OPINION
JP Fenix
When Philippine News Media Failed Its Own Tests
FILE
The Philippine media had a golden opportunity to defend journalism's most sacred principle—truth—and instead chose tribal warfare and moral grandstanding.
The most important factor of journalism is truth. Without it, journalism becomes gossip. Facts become conjecture. It doesn't matter if it's a life-changing investigative exposé or a fluff piece about some debutante's debut—truth is the key.
Remember Michael McDougal from The Paper? Randy Quaid's police columnist said it best: "We run stupid headlines because we think they're funny. We run maimings on the front page because we get good art. And I spend three weeks bitching about my car because it sells papers. But at least it's the truth. As far as I can remember, we never, ever, ever knowingly got a story wrong until tonight."
That standard mattered more when journalism was confined to newsrooms and broadcast stations. But the internet blurred those lines. Citizen journalists, bloggers, vloggers—everyone now competes for the same eyeballs, the same space.
Which brings us to recent events that should have been journalism's moment to reassert its principles.
First came Pasig Mayor Vico Sotto's bombshell: He publicly accused broadcasters Korina Sanchez-Roxas and Julius Babao of each receiving ₱10 million for their features about Curlee and Sarah Discaya, the couple under investigation for their massive DPWH contracts. This, while all other network news also featured the very same story on the Discayas and also without shifting to investigation mode.
Then Leyte Representative Richard Gomez doxxed journalists who questioned his involvement in a failed flood control project—publishing names and addresses with what Oxford defines as "malicious intent." Gomez later apologized from the plenary floor, perhaps realizing the gravity of his actions.
Sotto? Still no evidence for that ₱10 million claim. Both Sanchez and Babao maintain their "rags to riches" features were of public interest just as every other station thought so. All these features were produced in 2024, long before any suspicion or discovery of ill-gotten wealth came to light
Here was journalism's test: Demand proof. Defend colleagues under baseless attack. Show why evidence matters more than accusations.
Instead, the industry imploded.
Rather than demanding evidence for Sotto's claims or condemning the dangerous precedent of doxxing journalists, the media fractured. Some attacked colleagues for doing "fluff pieces," missing opportunities for "real" investigative work. Others virtue-signaled about their own integrity and credibility, capitalizing on the controversy to elevate themselves. The wisest stayed silent, choosing to simply report the unfolding story.
Most disturbing were the supposed guardians of journalistic ethics who seemed to suggest it would have been perfectly acceptable for journalists doing lifestyle features to suddenly pivot into interrogation mode—based purely on hunch or suspicion about illegal wealth.
This isn't a Murphy Brown episode where the protagonist can pivot from lifestyle piece to gotcha journalism for comedic effect.
Real investigative journalism requires preparation, verification, and fair notice to subjects when shifting from feature to investigation.
This flies in the face of basic journalism principles: fairness, accuracy, and verification before publication. The Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics is clear: "Seek truth and provide fair and comprehensive account of events and issues" and "Support the open and civil exchange of views, even views they find repugnant."
Ambushing subjects with unsubstantiated accusations isn't journalism—it's gotcha theater that undermines the profession's credibility.
The bottomline remains: TRUTH. Whether it's a lifestyle feature about society matrons and their embarrassment of riches, or a deep dive into ghost infrastructure projects bleeding taxpayers dry—what matters is accuracy, verification, evidence.
Anything short of truth isn't journalism, whether practiced by seasoned veterans or citizen bloggers churning out social media content.
The media could have used this moment to demonstrate why verification beats accusation, why protecting press freedom protects democracy, why journalism's standards matter regardless of platform or practitioner.
Instead, it chose infighting over principles, missing the chance to show why journalism—real journalism—still matters.
The most important factor of journalism is truth. Without it, journalism becomes gossip. Facts become conjecture. It doesn't matter if it's a life-changing investigative exposé or a fluff piece about some debutante's debut—truth is the key.
Remember Michael McDougal from The Paper? Randy Quaid's police columnist said it best: "We run stupid headlines because we think they're funny. We run maimings on the front page because we get good art. And I spend three weeks bitching about my car because it sells papers. But at least it's the truth. As far as I can remember, we never, ever, ever knowingly got a story wrong until tonight."
That standard mattered more when journalism was confined to newsrooms and broadcast stations. But the internet blurred those lines. Citizen journalists, bloggers, vloggers—everyone now competes for the same eyeballs, the same space.
Which brings us to recent events that should have been journalism's moment to reassert its principles.
First came Pasig Mayor Vico Sotto's bombshell: He publicly accused broadcasters Korina Sanchez-Roxas and Julius Babao of each receiving ₱10 million for their features about Curlee and Sarah Discaya, the couple under investigation for their massive DPWH contracts. This, while all other network news also featured the very same story on the Discayas and also without shifting to investigation mode.
Then Leyte Representative Richard Gomez doxxed journalists who questioned his involvement in a failed flood control project—publishing names and addresses with what Oxford defines as "malicious intent." Gomez later apologized from the plenary floor, perhaps realizing the gravity of his actions.
Sotto? Still no evidence for that ₱10 million claim. Both Sanchez and Babao maintain their "rags to riches" features were of public interest just as every other station thought so. All these features were produced in 2024, long before any suspicion or discovery of ill-gotten wealth came to light
Here was journalism's test: Demand proof. Defend colleagues under baseless attack. Show why evidence matters more than accusations.
Instead, the industry imploded.
Rather than demanding evidence for Sotto's claims or condemning the dangerous precedent of doxxing journalists, the media fractured. Some attacked colleagues for doing "fluff pieces," missing opportunities for "real" investigative work. Others virtue-signaled about their own integrity and credibility, capitalizing on the controversy to elevate themselves. The wisest stayed silent, choosing to simply report the unfolding story.
Most disturbing were the supposed guardians of journalistic ethics who seemed to suggest it would have been perfectly acceptable for journalists doing lifestyle features to suddenly pivot into interrogation mode—based purely on hunch or suspicion about illegal wealth.
This isn't a Murphy Brown episode where the protagonist can pivot from lifestyle piece to gotcha journalism for comedic effect.
Real investigative journalism requires preparation, verification, and fair notice to subjects when shifting from feature to investigation.
This flies in the face of basic journalism principles: fairness, accuracy, and verification before publication. The Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics is clear: "Seek truth and provide fair and comprehensive account of events and issues" and "Support the open and civil exchange of views, even views they find repugnant."
Ambushing subjects with unsubstantiated accusations isn't journalism—it's gotcha theater that undermines the profession's credibility.
The bottomline remains: TRUTH. Whether it's a lifestyle feature about society matrons and their embarrassment of riches, or a deep dive into ghost infrastructure projects bleeding taxpayers dry—what matters is accuracy, verification, evidence.
Anything short of truth isn't journalism, whether practiced by seasoned veterans or citizen bloggers churning out social media content.
The media could have used this moment to demonstrate why verification beats accusation, why protecting press freedom protects democracy, why journalism's standards matter regardless of platform or practitioner.
Instead, it chose infighting over principles, missing the chance to show why journalism—real journalism—still matters.
Sep 6, 2025
We are dedicated storytellers with a passion for bringing your brand to life. Our services range from news and media features to brand promotion and collaborations.
Interested? Visit our
Contact Us page for more information. To learn more about what we offer, check out our latest article on services and opportunities.
