Bong Go, a victim of fake news

"Mahirap sagutin ang mga bintang na wala ka namang kinalaman” (It’s hard to answer allegations that you are not even involved in). – Secretary Bong Go

When Special Adviser to the President Christopher Lawrence Go, also known as Bong Go or the “Selfie King” attended the Senate hearing on the Philippine Navy’s Frigate Acquisition Project on Feb. 19, he was accompanied not only by Cabinet members who provided him with moral support – he was likewise accompanied by people who believe in his innocence. These people even organized a rally outside the Senate grounds to show him that they are there for him in this trying time.

But while it was apparent that he was summoned by the Senate in an attempt to make him admit the allegations hurled against him in intervening on the said project, the same venue showed us many lessons that SAP Go was able to champion. One, he made it clear that he strongly supports the Senate hearing and that he has committed to attend to its succeeding meetings, all for the truth to come out. He likewise urged the senators in the hearing to also summon Rappler and Inquirer to lay down the facts that they used in exposing his supposed intervention in the said frigate deal.

Seeing SAP Go’s cooperation in the hearing shows one very important thing: he is proving to the nation that he has done nothing wrong and that he has nothing to hide. He is cooperating with the Senate, despite the hearing itself being a lopsided approach in resolving such issue, and by doing this I believe that he will soon be exonerated from all the malicious accusations and claims written by the media. Now, I’m curious if ever these mentioned news outlets will be held accountable for their distorted and rather irresponsible reporting. Will they once again make a public outcry saying that the state is curtailing their freedom of speech? Will they once again wrap themselves in the blanket of “press freedom” just to get away from the consequences of their actions?

To support his claim that Rappler is publishing “fake news,” SAP Go called them out on their post in the middle of the Senate hearing on the frigate deal: “Another classic example of fake news… Rappler, ngayon lang o, witness ko po kayong lahat, wala ako sinabing [my office] endorsed frigate supplier’s complaint to [the Defense Department].”

On the other hand, Senator Antonio Trillanes tried to defend Inquirer and Rappler by saying that their respective reports are not fake due to the documents they presented. However, if we examine the said reports, it cannot be said that there was no malice in the articles that claim that SAP Go intervened in the frigate project, or that the “Palace had special interest in the Navy’s selection of weapons system supplier.” If we also look into the evidence provided by the reports of both news outlets, can we outright say that these point to the claims of their headlines? Was the evidence they showed enough to support their claims? Did they do their job in getting both sides of the story before publishing a report that may damage the reputation of an innocent man?

I don’t think so.

That being said, I believe it is imperative to ask whether these are actual news reports or just another form of black propaganda being presented as “news.” We must find out whether these outlets reported this alleged budding scandal in search for the truth or to merely propagate a lie. If it’s the former, then they shouldn’t have released it without getting the side of SAP Go. If they released it just to show that they got first dibs on what seems to be a brewing controversy, then there lies the problem.

Based on the manner of interrogation of Senator Trillanes, it is obvious that he already has a biased opinion toward the report, if not pushing for the belief that SAP Go actually intervened in the frigate project. It also seemed that he blatantly disregarded the fact that both former FOIC Vice Admiral Ronald Joseph Mercado and Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana already cleared SAP Go of his alleged involvement in the project, by trying to establish that it is “still possible” that SAP Go could have intervened in the deal. Is it our policy nowadays to prosecute someone based on mere possibilities alone?

If a news report claims that SAP Go had indeed intervened based only on documents that do not even directly provide evidence to the allegation, is it safe for us to say that Senator Trillanes is the kind who believes in hearsay and outright fake news, given his stand and support for Rappler and Inquirer’s baseless gossiping?

In line with SAP Go’s request for Rappler and Inquirer to be part of the Senate hearing on fake news, I think it is time that we likewise focus on news outlets that are publishing malicious lies. In the past two hearings on fake news, the focus was on social media platforms and on how to control the proliferation of misinformation and disinformation online. However, I believe that it is also vital to scrutinize the mainstream media because they are supposed to be the primary credible institutions for information dissemination. And aside from addressing the current problems surfacing on social media, especially that of fake news sites and issues with bloggers, it is important to tackle irresponsible reporting that can be seen on mainstream media. Bloggers can be influential in the online realm, but they do not present themselves as news outlets, and that their audiences are aware of their posts as opinions on certain burning topics. It is also important to digress toward mainstream media, because malicious articles are now being used as their sources despite them being written and published as so-called “news reports.”

If this is not deliberately misleading the public through disinformation, then I don’t know what is.