Articles on media censorship from the period under colonization to present day Philippines. This was a project for Readings in Philippine History.

1. TRUTH
SILENCEDMedia blackout – journalists and novelists
persecuted by people of power who limit
freedom of expression!
3 4 6 9friars,
fraud,
& MORE
WHITE-
WASHING
& STRINGS
MARCOS
AND
MEDIA
FROM
DICTATORSHIP
TO DEMOCRACY
SPECIAL EDITION No. 1 Wednesday, December 11, 2019 Priceless

2. 2
Friars, fraud, and more
UNDER SPAINUNDER SPAIN
1989
by Juan Jose
T
he Spaniards have colonized
the Philippines for 333 years.
In these long period of colo-
nization, the Filipinos have strive for
freedom of their country. It is for the
freedom that they fought the Span-
iards and sacrificed their lives. Many
revolutions have happened during
the Spanish colonization. These rev-
olutions were caused by the abuse of
the Spaniards to the Filipinos which
made them furious. Andres Bonifacio
is one of the Filipinos who fought for
the country’s freedom. He is the Su-
premo of the Katipunan and led them
the revolution against the Spaniards.
Bonifacio gave importance to Jose
Rizal’s opinion on the necessity to
fight against the Spaniards (Agoncil-
lo, 1960). Because of this, the death
of Rizal has aggravated the anger
of the Filipinos. Moreover, due to
Rizal’s writings, he opened the minds
of the Filipinos about the true nature
of the Spaniards. Rizal is not the only
one who fought this way. Other Fili-
pinos also used the power of media to
open, not only the minds of Filipinos,
but also their hearts.
Silencio
During the Spanish colonization, the
media of communication of infor-
mation is through paper. It is mostly
composed of newspapers and maga-
zines. One example of a newspaper
is the Del Superior Govierno. It is
the first regularly issued publications
which provided news from Spain and
wasmeanttobereadbySpanishelites
(Maslog, 2007). Other examples are
La Esperanza, Diario de Manila, El
Comercio, and La Opinion.
The How’s
Newspapers during the Spanish col-
onization provided people informa-
tion about the happenings in Spain as
well as in the Philippines. However,
these newspapers were subjected
to censorship of the church and the
state. The newspapers should be
faced through a board of censors that
had been set up in 1856 before going
in circulation (Francia, 2010). Addi-
tionally, the language that is written
in the newspapers were Spanish so
only a few can understand the con-
text of the articles. Furthermore, it
is only limited in circulation and only
the Spaniards and Filipino elites,
who can understand Spanish, were
reached by the newspapers (Maslog,
2007).
The pen is mightier than the sword
Some did not like the way the Span-
iards were treating the Filipinos.
There were young men whose faith in
their country did not waived. These
group of young men were Graciano
Lopez Jaena, Marcelo H. Del Pilar,
Jose Rizal, Antonio Luna, Mariano
Ponce, Jose M. Panganiban, Eduardo
de Lete, and a few more (Agoncillo,
1960). In relation to this, they began
the revolutionary press to fight the
Spaniards through the media. Exam-
ples of the revolutionary papers are
La Solidaridad, Kalayaan, La Inde-
pendencia, El Renacimiento.
FRAILOCRACY. Spanish friars of the Dominican Order, circa 1875-1880 -philippineamericanwar.webs.com

3. 3
LA SOLIDARIDAD - Philippine press history
La Solidaridad is the most
famous of the revolutionary papers.
It was written in Spanish and became
the focal point of Ilustrados in Eu-
rope. Because of its revolutionary
context, it was banned by the Span-
ish authorities. The writings were in
Spanish and the paper is limited in
circulation. On the other hand, Ka-
layaan is entirely in Tagalog and was
credited that it fanned the anger of
the Filipinos (Maslog, 2007).
UNDER SPAINUNDER SPAIN
Crucigrama
(CROSSWORD)
Answers1.DelSuperiorGovierno2.Media3.Ilustrados4.Spaniards5.Newspapers
6.Rizal7.Kalayaan8.LaSolidaridad9.Church10.Bonifacio

