Media fail to highlight meaning of Sara Duterte’s “meltdown”

JEERS TO Manila Bulletin for its report that resorted to simply recording Vice President Sara Duterte’s ‘meltdown” when she called a press conference on October 18. Meanwhile, on social media, the backlash expressed shock and outrage that reflected the general public reaction. 

The next day on October 19, another Manila Bulletin report on the same press conference focused on her remarks lambasting lawmakers who criticized the use of budgetary funds by the Office of the Vice President.

While most news organizations only relied on other sources to comment on the episode, Manila Bulletin failure stands out for presenting her outrageous remarks without even noting other reactions, without background and context. As such, it provided mere publicity for the Vice President, presenting her offensive conduct as normal and acceptable. 

The second article was a clear PR article for her attack on those who questioned her use of public funds, previous coverage of this probe had already exposed her questionable use of public funds. 

The press conference provided a platform for the Vice President to vent her anger. The country’s second highest offiical abandoned the required rules of decorum for public office. She told the press that she had threatened Senator Imee Marcos, the President’s sister, — that she, Duterte, would dig up the body of Ferdinand Marcos Sr. from the Libingan ng mga Bayani and dump it into the West Philippine Sea. She also confided a “turning point” in her “toxic” relationship with the President, when she had thoughts of “cutting off” his head. 

She recalled that at the 2024 commencement ceremony of the Philippine Military Academy in May, she saw the President ignore the cadet graduate who approached Marcos to ask him for the President’s watch as a graduation gift. She recalled that when her father was President in 2019, he gave his watch to a cadet who made the same request on the same occasion in 2019. The Vice President said that not giving the watch humiliated the cadet and proved Marcos Jr. as “insincere.”  

As some of the media reports noted, Sara Duterte’s verbal assault doused any remaining doubts about the end of the Marcos-Duterte partnership.

Recording what “she said”- they said”

Most news organizations relied on sources to assert the shock, dismay, and direct criticism of Duterte’s behavior, quoting members of Congress, public officials, pundits and civil leaders who pointed to the different ways in which the VP’s conduct was offensive. 

Unfortunately, this news mechanism treats these substantive points as a matter of public opinion. “He said-she said” reports abdicate the responsibility to truthfully report what they saw, not just to quote the words, but also to analyse and interpret what happened, to help the public understand the meaning of an event. 

Journalists on the frontline of access to these events should witness on behalf of and for the benefit of the public. They should share what they observed. They could have counted the frequency of curse words, described the press conference itself, taking note of her demeanor, her physical presence. Did she take questions? Did she vent throughout the press con or lighten up at some point or break away to talk about other concerns?

Sara Duterte’s words constituted a violent verbal assault. It was macabre, and sordid and offensive to public taste. For example, the threat she made was an unprecedented criminal action that had never been used by politicians against their opponents – the desecration of their dead. This is not editorializing. These are factual points that can help the public evaluate the conduct of an official who is highly placed, someone obviously being groomed for higher office. Analysis and interpretation could have explored other meanings. 

The question of character

Sticking to “he said-she said,” such coverage passed on the responsibility to others completely. This is not to say that reporters should not present other sources. But these views should be incorporated in support of the journalist’s argument, analysis or interpretation. In this case, that the episode raised questions about her character and fitness for public office. 

The outrageous outburst displayed a disturbing lack of emotional control; a free fall that flouted standards set in codes of conduct for public officials. Self-control of one’s negative impulses and emotions is a necessary discipline for public officials, to preserve the dignity, credibility and authority of the position they occupy. 

Reports could have recalled the incident that introduced Sara Duterte to the national audience. In 2011, as mayor of Davao before her father was still President, she was caught on camera pummeling the back of a court sheriff with her fists. None of the reports described the recent event as a blast from the past.

Lack of strategic skills 

Journalists could have probed the outburst as a performative display, an attempt to counter what she has claimed as mounting threats to impeach her. But as such, reporters should have noted her timing as off, as her impeachment has not been much in the news. If these were ongoing however, the resort to verbal violence showed up her lack of political maturity. Journalists should not have seen this as a show of strength, but of weakness. Politics is addition, and when confronted with opposition, a skilled politician knows how to reach out to their allies, not turn them off. 

Journalists were more comfortable pursuing the angle of the Uniteam’s break-up. But this angle is no longer new. The immediate concern is about Sara Duterte who as Vice President is an aspiring President; and the highest office of the land is a breath away from her occupation.

---

SIDEBAR: Some notable analyses from the media