“WORK is work. Choice is choice. Respect begets respect.”
This is one quote posted by fellow media practitioner Henrylito D. Tacio on Facebook the other day. However it is apparent that this does not apply or is not practiced by ABS-CBN, the leading broadcast network that lost its franchise in 2021 when its application for franchise extension was not granted by the Philippine Congress.
Yes, the network is the leading media entity that is supposedly crusading for the respect of the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression and of choice. In fact the network’s top broadcasters are wont to say, “We are in a democracy.”
But it is clear that in the case of its top talent Toni Gonzaga the quote, or more precisely its advocacy for the respect of the freedom of expression and of choice, does not apply. Gonzaga is a citizen of this country. As such she is covered by that guarantee of the Constitution. She has every right to say or do anything up to the border where other people’s rights begin and in the perimeter or ambit of the law.
She also has her freedom of choice who she will support to become the leaders of the country in the same manner that those personal freedoms of hers deserve to be respected even by those who believe they have dominion over somebody by virtue of employment relationship.
But why is Ms. Gonzaga chastised by her fellow ABS-CBN talents and without doubt by the top officials of the network? If the contracts of the network in the employment of its talents expressly stipulate that they cannot and must not be biased for or against a particular person or entity so as not to compromise the mandate in the fair practice of journalism, why is the network or its top executives not even making a whimper over other talents of the establishment openly making pitches for other candidates?
It is crystal clear which side of the political fence is the broadcast network tilting.
Understandable of course because of what the media outfit went through for months now. But we believe that its present predicament is largely due to its own “sowing a whirlwind” that resulted in its “getting a storm” in return.
*****************************
Davao City Mayor Sara Duterte-Carpio in a pre-recorded television interview in Davao City says that while she is not against the vaccination of children 5 to 11 years of age she would not strongly push for it if the purpose of the immunization is not maximized.
Definitely we are in agreement with the lady mayor and now Vice Presidential candidate under the BBM-Sarah Uniteam. Yes, the position of the mayor makes a lot of sense when she recommended that face-to-face classes be now restored side-by-side with the pediatric vaccination effort for children.
Indeed, what is vaccinating the children for if it is only for them to be safe against CoViD infection when they are out in public places or inside malls and other establishments for them to enjoy. Or what good will the vaccination be if those children being vaccinated have to remain inside their houses or be limited in their movement within the compound of their residence?
The Davaoena VP aspirant believes that by allowing the holding of face-to-face classes but still complying with the minimum health protocols imposed by the government the vaccinated children will be given the best and most effective method of learning with the assurance of safety against the dreaded virus because of the immunization’s effect on their immunity.
It is our take that this is one recommendation of a local government executive who is aspiring to become the second highest national official that should officially be transmitted to the highest echelon of the Department of Education. And it is worth giving the department’s top leadership its most serious consideration because it is not just the health of the children that is at stake here but the quality of education that will be imparted in their early years in school.
**************************
Indeed in a city as large as Davao with more than 60 percent of the land area is considered as rural, the ban by the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) for candidates to engage in early campaigning is easier issued than complied with.
For example in the remote areas of the second and third districts we have personally seen posters of some candidates for councilors now pasted or hung on house walls or fence or on tree trunks. And who from the local COMELEC will be moving around the city’s rugged terrain to detach the posters considering the agency’s lack of manpower and transportation? Or will the agency’s deputizing barangay police or force multipliers be an effective strategy to address such infractions by candidates when the pre-campaign period posting and installation of campaign materials such as posters is at the behest of barangay officials who are utilized as leaders of the council candidates?
For comments and/or reactions we can be reached at our e-mail address victorino.sumalinog@yahoo.com or Mobile/Messenger at 09392980435 or at landline 237-2169.
