BRAVE guy this Presidential candidate Sen. Manny Pacquiao. He has challenged BBM to a one-on-one debate.
But why is he, along with three others not attending the Sonshine Media Network, International (SMNI)-sponsored Debate this coming Saturday? If he and the other three “back outers” believe that they cannot or may not be given a fair deal because the Network’s honorary chairman of the board has personally endorsed the BBM-Sara tandem, how then could they differentiate themselves from BBM and Sara refusing to attend an openly bias network and owners-sponsored debates? How could they differentiate themselves from the leading tandem for President and Vice President, respectively that sees the moderators or hosts in an open discussion raising questions that are all geared towards the destruction of the persons of the front-runningcandidates instead of those that will define their administration should they win?
It is our take that the trio of VP Leni Robredo, Manila Mayor Isko Moreno Domagoso, and Sen. Manny Pacquiao will have solid moral grounds in lambasting Marcos or Sara for ignoring invitations to debates organized by other Networks or even by the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) if they themselves have attended or will attend debates organized by a network they suspect to be tilted towards the Presidential tandem they so abhorred.
And by the way does a personal preference of someone who is perceived as top executive of a group that has its own juridical personality automatically carries with it the choice of the entire corporate organization?
We do not think so. Of course it is a different story if the top executive will make it a norm that only those that will abide by the personal preference of the corporate owners will be accepted for employment in his establishment. But sure that is one policy very much against the law.
And if the “apple of discord” of those who are supposed to participate in any forthcoming debates is their perceived bias of the organizer and/or certain executives, why not the initiators cull out names from the Academe, the corporate sector, and the media and propose them to the candidates as either the moderators, panelists or anchors in the debates and let them make their choices? Whoever has the most number of approvals gets the chance to serve.
Still, questions or topics should not be presented in advance except perhaps a general overview of what is the possible subject of the interaction. That, we believe, is fair enough.
But can any candidate refuse to join? Of course anyone has the right to refusal. But as consequence he or she defaults on his right to complain of not being given a chance to refute.
Other than the war fought between Ukraine and Russia in Europe, there is also another kind of war where the now famous drone is critically in use to create advantage for any of the protagonists.
In that European war savagely fought by two neighboring countries, drones are now used as weapons of destruction without much human bodies of soldiers put at risk. Drones from Ukraine or Russia carrying bombs fly in designated air spaces towards a target. These are self-propelled and aside from the highly destructive explosives, are also equipped with a camera to record the destruction made. The video recordings now become very effective tools for propaganda purposes of each belligerent nation.
The other war where drones are now in constant use is fought right here in the Philippines. It is the electoral battle for the Presidency of the land. The battlegrounds are the various social media platforms where pictures of the candidates’ rallies and caravans are posted and are offered for comparison as to whose activities of candidates are attended the most; which rallies and caravans gathered the biggest crowd as documented by drone mounted cameras.
And like the drone shots in the Ukraine-Russia scene of attacks and subsequent devastations the drone shots in candidates’ rallies in the Philippines are now also becoming the leading influencer of people’s opinion.
We would not be surprised if soon some local officials who are known backers or endorsers of this and that more significant aspirants will cause the passage of ordinances mandating that their cities or municipalities shall be “No Fly Zone” for camera-mounting drones.
For comments and/or reactions we can be reached at our e-mail address: firstname.lastname@example.org; Mobile No. 09392980435; or Landline No. 2372169.
- Security forces support Baste leading RPOC XI
- Davao City jail opens mini-library
- Optimized security
- 3 arrested for drugs, unlicensed gun at checkpoint
- The New Channel: Always looking for the next highlighting its social advocacy, Global Women Who RULE 2023
- AirAsia Philippines records 95% increase in March bookings
- CDRRMO rates quake drill response at 8 or 9
- 174 PDLs test negative in random jail drug test
- UM founder to be honored by CPAs
- Classes canceled