VP Vote Recount: Anonymous, Insider Sources Feed Marcos Propaganda

 

JEERS TO some media organizations for anonymously sourced reports about the vote recount, particularly votes allegedly lost by Vice President Leni Robredo due to the shading threshold set by the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET).

The PET is currently recounting votes for vice presidency in the province of Camarines Sur, one of the three provinces identified by former Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. in his electoral protest. Marcos also wants to count the votes in Iloilo and Negros Oriental. Results of the manual recount in these provinces will determine if the PET shall proceed with Marcos’ electoral protest.

Manila Bulletin reported on May 3 that Robredo may have lost 21,000 votes as a result of the PET resolution setting a 50 percent shaded ovals in ballots as the threshold in counting valid votes.

The Bulletin reported: “On condition of anonymity, the revisors said the votes were lost by Robredo during the manual recount and revision of ballots in 16 towns of Camarines Sur the past month since the work started last April 2” (“Robredo may have lost 21,000 votes in 16 towns due to 50% shading threshold”).

Meanwhile, The Philippine Star tweeted: “PET recount: VP Leni Robredo’s lead over Bongbong Marcos down by over 21,000 after 4 weeks covering 16 towns in Camsur.”

In reporting Robredo’s reaction to the story, GMA News Online observed: “Apart from the Philippine Star, newspapers such as the Manila Times, the Manila Bulletin, and the Manila Standard carried the dwindling-lead story, citing as sources unnamed individuals within the Supreme Court sitting as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET)” (“Lead vs. Marcos down by over 21,000 votes? ‘Fake news,’ says Robredo”).

In April, the Bulletin and the Star reported on the 5,000 votes that Robredo may lose due to shading of ballots. Both broadsheets also cited insiders as sources (“Robredo reportedly lost about 5,000 votes resulting from PET ruling”; “Leni Robredo may lose votes due to shading limit”).

The use of insider sources is a bad habit that journalists find hard to break for different reasons, all bad. Anonymous sources need to be corroborated by other sources and other findings. On the issue of vote recount, the press ought to be careful in picking up information, cautious not to provide media mileage to amplify propaganda. Providing space for these reports is tantamount to conditioning the public to accept a desired outcome.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *