Journalists in the news
Some journalists who covered or are still covering the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona—which for weeks has been the biggest story in print, broadcasting, and online media—have become the story themselves.
Covering Corona
Media in aid of accountability
The media coverage of the ongoing impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona is generally fair. But the tendency of the press to be reactive when reporting has once more made it vulnerable to spins.
Vitug and UST: On CJ’s doctorate degree
On Jan. 1, the Philippine Daily Inquirer bannered Marites Dañguilan Vitug’s story on the academic record of Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato C. Corona, particularly about the University of Santo Tomas’ (UST) conferring him a doctorate in civil law, summa cum laude. (“UST breaks rules to favor Corona”, originally published on Dec. 22, 2011) According to the report, Corona did not meet the program requirement for a dissertation and overstayed besides, and thus should not have gotten his degree, much less qualified for honors if UST rules were followed.
In a statement, UST said there is “no truth to the allegation” and that being an autonomous higher educational institution, it “enjoys an institutional academic freedom to set its standards of quality and excellence and determine to whom it shall confer appropriate degrees.” (“UST’s statement on the ‘Rappler’ online article by Marites Danguilan-Vitug”, Jan. 2)
UST asked for “objectivity and fairness” from Vitug and the Inquirer, arguing that
- “Miss Vitug did not make a disclosure that she has had a run-in with the Supreme Court and may have an axe to grind against it.
- “The Inquirer did not get the side of the University and rushed to print the online article; it merely repeated Miss Vitug’s claim that the University didn’t respond to her queries.
- “The University didn’t reply to Miss Vitug’s questions because it was at a loss on how to respond to ‘online journalism.’”
PJR Reports noted that in the article, Vitug mentioned her attempts to get the side of UST and Corona as well as her previous research on the High Court and its justices for her book “Shadow of Doubt: Probing the Supreme Court”.
On the question of the identity of Vitug and her news organization Rappler.com, the “About Us” page of their website provides this information: “We are veteran journalists trained in broadcast, print and web disciplines working with young, idealistic digital natives eager to report and find solutions to problems. We are web artists, designers, publishers and professionals combining the best of broadcasting and IT processes.” Vitug is named “editor-at-large”.
The Inquirer also published the university’s response in a Jan. 2 article, “UST: CJ Corona earned Ph.D; University denies rules broken to favor Corona”, written by Lito B. Zulueta.
However, the only source of the article was UST. A conflict of interest issue could have also been avoided if the Inquirer and its editors had disclosed Zulueta’s connection to the university, or assigned the article to another writer who has no private interest in the matter. Zulueta teaches journalism at the UST Faculty of Arts and Letters and is the adviser of The Varsitarian, the official student publication of the university. He has also written a number of glowing articles on UST’s 400-year history.
Journalists as witnesses
The prosecutors in the impeachment trial also tried to subpoena several journalists as witnesses on the seventh article of the impeachment charges: “Respondent betrayed the public trust through his partiality in granting a temporary restraining order (TRO) in favor of former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and her husband Jose Miguel Arroyo in order to give them an opportunity to escape prosecution and to frustrate the Supreme Court decision on the effectivity of the TRO in view of a clear failure to comply with the conditions of the Supreme Court’s own TRO.”
Journalists Vitug, Raissa Robles, and Criselda Yabes were asked to testify on, among others, the close personal relationship between Corona and Gloria Arroyo. Vitug would also be asked about her research on the judiciary.
Robles is an investigative journalist. She is the Manila correspondent of the South China Morning Post and Radio Netherlands. ABS-CBN News also publishes her articles.
Yabes is a freelance writer and has worked as a correspondent for foreign news agencies such as Reuters, Associated Press, The Economist, Newsweek, and The Washington Post.
ABS-CBN News reporter Ina Reformina and an unnamed journalist, who were supposed to testify on the TRO issue and related-events that transpired on Nov. 15, 2011, have also been identified as possible witnesses.
Vitug, in a letter to lead prosecutor Rep. Niel Tupas, said “I am surprised to learn that I am listed as one of the prosecution’s witnesses for Article 7. I have repeatedly explained to your colleagues that I am not going to testify in the impeachment trial. All my works are public and they speak for themselves. And, of course, you know that confidential sources are another matter.” (“‘Journalists are not the story’”, Jan. 27)
Robles sent a letter to the prosecution panel saying she has “no personal knowledge” of Article VII. (“My letter sent to the prosecution panel”, Jan. 28)
In an interview with InterAksyon.com, Yabes said “I’ve already emailed Congressman Tupas telling him that I won’t testify, that I’ve never written anything about Corona, and that the book I co-wrote with Marites (Vitug) on the Supreme Court’s landmark cases has nothing at all to do with the Chief Justice.” (“Justices, journalists top witness-wishlist of prosecutors for Article 7 in Corona Trial”, Jan. 27, http://www.interaksyon.com/article/22993/justices-journalists-top-witness-wishlist-of-prosecutors-for-article-7-in-corona-trial)
Robles: “I am NOT the Little Lady”
Text messages and social networking sites passed around a variation of the following information: “Scoop: just in: Raissa Robles, Justice Carpio’s girl friday, moonlighting as a journalist, is the short lady who handed the envelop(e) to Cong. Umali. Isusubpoena na yan ng senado.”
Robles in her blog responded: “For the record, I am NOT the Little Lady.” (“I become part of the Corona story”, Feb. 9, http://raissarobles.com/2012/02/09/i-become-part-of-the-corona-story/)
Robles added: “I have never met nor interviewed Associate Justice Antonio Carpio in my life. I have never been a ‘girl Friday’, whatever that poster means. I am not moonlighting as a journalist. I AM a journalist. I have never handed any envelope to Cong. Umali nor have I ever met him.”
On Feb. 10, The Daily Tribune wrote in a banner story that “The claimed ‘small lady’ who supplied the prosecution with the envelope that had copies of the Philippine Savings Bank (PSBank) documents was none other than the Katipunan branch manager, Annabelle Tiongson, who leaked these to a second ‘leak,’ one Gigi Sawit who, in turn, gave the copies to blogger and stringer of the South China Morning Post, Raissa Robles, who then passed it on to the prosecutors, a (sic) impeachable (sic) source told the Tribune yesterday.” (“PSBank’s Tiongson leaked CJ’s peso, dollar accounts—source; ‘No small lady’ seen handing envelope to prosecutor in Senate CCTV”)
On Feb. 11, the paper went on to say that “The report also stated, quoting the Tribune’s unimpeachable source as saying that the leak came from Tiongson, then passed on to one Gigi Sawit and a blogger and stringer of the South China Morning Post who called up the Tribune yesterday to state that she does not even know Gigi Sawit. The Tribune stands by it(s) story as told by the source.” (“Umali appeals to ‘small lady’ to come forward on leakage”)
Robles wrote another piece, this time about her phone conversation with Tribune publisher and editor-in-chief Ninez Cacho Olivares. She wrote: “I thought I had made it clear with Ninez that her source was wrong in naming me as the leak. I thought she would at least go back to her source and ask for more details, supporting evidence and proof.”
Cacho Olivares in the blog’s comments section wrote: “you twisted what you and I talked about, which doesn’t speak well of you as either a blogger or a journalist. I never asked you if you wanted me and the Trib to apologize. What I clearly said was, do you want me to put your side because I can do that. But apology–no way. I still stand by my source and my story and why you call it a fabrication is just your claim.” (“Ninez seems to know better than me where my body was”, Feb. 12)
In the interest of balance and fairness, the Tribune should have included Robles’ side of the story. After all, Robles’ blog post denying the rumors was available a day prior to publication.
Leave a Reply