4. 4
Whitewashing the brown
[ABOVE] AMERICAN SOLDIERS. –Philippine Press History
[RIGHT] FRIENDLY FIRE. America raises its flag in Fort Santiago
after buying the Philippines from Spain –drawing from Harper’s
Pictorial History of the War with Spain.
AFTER THE 300-YEAR RULEAFTER THE 300-YEAR RULE
1901-1942
by Hope Andes
Newspapers, gazettes, film, theater,
and radio broadcasting arose and
gained prominence during the
American period in the Philippines.
At first glance, the Philippine mass
media seems to have improved and
was set free from the control of the
friars and the Spanish government.
But were the countrymen really free
to speak up their minds during the
said period as what we all thought
of? According to the Philippine Press
History (2015), Governor General
William Howard Taft signed and
declared the Sedition Law of 1901,
quote: “It shall be unlawful for any
person to advocate orally, or by
writing or printing or like methods,
the independence of the Philippine
Islands or their separation from the
United States, whether by peaceable
or forcible means, or to print,
publish, or circulate any handbill,
newspaper, or other publication
advocating such independence or
separation.” Indeed, the American
colonizers have openly introduced
new forms of media but these are still
out of our control.
This make-believe story
of American heroism is
already instilled in the
Philippine culture
The worse; we don’t know the reality
anymore. Whitewashing, based on
its formal metaphorical definition,
refers to covering up scandalous
events through biased presentation
of data (Cambridge, n.d.).
Meanwhile, according to Penn State
University (2018), whitewashing
also means having dissociated
oneself from one’s ancestral culture
by adopting or attempting to adopt
an American lifestyle. In the case of
the Philippines, both are applicable.
Here’s why: the Americans did not
just censor the mass media during the
colonial times for even our history
was whitewashed by them. Based on
the video The American Conquest of
the Philippines in 1899, textbooks,
modern news articles, and other
forms of media proclaim the heroism
of the Americans as the liberate their
“Little Brown Brothers” from the
Spanish oppression (Wow! Should
we say, “Thank you, Big bro!”),
even if the reality reflects otherwise?
This just connotes that all forms
of mass media and other historical
evidences during under American
rule are censored or, better-to-
say, whitewashed. But what makes
it worse is that this make-believe
story of American heroism is already
instilled in the Philippine culture,
reflected by our colonial mentality.
Thus, the media is not the only factor
that was censored, even our minds
are and identity were also influenced.
With our tampered history, we as
Filipinos are continuously being
whitewashed up to this date.
AMERICAN LIES, ENEMY LINES

5. 5
THELIVING
MARIONETTES
THE JAPS ARRIVETHE JAPS ARRIVE
1941-1946
by Hope Andes
A
ccording to Salazar, Reyes,
and Nuval (1994), the Filipi-
nos, under the Japanese rule,
were like living marionettes hanging
on sticks and strings since 1942 to
1945. Despite the colonizer’s en-
couragement to develop the Taga-
log language; hands, feet, and even
tongues are tied and no signs of liber-
ation was evident. The Japanese pow-
ers claim to save the country from its
western oppressors whilst promot-
ing the Asian dominance through
their Greater East Asia Co-Prosper-
ity Sphere. Remember the American
strategy of acting as our defenders?
The Japanese force did the same but
it did not work. So, in pursuit of per-
suadingtheFilipinopeople,theJapa-
nese used the coercively manipulated
Filipino leaders under their so-called
“Puppet Government”. All publica-
tions were tied and controlled under
Japanese military administration’s
crossbar. Instead of literal strings,
the colonizers used their weapons in
order to control the Filipinos. The
Japanese Imperial Army and the Fil-
ipino puppet government’s Board of
Information imposed strict censor-
ship. Articles and other forms of me-
dia released during the said period
talks about how the Japanese aims to
make the Filipinos, not just free, but
also great. Ironically, the Japanese
visited the country offering bombs
as gifts and the government officials’
heads are at stake. Does that even
reflect making the country safe from
oppression or Asia for Asians? Be-
cause what’s evident was Asians kill-
ing Asians, Japanese soldiers will kill
those whose tongue will be as sharp
as a sword against their regime.GEN. MASAHARU HOMMA
–The Tribune

6. 6 MARCOS’ MARTIAL LAWMARCOS’ MARTIAL LAW
September 23, 1972
by Tinig
On the eve of the 23rd of September
1972, Filipinos turn to their
televisions to witness President
Ferdinand Marcos’ formal
declaration of Martial Law under
Presidential Proclamation No.
1081, which ignites the beginning
of President Ferdinand Marcos’ 14-
year dictatorship in the Philippines.
Under the guise of a “communist
threat” posed by the Communist
Party of the Philippines and the
Mindanao Independence Movement,
Martial Law provided Marcos the
entire power of the government as
well as the command of the armed
forces (Francisco, 2016).
What’s good, what’s bad?
The “New Society” that Marcos
intended to build was set on a
foundation of progress, with the goal
of improving the society’s well-being
in multiple aspects and freeing us
from our neo-colonial chains (Tan,
104).Thisisfurthersupportedbythe
willingness of Marcos to dismantle
our western ties in our journey to
self-discovery (The Lost Martial Law
Video, 00:45). He had his eyes on
political stability and social order,
which was evident in the legislations
he approved such as the creation
of the barangays (TLMLV, 2:46).
However, the checks and balances
that was provided for by having the
three branches of the government
was abolished as legislation was
put at the hands of one person: the
president (Tan, 103). In response
to the cry for justice of numerous
groups, the Marcos administration
responded with spite. Violence and
brute prevailed (Magsanoc-Alikpala,THE FIST OF A DICTATOR.
–Presidential Museum and Library

