On the Right of Reply Bill

James Soriano — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 16:00:44 +0000

PUBLISHED: Student & Campus Section, Manila Bulletin, 11 March 2009 Issue (Page E-2)

What if we lived in a society where no one is allowed to tell anyone else that he is wrong?

Suppose, for example, that in this sort of a society, we study in a particular school. In this school, we are classmates. I am your bully. I take your food, drink from your jug, and copy your homework. I am the vampire of your school life, sucking your blood, and you are sick of it.

Suppose that you decide to speak up and complain. While you know that this is against the law, you are fed up. You tell me anyway, in direct violation of this law.

Suppose further that by violating this law, you incur a penalty. By telling me that I am wrong, your penalty is that I get—by the power of the state and the school—a free shot at your face, at that same instant.

By way of analogy, this is the situation our journalists would be in if the right of reply bill were passed. In this scenario, the journalist is the student. The public official is the bully. And the painful punch delivered to the face of the poor student is the equivalent of the painful repercussions that would result from trying to expose social wrongs.

While the right of reply is an accepted and necessary principle in any democratic society, as it is an extension of freedom of speech, it is not the principle that is put to question here. A person who is subjected to criticism may, of course, respond to accusations directed towards him. Celebrity talk shows do this all the time.

What is in question here is how the right of reply is to be implemented.

Under Senate Bill No. 2150, the reply of the person accused or criticized must be published or broadcast in the same publication, radio/television show, or website. For each failure of the said establishments to broadcast these replies, free of charge, in a period of three days after the slanderous comments were printed or aired, they shall be fined amounts ranging from P10 000 to P50 000. What motivation would any journalist have to write about what’s wrong, or who’s wrong?

It isn’t even the reply itself that is being criticized: public officials may say anything they want to defend their reputations, as far as media is concerned. What they do fear, however, is the impingement on their medium of communication. Every reply published comes at the expense of the publishers. Guilty individuals who are now provided with a cost-free weapon: legally-hijacked space or airtime.

But more fundamentally, it is important to remember that like any one of us, the media are entitled to what they are saying. They may not be forced into saying what they do not want to. In the words of Fr. Bernas, SJ, they have a “freedom not to speak.” Yet the bill comandeers the vehicles of the media for the thoughts of others, with or without their consent.

On the other hand, however, proponents of the bill validly argue that the media should perhaps exercise more control. Their advantage, after all, is the prerogative to shoot first, and this advantage should not be absolute. In effect, the bill strikes a balance between the media’s right to publish critical comments and the right of the accused to defend his or her honor.

But if we are to speak about balance, then the bill simply tips things in favor of the powerful. We cannot continue to ignore the fact that in this country, even the elite can put the law in their hands. As things stand, society’s only weapon against the oppressive elite are our words: the expositions that media publishes. All we really have is the knowledge of their wrongs, and for this journalists pay a heavy price, from death threats to actual deaths. We can expect that those with ill intent will use this leverage to exact a heavier tax from those who point out they are wrong.

It is sad to think that we now live in a society where no good deed goes unpunished. And even more so when lawmakers have the audacity to suggest that journalists get killed because they don’t have a right of reply.

But if no one else will tell anyone else that they’re wrong, who will?

james.soriano » right of reply

On the Right of Reply Bill