Making sense of Calida’s second quo warranto

SOLICITOR GENERAL (SolGen) Jose Calida filed a quo warranto petition in the Supreme Court on February 10 asking the high court “to forfeit” ABS-CBN’s franchise, challenging the media and the public to make sense of the legal undertaking. 

But there was no copy of the petition available on that day. The Court did not release one and Calida released only a press statement and an executive summary.  Without an actual copy, journalists found it difficult to report the extraordinary development except to recount the obvious.

However, most reports took on the test by going to a wide range of sources, providing context and background in reporting Calida’s action. 

But there were exceptions.

CMFR monitored reports from broadsheets Manila Bulletin, Philippine Daily Inquirer and The Philippine Star; primetime newscasts ABS-CBN 2’s TV Patrol, CNN Philippines’ News Night, GMA-7’s 24 Oras and TV5’s Aksyon; and selected news websites on the day of the filing of the quo warranto.

Two reports stood out for not having tried to go beyond the surface of the news. GMA-7’s 24 Oras and Manila Bulletin relied exclusively on quotes from the statement of the Office of the Solicitor General and the response of ABS-CBN, with insufficient explanatory notes and analysis. 

Other reports fared better by quoting journalists, advocates of press freedom and human rights defenders, legal experts and members of Congress as well as public officials.    Some sources described the quo warranto as a legal concept. Others raised questions about its applicability in the case of a private media enterprise. Media advocates expressed alarm about what they saw as an attempt to silence journalists and government critics, and its “chilling effect” on press freedom.

Other reports included the context drawn from the president’s animosity toward some journalists and his threats against ABS-CBN and other news organizations since he assumed office.

News website Rappler provided an updated timeline of Duterte’s repeated insults and threats against ABS-CBN along with a point-by-point explainer of Calida’s quo warranto petition.

The passive stance in some of the reports on Calida’s second quo warranto is not only lazy journalism. Such seeming indifference and neutrality reflects the inability to tell the story as it is.