7. 7
4:45). The suspension of writ of
habeaus corpus was considered as
a dry run for Marcos’ declaration of
Martial Law, and it allowed for the
arrest of Marcos’ critics (Magsanoc-
Alikpala, 8:42). Behind the glitz
and glamour of the showcases of
Imelda Marcos lied the problems that
were set in reality. Unemployment
went rampant, prices surged, the
value of Philippine peso dropped,
and development of the agriculture
sector ceased (Magsanoc-Alikpala,
6:03). More so, thousands were
wrongfully imprisoned, tortured, and
killed (Francisco, 2016). We look
far beyond the East for internment
camps, when they have existed in our
very own lands. The ‘golden years’
of the Philippines was nothing but
a sham, yet some people at present
remain to believe the lie.
Within the first week of the
declaration of Martial Law, Marcos,
through Letter of Instruction No.
1, seized the assets of major media
broadcast outlets, claiming that
they were “engaged in subversive
activities against the government”
(Francisco, 2016). Teodoro Locsin,
Sr. of Philippine Free Press, Chino
Roces of Manila Times, and several
other journalists were arrested
and detained by the Philippine
Constabulary, which was then under
Fidel V. Ramos, who would serve as
the 12th president after Cory Aquino
later on.
Media outlets allowed to operate
While some broadcast publications
were prohibited from operating,
some outlets were still allowed to
print issues and air shows such
as the Philippine Daily Express,
Kanlaon Broadcasting System,
and several television channels.
One thing that these outlets have
in common though, is that they are
all owned and managed by Marcos’
supporters and friends. For instance,
Roberto Benedicto owned the two
aforementioned media outlets whilst
being the chairman of the Philippine
National Bank, ambassador to Japan,
and head of the Philippine Sugar
Commission (Martial Law Museum,
n.d.). Philippine Daily Express
would later dominate print media
for a few months (Pinlac, 2007).
Soon thereafter, new publications
would be established. Workers
from closed down publications,
such as the Philippine Herald,
eventually transferred to the
Philippine Journalists Inc. (PJI), a
new newspaper corporation under
the guidance of Benjamin “Kokoy”
Romualdez, Marcos’ brother-in-law.
On October 1972, PJI published the
Times Journal, its flagship paper, and
various supplements including the
Campus Journal, Parade, and People.
“There is no censorship at
present,” Marcos claims
Another newspaper publication
would then join the course of media –
the Manila Daily Bulletin. Under one
more of Marcos’ cornies, his aide-
de-camp, Hans Menzi, the Bulletin
was allowed to operate if, as per
Marcos’ request, it would change its
name. Marcos would later choose the
name Bulletin Today, from Menzi’s
presented options, for the reason
that it portrays the ‘New Society.’
Writing beside a censor
Perhaps the most significant
authority in media censorship during
the imposition of Martial Law was
the Media Advisory Council. With
Primitivo Mijares as the Chairman
of the Media Advisory Council,
media outlets were not entirely free
to act to their will. As Marcos’ top
media man, Mijares controlled the
circulation of information across
all platforms. Editorial opinion,
commentary, or any political,
unauthorized advertising were
banned. The Deparment of Public
Information explicitly prohibited any
material that ‘incite or inflame people
against the Government’ (“Manila
Imposes”, 1972). It did the same for
anything speaking ill of the military
or law enforcement authorities.
Guidelines on the do’s and don’ts of
news publication were issued by the
Malacañang Press Office. Through
its information ministry, good or
positive news about the government
were the only ones that saw that
light of day. Likewise, legislations
penalizing journalists who go against
the government were passed, so
criticaljournalists,whomwecanliken
to ilustrados of the Spanish period,
faced libel suits. In grave cases, they
were assassinated. Santiago (2007)
recalls how she and another reporter
had to put themselves under disguise
to cover a closed-door meeting
between Marcos and the leaders of
the Manila public school teachers,
who helped them get in. Despite all
that, in an interview with NBC Today
Show, “There is no censorship at
present,” Marcos would claim.
Ben Rodriguez, former Bulletin
Todayeditor,hassharedthatacensor
sits beside the editor to read and
approve whatever they would write.
The same is imposed for PJI, but not
for the Daily Express, which was not
visited by lawyers every afternoon.
Afterall, it was part of the Marcos
administration. Nevertheless, the
editors of the monitored publications
strivedtorunthepaperprofessionally
(Pinlac, 2007). Even though they
MARCOS’ MARTIAL LAWMARCOS’ MARTIAL LAW

