Journalism Under Fire: Two cases show media accused of “spin” and paid PR

IN AUGUST 2025, both Pasig Mayor Vico Sotto and Leyte Rep. Richard “Goma” Gomez clashed with the press — with Sotto accusing broadcasters of paid PR and Gomez claiming reporters were paid to seek his side. Different charges, both showing how easily journalism’s credibility can be compromised or attacked.

Vico Sotto vs Babao and Sanchez

On August 21, 2025, Pasig City Mayor Vico Sotto, in a Facebook post, claimed that celebrity broadcasters Julius Babao and Korina Sanchez were paid “PHP10 million” to feature contractors-turned-politicians Sarah and Curlee Discaya in their programs. Sotto asked how media exposure could cost as much as a political ad, as he criticized prominent journalists whose reports lend credibility to individuals who are now facing questions about the wealth they have gained from government contracts. 

The post read: “Bago tanggapin ng mga kilalang journalists ang alok para mag-interview ng Contractor na Pumapasok sa Politika, hindi ba nila naisip na, ‘Uy teka, ba’t kaya handa ’to magbigay ng 10 million para lang magpa-interview sa akin??’” (“Before famous journalists accept offers to interview contractors entering politics, didn’t they think, ‘Why is this person ready to pay PHP10 million just to be interviewed?’”). He said even if not illegal, “at the very least it should be considered shameful and violative of the spirit of their code of ethics.” 

Both Sanchez and Babao denied receiving money. Babao said his YouTube vlog was meant to inspire viewers, while Sanchez’s camp maintained her Rated Korina feature was in the “public interest.” A since-deleted comment by one of her producers admitted that features can involve fees, but offered no specifics. Both also emphasized that their interviews aired before the election period and did not violate campaign finance rules. Producers of Rated Korina and Korina Interviews insisted the Discaya feature was a transparent “rags-to-riches” story aired before the election period. But the videos have since been removed and are no longer accessible. 

Julius Babao also denied wrongdoing and went on leave from TV5’s Frontline Pilipinas.

Sotto’s criticism highlighted the framing of the stories, presenting the Discayas as successful, family-oriented entrepreneurs, their lifestyle and luxury cars showcased as aspirational symbols. Sotto suggested that the media features effectively laundered their image and sidelined the issue of accountability. 

After media called attention to the Discayas’ extensive display of wealth, including some 40 luxury vehicles, among others, Bentleys, Rolls-Royces, and Porsches; the Bureau of Customs (BOC) and the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) initiated probes. The BOC declared it would “immediately look into” whether these imported cars had been properly declared and taxed, warning of possible seizures or additional liabilities. Meanwhile, the BIR reportedly launched a parallel audit into the couple’s tax compliance. 

Issues and implications 

Media critics noted the broader implications. Danilo Arao, journalism professor at UP, said to Philstar.com and Rappler that the incident “shows how blurred the line has become between journalism and PR.” He stressed that veteran journalists should disclose any arrangements made when featuring political figures: “The key word is honesty.”

Other journalists pointed to structural problems that make reporters vulnerable to questionable trade-offs for coverage, describing how many beat reporters struggle with with low pay and lack of job security, in contrast to the opportunities that some celebrity broadcasters have to monetize airtime and online platforms – advantages that involve the risk of turning their programs into PR opportunities that further enhance the high profiles of already prominent and powerful public figures. 

Explained.ph observed that the issue is less about legality than the impact of media credibility: Journalists like Sanchez and Babao may describe their features as “lifestyle” or “aspirational” content, but the effect is to lend their long-cultivated reputations to enhance the image of those they cover, in this instance, the Discayas. This “credibility transfer” makes contractors-turned-politicians appear respectable or even admirable, despite the relevant questions raised by controversies. The article stressed that audiences rarely separate the journalist from the content: when a trusted broadcaster conducts a glowing profile, the trust attached to the journalist is also conferred on the subject.

The National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) weighed in, warning that “soliciting and accepting money, gifts and other forms of compensation in exchange for favorable coverage threatens editorial independence” and erodes public trust in the press in general. 

While acknowledging that the allegations against Sanchez and Babao remain unproven, the NUJP highlighted that undisclosed paid content has long plagued the industry, often a survival tactic for poorly paid reporters. Still, it stressed that this justification “does not apply to wealthy media personalities,” calling instead for adherence to the Journalists’ Code of Ethics and fair newsroom compensation: “Ethical practice is difficult, if not impossible, when even media workers’ basic needs are not met.”

The poor wages issue is a problem. But there have been enough journalists who have persisted in the practice, keeping their reputation and practice above suspicion. Each journalist or media worker must come to terms with the reality, join in campaigns to improve workers’ compensation, initiate the move for unions as well as other ways of promoting better working conditions and salaries. 

Gomez’ alleges “media spin”

Another case carried more charges against journalists and their practice. 

On August 28, 2025, Leyte 4th District Rep. Richard “Goma” Gomez lashed out at the press on his Facebook post, amid questions about a collapsed flood control structure in Matag-ob, Leyte. Reporters had been seeking his comment after Matag-ob Mayor Bernie Tacoy accused him of neglect and lack of support during heavy flooding.

He accused journalists of orchestrating a “media spin” against him, claiming that the similarity of questions and multiple requests for comment indicated coordination, and further alleged that reporters were being “paid” to ask for his side.

Gomez added to the tension by posting screenshots that included the names and contact numbers of reporters who reached out to him, a move that potentially violated data privacy and exposed journalists to harassment or fraudulent scams. His framing inverted the normal process of fairness: in fact, as the NUJP pointed out in an alert, asking for his side actually favored him, giving him a chance to respond to Tacoy’s allegations. 

This was picked up by ANC’s Dateline Philippines, Philstar.com, and DZMM Teleradyo. Gomez has since apologized in his speech at the House plenary on September 2, which garnered coverage from all media.

Both cases, the first involving Vico Sotto and the second, Richard Gomez, show the different challenges to media credibility. Sotto directly called out journalists for allegedly accepting money to publish favorable stories, while Gomez accused reporters of being paid just to ask for his side of the story. 

Both episodes reflect the fragile state of media credibility and the integrity of journalism in the country. It is the result of long-embedded practice that seemed to have reached heights in the long years of the Marcos dictatorship. It is a bane that will not be wiped out without concerted and persistent effort of the various communities, media owners, press associations, and key stakeholder groups, including the public who consume the news on various platforms. 

As human endeavor, reporting is marred by inaccuracies, misleading slants, and flawed framing of what happened. There are other more serious failures that editors are called to acknowledge and apologize for harm that these slips can cause. Indeed, media can “spin” a story, exaggerate, and over-emphasize some aspects that effectively mislead or create a false impression. Correction and apologies are called for when this happens. 

But the charges remain because fundamentally, corruption involves a two-way exchange. Journalistic work opens itself to interaction with the corruption that pervades the larger community, including sources in and out of government. Unfortunately, technology has made money changing hands barely visible and thus easier to transact.  

And yet, even amid such pressures, there are enough journalists who have set themselves apart from various forms of trade-offs, with some news organizations enhancing their brand with the unquestioned integrity of their editorial staff. It is on their solidarity and perseverance that efforts can have a chance to turn the page.