Rappler’s Ressa mistaken about death of democracy

in 1992, the late Lee Kuan Yew implied that the Philippines had too much democracy and not enough discipline, that our style of government was an impediment to progress. the then-senior minister of Singapore spoke at a business conference in manila, where he said, “i believe that what a country needs to develop is discipline more than democracy. the exuberance of democracy leads to undisciplined and disorderly conditions which are inimical to development.”

those views are in stark contrast with those of Rappler’s maria Ressa, who appeared on BBC’s hARDtalk last week when she argued that democracy in the Philippines was “essentially dead,” that it had perished from “a thousand cuts.” She was, of course, reacting to her recent conviction on cyberlibel. She continued to blame President Rodrigo Duterte for the supposed harassment, DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE CASE WAS fiLED BY A PRIVATE BUSINESSMAN whom Rappler had linked to the late Chief Justice Renato Corona. her conviction is presumably on appeal and is one of the several cases that she and her news website are currently facing.

if it seems improbable that the state of Philippine democracy would swing from too much to virtually dead in less than 30 years, it probably is. granted, democracy in this country can be faulted for many things, and yes, it is far from perfect. But for ms. Ressa to posit that it is dead is not only inaccurate but also self-serving given her predicament.

in fact, ms. Ressa herself presented evidence against her claim by mentioning that Rappler had “doubled down” on its investigative reporting against the Duterte government, that its relentless reporting has been continuing, even without her giving out the daily assignments. Clearly, these would be impossible if democracy is indeed dead and that Filipinos are living under a climate of fear as she claimed.

Biased views

ms. Ressa undermines herself by showing obvious bias against President Duterte. in her BBC interview, she refused to acknowledge that the President enjoys an overwhelming mandate, conceding only that he won by plurality in 2016.

THOSE ELECTIONS, TO QUOTE RAPPLER’S fiGURES THEMSELVES, SHOWED that mr. Duterte garnered some 6 million votes over the candidate who came in second. And four years into his term, President Duterte has maintained high approval and satisfaction ratings in national surveys. An objective journalist would at least acknowledge these facts, even if he or she disagreed with the President over political and other issues.

instead of acknowledgement, ms. Ressa depicted those who support or approve of President Duterte as a mindless swarm conditioned by government propaganda and weaponized by social media against self-proclaimed champions of freedom and democracy. not surprisingly, she offered no evidence to support this.

her insinuation that Filipinos are somehow incapable of critical or independent thinking is as wrong as it is demeaning. And yet, this has been her theme in her interviews with other international media, including Cnn, in which she portrayed herself as a victim of an authoritarian regime. instead of fair criticism, ms. Ressa’s statements appear to have an elitist tone common among those who have not gotten over the fact that a parvenu had become president.

to be clear, we believe that the press has a duty to criticize President Duterte and his team. that is probably why the manila times HAS A DOZEN LIBEL AND CYBERLIBEL CASES fiLED BY THEM. But we maintain that critical speech should be fair and without malice. that is democracy.

Back in 1992, Lee Kuan Yew did not mince words in counseling a Filipino audience that they should learn what a working democracy should be. he also said, “the Philippines has a lively and rumbustious press and television. they should undertake this vital job as their national duty.”

given Singapore’s stringent laws, we wonder if mr. Lee could have been as critical of his government had he been a journalist THERE RATHER THAN A REVERED POLITICAL fiGURE. BUT IN THIS COUNTRY, such statements are a daily fare for reporters and commentators. that was true in 1992, and contrary to ms. Ressa's view, we believe that it remains the same today.