8. 8
prohibited to publish articles against
the Marcoses and his administration,
they were allowed to print anything
else. “If in doubt about the story,
don’t print it,” Villanueva recalls.
Mijares would later on commit his
wrongdoings and expose Marcos’ in
a 24-page memo to the US House
International Organization. He
discussed the atmosphere of danger
that the president has insisted in
that led to the declaration of Martial
Law with the communists put on the
blame. Moreover, he confessed to
publishing misinformation to attack
the enemies of the administration
including delegates, legislators, and
companies as well as admitted to the
bombings and violence that pushed
for Marcos’ endeavors (Mijares,
1976).
THE REACH OF MARCOS’ POWER
MARCOS’ MARTIAL LAWMARCOS’ MARTIAL LAW
January 17, 1981
by Tinig
Upon the lifting of Martial Law in
1981, one would expect media
outlets to bustle in publishing and
airing what they had not done for
the past decade. However, Marcos’
control extends far beyond the
provisions of Martial Law. His word,
when calling publications, would still
prevail as he stood from a position
of authority (Pinlac, 2007). While
news of Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino
Jr.’s assassination was being spread,
publications were receiving calls
from Malacañan to cease the printing
of photos: whether of Ninoy’s actual
body, his family grieving, or the big
crowd sympathizing in his funeral.
Needless to say, the news was so
massive that despite the restricted
media, widespread reach was still
made. His death would thereafter
catalyze Marcos’ downfall. The
people, now demanding for a new
president, turned their backs from
mainstream newspapers that have
prevented them from being properly
informed, and resorted to alternative
press.
Marcos’ control extends
far beyond the provisions
of Martial Law
ThroughthePresidentialCommission
on Good Government (PCGG) of
Cory Aquino’s administration, the
Bulletin, the Express, and the Journal
were sequestered (Pinlac, 2007).
The sequestering was not an easy feat
as issues about mismanagement of
funds and the publication shot out.
Scandalssurroundedthegovernment
appointees handling the sequestered
corporations, saying that they were
‘milking’ them for their own selfish
gain. After an 18-year court battle,
PJI was returned to the hands of
Kokoy Romualdez, who insisted to
run the publication democratically,
refusing to twists stories for his sister
Imelda, to clear up the paper’s name.
Bulletin Today also chose to clear up
its hazy past and reopened under a
new owner. Returning to its original
name, Manila Bulletin went on to
become a ‘conservative paper that
stands for stability’ (Pinlac, 2007).
MILITARY RULE. President Ferdinand Marcos meets
with military leaders for Martial Law instructions.
–Presidential Museum and Library PH

9. 9
Reality or
fantasy?
Liberalization of
the press after
Martial Law
TOWARDS DEMOCRACYTOWARDS DEMOCRACY
1986–present
by Maya
Press freedom has a vital
role in democracy as what
former presidents Cory
Aquino and Fidel Ramos
have believed.
W
hen the Marcos Regime
ended, freedom of the
press has been redeemed
and the doors to dynamic media were
reopened once again. The oppressive
media control system that existed
during Martial law collapsed and
various new newspapers, radio and
television stations were established.
The media outlets that were handled
by the Marcoses and their cronies
were also abolished by the new
government. With the becoming
saturated and expanding media
market, those who came up with
formulas that captured the public
emerged dominant. Most media
outlets were also privatized and some
of the pre-Martial Law media owners,
such as the Lopez family, were able to
recover back their media companies
that were shut down and taken by the
government.
When the constitution changed, was
the media totally liberalized or was
there a less obvious system starting
to emerge to seize the freedom of
the press? During Corazon Aquino’s
timeaspresident,shewasalsoheavily
criticized by the media, particularly
her administration’s way of handling
those who attempted to overthrow
the Aquino administration. Despite
the criticisms, according to the
Reporters Without Borders, in
dealing with the media, Cory Aquino
was “uncomfortable with it but
managed to deal with it conscious
of the vital role of media in a
DILAWAN. Cory Aquino putting up the
iconinc “L” sign, signifying laban.

