teodoro “Teddy” Acevedo Casiño—both questions underlie amplification of red-tagging in the media.
In separate questioning, Castro was asked the question, “Paano niyo dedepansahan ang inyong sarili sa paratang na isa kayong komunista?”
Casiño, in a similar way of query, was asked why he would not just condemn the Communist Party of the Philippines – New People’s Army (CPP-NPA).
To say the least, these questions appear as pseudo-critical. Instead of discussing why these certain candidates support armed movements and what actions the government can do to address their calls given that those who are part of rebel groups are victims of injustice, asking such queries go instead by the red-tagging narratives of the government—vilifying activists and bending facts about their fights and genuine causes.
When we bend a fact and choose a facet of it to only pursue what is convenient and within our personal (rather than the public) agenda—when in fact we are supposed to champion critical reporting—we become no different to the gigantic institutions of misinformation and malicious reportage that we are trying to dismantle.
As we move towards another election season, the heavy responsibility lies upon those whose duty is to question and scrutinize—journalists, most especially—to give critical analysis that equally highlights the strengths and defines the flaws for voters to decide upon who to vote for.
Especially in today’s political climate where misinformation and redtagging already sit alongside elected officials in the government, the responsibility is upon reporters to carefully dissect and angle a candidate’s response; to simultaneously word with criticality and sensitivity questions that will actually enlighten the masses with the truth.
Crucial—if the 2025 NLE is to be put into a word. From thereon, we see and value the importance of town halls and forums to guide us in selecting those who could actually serve the country, and whose intent is for the welfare of the people, especially the ordinary masses.
We are not just choosing a leader as we elect, but also selecting the truth we intend to uphold. If our reporting fails through bended facts, missed out truths, and the amplifications of distortions—even far before the elections, the vote of the people and the voice of truth have already lost.
Godwin Pring is the editor-in-chief of The Angelite for the Publication Year 2024-2025, and writes opinions under the column “God ‘in the Masses.”
The views and opinion of the editor does not necessarily reflect those of the publication.
