Ombudsman on Freedom of Expression in a post-truth era
SPEAKING before some 500 communication scholars, media professionals, educators, and students from several countries in Asia at the AMIC Conference held last week at Miriam College, Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales, who was keynote speaker, underscored the need to rethink communication especially today – a time she describes as an era when truth does not really matter anymore.
“New communication tools are being used to stir up hate towards individuals and groups which are different, politically and culturally, leaving little room for tolerance, and with much pride, prejudice, and bigotry,” she said. “It also seems that a big part of the population would rather believe, like, and share fake news sites, and echo the baseless assertions, dubious, albeit popular bloggers. But bloggers do not abide by the basic journalism tenets of accuracy and verification. Objective facts are regarded as less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief, and rational discussions become irrelevant,” she noted.
“Does falsehood rather than the truth resonate?” Do people listen only to what they want to hear and believe? she asked, as she gave some illustrations such as how Facebook and Twitter have become a battleground for propagandists, apologists, and, more alarming, trolls and “bots.” She then urged the participants to help make their audiences media literate, enabling them to discern, distinguish, and detect false narratives, especially the “systematic efforts to rewrite history.”
And she sees the need to craft a compelling message. Which now should be done by the Office of the Ombudsman, a constitutional body mandated to fight corruption. Such message should resonate with the people.
But she has yet to discover that “magic formula” that would make Filipinos, especially the marginalized, become more attentive to the evils of corruption. “It is not the government that is being robbed by the corrupt. It is the street vendor, classroom teacher, student, the jeepney driver, the public health nurse, and similar people who are being robbed,” she noted. She realized that the poor may not be aware of the impact of corruption on them, but are unable to protest because they are busy eking out a living for themselves and their families. But the better-off remain apathetic to corruption, and human rights violations as they are comfortably situated. Until a next strategy strikes, and a loved one becomes the victim.
“Every peso stolen from the public coffers means few medicines for indigent patients, fewer classrooms, fewer farm-to-market roads, fewer food packs for victims of disasters. Engaging in grand corruption is rewarding oneself big time for depriving and denying the fundamental human rights of others,” she said.
At the plenary on the “post-truth era,” speakers noted the need for measures to combat false news. Yvonne Chua, co-founder of Vera Files, observed that fact-checking is now part of the post-truth era and deal primarily with alternative facts. The latter consists of false claims, misleading content, fake context, spin, and fake news. And often they are due to ideological and party differences, and shoddy journalism. She also noted a Stanford content analysis finding stating that in 2016, there was a total of 37.6 million shares of fake news.
Peixin Cao, professor of communication at the University of China, noted that to understand the state of freedom of expression in China, one has to examine historical perspectives – the various class struggles, worker-peasant alliances, migration, revolutions, ownership of media, and related aspects of Chinese history. Cao note the 7 taboos that university professors must always observe, and they are: universal values, freedom of expression, civil societies, citizens’ rights, historical mistakes of party, peaceful and noble bourgeois, and judicial independence.
From these taboos, we can have a better understanding of the challenges now facing the Philippines and China as well as other claimants in the South China Sea conflict.
Cherian George of Hong Kong Baptist University cited contextual concerns in analyzing disinformation such as being aware of the motives of those who set the agenda for research and policy. What are their sources in addition to government, business, academic, and non-state actors? What is their resource capability?
On the people side, the response should be that of strengthening the capacity to deal with disinformation; from the media, faster, wider access to more factual information, as well as building public trust; and from sources, exposing misinformation.