10. 10 TOWARDS DEMOCRACYTOWARDS DEMOCRACY
democracy.”
However, she once filed a libel case
against journalist Luis Beltran.
This was due to what Beltran wrote
in his column where he stated that
during one mutiny in August 1987,
Aquino was overpowered by her
fear and just hid under her bed.
Furthermore, in 1989, the National
Telecommunications Council also
coerced two radio stations to shut
down for airing “rebel propaganda”
but the order of closing these radio
stations was also lifted in the same
month. During her time as president,
there were at least 21 journalists
killed under her administration
according to Center for Media
Freedom and Responsibility.
The time of Fidel V. Ramos’
presidency almost did not have
controversial issues with the media.
Also, like Cory Aquino, he believes
that the role of media is necessary
and significant in pursuing and
upholding democracy. Compared to
Cory Aquino’s administration, there
were only at least 11 journalists that
were killed during his time as the
president but the Center for Media
Freedom and Responsibility still
found it alarming.
While Aquino and Ramos were
tolerant of the criticisms to their
administrations provided by the
media, it was somewhat a different
story for Joseph Estrada. He used his
influence and power as the president
to put various media outlets and
personalities that were critical of him
and his administration in pressure.
In 1999, he openly and publicly
criticized Philippine Daily Inquirer
saying that the newspaper was
biased in publishing criticisms
about him. Furthermore, the former
president prompted companies and
government-handled corporations
to withdraw their advertising deals
with the said newspaper. According
to Reporters Without Borders,
the president is “Aware that
advertisements are the lifeblood
of a media outfit, he waged a
campaign to deprive a newspaper
(Philippine Daily Inquirer) of ads.”
This act showed how media is being
oppressedwithoutexplicitlyviolating
the constitution and other legal
provisions that are said to protect
press freedom. Aside from these, he
also filed a P100 million libel suit
against Inquirer because of an article
in which he believed that his dignity,
honor, and reputation were tainted
and that the article was an attack on
his honesty and integrity as a public
official. He also threatened media
owners with tax audits.
In terms of press freedom, the
administration of Gloria Macapagal
Arroyo is one of the administrations
which was plagued with the most
controversial media freedom issues.
It was filled with libel suits, raids, and
the deadliest single attack against the
media, the Maguindanao Massacre.
During Arroyo’s presidency, the
form of attack or censoring the
media was through filing libel suits
against journalists. In fact, the first
gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo filed a
total of 50 libel cases, amounting to
P140 million, against 46 journalists
who exposed him of his alleged
wrongdoings such as corruption
and abusing influence. Not being
threatened, the journalists fought
back with a civil class suit, amounting
to P12.5 million, on the grounds of
causing damages, anxiety, loss of
income, and other inconveniences
to people of press and the press
freedom. However, in 2007, the first
gentleman dropped all the libel suits
in lieu of the World Press Freedom
Day. This just implied that all the
libel cases he had filed against these
journalists were not based on solid
grounds but were only meant to
protecthimselffromtheirallegations.
The Daily Tribune was also a victim
of press harassment when the police
raided its office because it was
suspected as a “possible source of
destabilization materials.” However,
the Supreme Court declared that
the raid was “plain censorship” and
the raid was meant to confiscate
newspaper copies, several story
drafts, and photos that were critical
of the Arroyo administration. In
2009, the deadliest single attack
against the media happened, the
Maguindanao Massacre, which was
a nightmare for press freedom.
Among 58 killed in the massacre
in Ampatuan, Maguindanao, 32 of
those were journalists who were
brutally attacked, killed, and buried
using a government backhoe. The
Ampatuan clan who was an ally of

11. 11TOWARDS DEMOCRACYTOWARDS DEMOCRACY
the Arroyo administration were
suspected as the masterminds of the
massacre to prevent the candidacy
of its rival, Esmael Mangundadatu
in 2010 elections. A decade later,
none of the 188 accused have been
convicted and justice for the victims
is still nowhere to be found.
In President Benigno Aquino III’s
time as the leader of the country,
the main concern of the president
and his administration was for
the press to have “balanced” and
unbiased reporting. He stated that
he repeatedly appealed for “fairer
media coverage,’’ despite all his
appeals, he also said that nothing
is happening and that the press is
mainly focused on the shortcomings
of his administration. However, the
number of journalists killed (31)
during his presidency was also very
alarming.
President Rodrigo Duterte, only
halfway through his term of being
the president of the country,
has expressed countless attacks,
harassment, and threats against
various media outlets. Some also
believe that the current president
uses his influence to threaten several
media owners.
In 2017, the president stated that
he wants to block the renewal of
ABS-CBN’s franchise. He also
accused the network of swindling.
Many believe that this is due to the
reason that the television network
has always been so critical of the
current administration through its
news and programs. Furthermore,
it is believed that the president
has a “grudge” on the network
because it did not air his already
paid political ads during the 2016
campaign season while his rivals’ are
being watched by the whole nation.
Furthermore, he also threatened the
Philippine Daily Inquirer of exposing
the owners for not paying proper tax
bills. Also, a major stockholder of the
newspaper sold the majority stake
due to, as people believe, harassment
and pressure from the current
administration, though his family is
denying it.
The next target of the administration
was Rappler, a media outlet
who is also renowned for being
critical of the ways of the current
administration. President Duterte
claimed that Rappler is owned by
Americans which is clearly a violation
of the 1987 constitution. The news
outlet has continuously debunked
and denied this claim by the
president. However, the Securities
and Exchange Commission still
rescinded Rappler’s registration
on the grounds of violating the
Constitution and Anti-Dummy Law.
The news outlet indicated that what
the administration did is “harassment
aimed at stifling press freedom in
the Philippines.” Another issue that
further stirred the alarm of the public
with regard to Philippine Press
Freedom is the conviction of Maria
Ressa, an outspoken journalist critic
of the president. Maria Ressa was
arrested several times due to cyber
libel suits and tax evasion case filed
against her.
Throughout history, it can be
observed that the method of media
censorship has changed over time.
From Cory Aquino’s presidency
up to the current administration,
it is clear that the most common
method to silence media outlets and
journalists is through threatening
them with libel suits and tax evasion
charges. Those who want to control
media nowadays keep on finding
ways that are “legal and not against
any law” which is concerning since
these ways are becoming effective to
suppress press freedom once again.
#DUTERTE016. An artwork for
Duterte’s presidential bid –Fraviro

