Editor’s note: We love a good conversation. So starting this week, we will be highlighting readers’ comments we deem interesting and relevant to this blog. Readers must identify themselves and not use anonymous names to get higher chances of being picked out from the crowd. Also, best to say where you’re from and put a link to online articles you wish to comment on. Here’s one we picked for this week.
+++
I am so appalled at how the Inquirer editorial on September 7, 2008 can be so careless and wrong about its facts despite its vast network of reporters and contacts who can do even a cursory verification.
The Consortium on Electoral Reforms or CER is not composed of lawmakers from both Houses of Congress. It is purely a civil society network of electoral reform workers and it definitely cannot “railroad” the passage of a bill.
With all due respect, the tone of the editorial makes it look more like a hatchet job against groups that supports reform in our political party system, than one that would encourage debate on this important issue. Where did this piece come from? I understand that Inquirer has to take strong positions on important issues, and although I do not agree with all of them, they are generally well written and informative. This editorial is different.
All that Inquirer should have done was to talk to Mon Casiple, the CER Chair, who is anyway very visible in the media, to ask CER’s positions on the political party reform bill. Inquirer may disagree, but at least it would be an informed position.
The insinuation of malice and sinister motive on CER is a grave insult to its network members who have selfishly worked for electoral reforms for a number of years now. This is plain irresponsible journalism that must be rectified.
I have made it a daily habit to read the Inquirer and its editorials over that of the other papers. Now I am having second thoughts about your paper.
Luie Guia, via readers’ comment.
Loading ...
September 11th, 2008 at 8:12 am
IS THE IDENTITY OF A CONTRIBUTOR REALLY IMPORANT?
I don’t think the editors will ever know if a contributor is using his/her real name and address, except perhaps the email address, so what’s the point of requiring the contributor’s true identity?
There are many reasons why some won’t reveal their identity. Some do it because they don’t want to be responsible for what they write. Others do it to preserve their privacy. I do not subscribe to both reasons because this is a free country and I know it is my right to say what I feel and hold myself responsible for what I say. Just as I have the right to criticize it is also the right of others to criticize me.
Besides, the editors are the ones making the choice which commentaries are worth discussing. What I think is important is the substance of an opinion and not necessarily writer’s true name and address.
September 8th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
NOW: Editor’s note: Requiring those who contribute on their comments to reveal their true identities.
TOMORROW: Publish your home address, phone number, sex, age, relatives, friends and places we can easily find you.
Got the message?
This is not only counter productive. This is insane.
PDI WAKE UP!
September 8th, 2008 at 10:54 am
The editor’s note requiring those who contributes on their comment to divulge their true identity would be counter productive. Primarily, it is because some of the comments cannot be said or written otherwise.
When you call an ace as an ace, when you are sardonic on your comment, just to put across your idea, you take the risk of retribution from those who you criticize. Everyone knows and it is no secret that our government has the penchant to eliminate with whatever means to rid the people who are critical to its policies and perceive corruption which are clear as daylight.
We all know that the people, especially from the Executive branch of our government, in the history of our country, have grown callous and blatant in their desire to personally amass so much wealth through fraudulent means and at the expense of its people.
And these requires strong words, acerbic word, derogatory words, for politicians who no longer feel in their face any gain of shame for what abuses they do to their people. Why then would I reveal myself, my true identity to these scoundrels?
If they think otherwise regarding these hypo-critical comments they receive from the public, if they feel slighted, all it takes is to refute the comments by writing back on these news section.
It is wrong for them to stay silent and leave the comments towards a natural death.
Needless to say, it is well known that ISAP is monitoring all newspapers, telephone, cell phone conversations and any communication there is.
Since the issues brought out here concerns them, then let it be. Even Senator Enrile, Ex Comelec Commissioner Abalos, and even the first gentleman insinuates that they have access to private communications. They have ISAP do the dirty job of monitoring particular communications.
The activity of ISAP is more to the caprice of these politicians rather than national security.
Give me a feedback and if you insist that I identify myself, then I will just forever remain silent.
Content yourself paying P682 Billion pesos government debt for 2009 alone.
September 8th, 2008 at 10:50 am
The editor’s note requiring those who contributes on their comment to divulge their true identity would be counter productive. Primarily, it is because some of the comments cannot be said or written otherwise.
When you call an ace as an ace, when you are sardonic on your comment, just to put across your idea, you take the risk of retribution from those who you criticize. Everyone knows and it is no secret that our government has the penchant to eliminate with whatever means to rid the people who are critical to its policies and perceive corruption which are clear as daylight.
We all know that the people, especially from the Executive branch of our government, in the history of our country, have grown callous and blatant in their desire to personally amass so much wealth through fraudulent means and at the expense of its people.
And these requires strong words, acerbic word, derogatory words, for politicians who no longer feel in their face any gain of shame for what abuses they do to their people. Why then would I reveal myself, my true identity to these scoundrels?
If they think otherwise regarding these hypo-critical comments they receive from the public, if they feel slighted, all it takes is to refute the comments by writing back on these news section.
It is wrong for them to stay silent and leave the comments towards a natural death.
Needless to say, it is well known that ISAP is monitoring all newspapers, telephone, cell phone conversations and any communication there is.
Since the issues brought out here concerns them, then let it be. Even Senator Enrile, Ex Commelec Commissioner Abalos, and even the first gentleman insinuates that they have access to private communications. They have ISAP do the dirty job of monitoring particular communications of interest.
The activity of ISAP is more to the caprice of these politicians rather than national security.
Give me a feedback and if you insist that I identify myself, then I will just forever remain silent. Content yourself paying P682 Billion pesos government debt for 2009 alone.
September 7th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Just a correction of the second to the last paragraph what I earlier wrote:
“The insinuation of malice and sinister motive on CER is a grave insult to its network members who have selflessly (not selfishly) worked for electoral reforms for a number of years now. This is plain irresponsible journalism that must be rectified.”
My apologies for the error, which may have been brought about by my frustration.