12. 12 OPINIONOPINION
by Jan Josef Domingo
The media is important because it can shape
opinions. However, media censorship
hinders a significant part of the media in our
lives. In relation to this, censoring the media
isliketakingawayourfreedomofexpression.
Also, all of us have the right to criticize other
people, especially those who abuse their
power and position in the government.
The Philippines has gone through different
periods. In these periods, media censorship
is present. Even though the way of censoring
media is different, there are also similarities
between these periods. In my opinion, the
Nothing has
changed...
Shaping opinions
These patterns are
evident in history. The
censorship done under
the Marcos regime is the
same as how the media
is controlled under the
Spanish and Japanese
rule: make the media a
puppet of the government and those which
continuously oppose the government must
face death. How many journalists or writers
are killed during the Spanish and Japanese
time? Isn’t like deja vu when the former
President Marcos was also accused of killing
many journalists? To better illustrate, the
Spaniards imprisoned Jose Rizal for his act of
using his literary masterpieces to enlighten
the minds of the people. Likewise, Teodoro
Locsin, Sr. of Philippine Free Press and
Chino Roces of Manila Times were also sent
behind bars under the leadership of Marcos.
ThemannerofhowtheJapanesegovernment
was able to leash the necks of the media is the
same with how Marcos controlled the media
giant, ABS-CBN.
main objective of censoring the media is
to hide sensitive information. They censor
these sensitive information to prevent
people to be aware of injustice and pacify
them to keep them in place. Example of
this case is the censoring of the famous
novels by Jose Rizal, Noli Me Tangere and
El Filibusterismo. If the people, specifically
the Filipinos, have read it, they may start to
rebel against the church and the state. The
people in power did not want that to happen;
therefore, they banned these writings.
Media censorship should stop because
everyone has the right to express their
opinions and to know about important
events. All our opinions matter and even
if they are positive or negative, it will still
help shape our community. In conclusion,
using and listening to media is a significant
part of our lives so we must stop preventing
information from incoming and outgoing.
by Honey Pearl Fernandez
From the Spanish colonization to the
present, it seems like nothing has changed
as to how free media is treated. Leaders
utilize same patterns in shutting the words
which go against them. Worse, there are
even times when the reality is turned into
fabricated stories making the people believe
in things that they should not believe in.
After the Marcos dictatorship, were we able
to gain press freedom? By law, “yes”, but
in reality, “no”. We were White-washed
before and being “Yellow-washed” now.
President Aquino only patterned her style
in addressing the media with how the
Americans whitewashed the history. We all
believed that Cory Aquino is a democratic
presidentwhowillprovidefreedomofspeech
and would not take media criticism with a
shot of a gun. But, she is no different. Under
her rule, at least 21 journalists were killed
according to Center for Media Freedom and
Responsibility. But how come we regard
her as a hero? The question is similar to
how we see the Americans as our savior as
well. It is as if the wrongdoings of the late
President Aquino are “Yellow-washed” by
her democratic propaganda. We see her as
a savior but who knows how our history was
tampered? The Americans were able to do it,
it is not impossible that it will occur to her
as well.
The succeeding presidents also did the
same. Their wrongdoings just simply
become invisible in thin air. The connotation
of “Marami naman kasi silang nagagawa.”
does not justify the media bloodshed that
have been happening under every president.
Wars and social dilemmas become masks
of the reality. An example of this is how
the death of many journalists was covered
by the Maguindanao massacre. Another is
how President Duterte keeps on staining
media corporations’ credentials every time
these speak ill against his government. I
understand that there are times when the
media groups are indeed biased but why are
these companies only accused of “biased-
media” when they go against the will of the
government?
The worst is yet to come because nothing has
changed and probably will never change. A
new face of media censorship is prevailing
and overpowering. It controls our minds
without us knowing it. Perfect example
of this are the fake news. While some are
hidden under fabricated stories, covering
up the dirt with fake grass and meadows.
After which, people will claim it to be good
news and yet, nothing is real. Media, itself, is
becomingworseaswellasitalwaysgetsalong
with the currents, pleasing the people which

13. 13OPINIONOPINION
An age of
evolution
in free
press
A great
power
by Rayhanah Decampong
Freedom of speech, at present, is
something we take for granted. With
social media available for our use
anytime and anywhere, we get to speak
out our minds to our liking. Knowing
how we were silenced multiple times
throughout our history, it makes me
think twice about how I use my voice.
Indeed, with great power comes great
responsibility, and like the reformists
of the 18th century, I believe that the
pen is mightier than the sword. In a time
dominated by more noise than actual
constructive information, I’ve come to
realize that the way I exercise my right
to expression can reach heights higher
than what the writers of yesterday could.
Afterall, Jose Rizal wasn’t able to grasp a
smartphoneinhislifetime.Butthisreach
comes with a responsibility: to stand for
the truth and to brave the consequences
of doing so. This makes our struggle for
freedom worth it. This refuses to make
the deaths of the people who fought for
this right go in vain.
by Carmella de Leon
Looking back through the history of the
Philippines, media censorship has become
a challenge to the rights and freedoms of
not only the media or journalists, but the
common Filipinos as well. Freedom of
expression and the right of the Filipinos to
know the truth are being affected by media
censorship. Those who are in position above
their fellow Filipinos abuse their influence
and power to gain control of the “truths” that
the public know. Ways of censoring media
and hindering the freedom of expression
of journalists have evolved through time.
During Jose Rizal’s time, anyone who speaks
against the Spanish are exiled or killed while
in the present times, those who speak against
the authorities and government through
articles or cyberspace will face endless libel
suits and in the worst case scenarios, will be
killed as well.
Philippines was labeled as the Most
Dangerous Country For Journalists by the
International Federation of Journalists in
2018. This is due to several incidents of
killings of journalists that occured in the past
decade, and one of these is the most brutal
Maguindanao Massacre. Across Southeast
Asia, the Philippines has the most number
of journalists killed annually and most of
these cases are still unresolved even though
decades had already passed. Justice is almost
never met by the victims of media killings.
Aside from killings, often times news today
contain headlines of politicians filing label
cases against influential journalists because
they exposed them for their wrongdoings or
because they are a threat to these politicians.
Most of the times, the grounds for the filing
of these libel suits are unjust. They only use
libel suits to censor or to control the content
that will be released to the public.
As ways of repression of the media evolve,
the methods of obtaining freedom of speech
also evolve particularly through social media
andtheinternet.Throughsocialmedia,news
and information are easily propagated and
accessed. Many are becoming aware of the
currentstatusoffreedompressinthepresent
and many are expressing their concerns and
alarms about the issues in freedom press.
With this, today has become an age to
challenge and change the oppressive system
of media censorship. The public should use
the emerging ways as an advantage to fight
for the freedom of the press and freedom of
speech as a whole. However, social media
and the internet also poses risks and threats
to the quality of information the common
Filipinos receive. Also, sometimes, freedom
of speech is also being abused through these
ways. The question now is how should these
methods be utilized without worsening the
situation of the Filipinos with regard to
freedom of the press.
`
is controlled under the bandwagon effect.
Truly, there are a lot of hindrances in pursuit
of the truth. But, the most alarming factor is
the indestructible censorship when people
only believe what they find entertaining.
VINTAGE ADS –spot.ph

14. 14
Abinales P. N. and Amoroso, D. (2005). State and
society in the Philippines. USA: Rowman
Littlefield Publishers, Inc. p. 79
Agoncillo, T. A., Churchill, B. R. (2003). History
and culture, language, and literature: selected
essays of Teodoro A. Agoncillo. España,
Manila: University of Santo Tomas Pub.
House [Print]
Agoncillo, T.A. (1990). History of the Filipino People.
Garotech Publishing.
Center forMedia Freedom and Responsibility
Southeast Asian Press Alliance. (2004).
Press freedom in the Philippines : a study
in contradictions. Manila: Center for Media
Freedom and Responsibility.
Coronel, S. S. (2014). The media, the market, and
democracy: the case of the Philippines.
Journal of the European Institute for
Communication and Culture, 8(2), 109-
126. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/13183
222.2001.11008774
Coronel, S. (2018). A “fraught time” for press
freedom in the Philippines. National Public
Radio. Retrieved from https://www.npr.
org/sections/parallels/2018/01/17/
578610243/a-fraught-time-for-press-
freedom-in-the-philippines
Francia, L.H. (2010). A history of the Philippines:
From indios bravos to Filipinos. New York:
Overlook Press.
Francisco, K. (2016, September 22). “Martial law, the
dark chapter in Philippine history.” Rappler.
Retrieved from https://www.rappler.
com/newsbreak/iq/146939-martial-law-
explainer-victims-stories
Forbes, A. Courageous women in media: Marcos
and censorship in the Philippines. Pacific
Journalism Review, 21(1), 195-210.
Gregorio, F.S. (2012). In defense of freedom:
Philippine press through the ages. Retrieved
from http://nhcp.gov.ph/in-defense-of-
freedom-philippine-press-through-the-ages/
Magsanoc-Alikpala, K. (1997). Batas military
[Documentary]. Philippines: Foundation for
Worldwide People Power
Manila imposes strict censorship on news media.
(1972, September 29). The New York
Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.
com/1972/09/29/archives/manila-
imposes-strict-censorship-on-news-media.
html
Martial Law Museum. (n.d.). “Breaking the news:
silencing the media under martial
law.” Martial Law Museum, https://
martiallawmuseum.ph/magaral/breaking-
the-news-silencing-the-media-under-martial-
law/.
Maslog, C.C (2007). Philippine Communication Today.
New Day Publishers.
Mijares, P. (1976). The conjugal dictatorship of
Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos. New York:
Union Square Publications.
Ocampo, A. (1998). Rizal’s Morga and views of
Philippine history. Philippine Studies,
46(2), 184-214. Retrieved from www.
philippinestudies.net
Penn State University. (2018, March 6). Being “White-
Washed”: a Cultural Phenomenon. Retrieved
December 5, 2019, from https://sites.psu.
edu/twu21/2018/03/06/being-white-
washed-a-cultural-phenomenon/
Pinlac, M. (2007). Marcos and the press. Center for
Media Freedom and Responsibility. Retrieved
from http://cmfr-phil.org/media-ethics-
responsibility/ethics/marcos-and-the-press/
Pinoy Trending and Info. (2016, December 9).
The lost martial law video – golden years
of the Philippines [Video file]. Retrieved
from https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=F1Xgu6WybOk
References
CITATIONSCITATIONS

15. 15
EDITORIAL BOARD
Editors
Layout Editor
Contributors
Researchers
Professor
Hope Andes
Juan Jose
Tinig
Carmella
Rayhanah Decampong
Carmella Grace De Leon
Rayhanah Decampong
Jan Josef Domingo
Honey Pearl Fernandez
Mr. Macapinlac
FOR THIS ONE-ISSUE SPECIAL EDITION
CITATIONSCITATIONS
PhilippinePress History (2015). Censorship during
American the Occupation. Retrieved from
https://philippinepresshistory.wordpress.
com/2015/05/26/censorship-during-
the-american-occupation/
Salazar, G. P., Reyes, F. R., Nuval, L. Q. (1994).
World war II in the Philippines. Manila:
Veterans Federation of the Philippines.
San Juan, E. (1978). Marcos and the media.
Remembering the Struggles During Martial
Law, 7(3).39-47.
Santiago, J. S. (2007, September 1). Being a reporter
during martial law. Center for Media
Freedom and Responsibility. Retrieved
from http://cmfr-phil.org/media-ethics-
responsibility/ethics/being-a-reporter-
during-martial-law/
Santos, J. B. F. Pinlac, M. (2007). Back to the
past: A timeline of press freedom. Center
for Media Freedom and Responsibility.
Retrieved from http://cmfr-phil.org/
media-ethics-responsibility/ethics/back-
to-the-past-a-timeline-of-press-freedom/
Smith, R. (1945). The Philippine Bill of Rights. The
Far Eastern Quarterly, 4(2), 170-181.
doi:10.2307/2048968
The American Conquest of the Philippines in 1899.
(2019). Retrieved from https://www.
youtube.com/watch?v=rg2B_z-wZXM
Thomas, M. (2006). Isabelo de los Reyes and
the Philippine Contemporaries of La
Solidaridad. Philippine Studies, 54(3),
381-411. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/
stable/42633878
Tuazon, R.R. (2000). The print media: a tradition
of freedom. Retrieved from https://ncca.
gov.ph/about-ncca-3/subcommissions/
subcommission-on-cultural-
disseminationscd/communication/the-print-
media-a-tradition-of-freedom/

16. MediaCensorshipbyMagoz