freedom of expression in the philippines essay

Freedom of Expression Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Searching for freedom of expression essay? Look no further! This argumentative essay about freedom of expression, thought, & speech, will inspire you to write your own piece.

Introduction

• The Key Concepts

Freedom of expression refers to the right to express one’s opinions or thoughts freely by utilizing any of the different modes of communication available. The ideas aired should, however, not cause any intentional harm to other personality or status through false or ambiguous statements. Communication of ideas can be achieved through speech, writing or art. Freedom of expression, unlike freedom of thought, may be regulated by the appropriate authorities in any society in order to avoid controversies between different individuals.

The extent to which this limitation or censorship is done varies from nation to nation and is dependent on the government of the day. According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, every individual has the right to search for information, access and impart variety of ideas irrespective of the frontiers.

Freedom of Expression: The Key Concepts

The subject of freedom of expression has always been controversial, especially when considering political aspects. A state is perceived to have the mandate to impede people from convening groups in which they air their opinions if those views can result in direct harm to other people.

However, the interference would only be an exception if doing so results in more beneficial outcomes than standing aside. For one to be in a position to gauge the eventuality of a gain or a loss, then there should be absolute freedom of expression on all matters irrespective of the nature of the sentiments made.

Arguments for absolute freedom of expression can be a made by evaluating the purpose for which the ideas are expressed and the manner in which we evaluate what is true or false. According to Mill (Eisenach, 2004), the right to express one’s opinions offers humanity a rare chance to switch over an error for the truth if the idea expressed happens to be true.

In case the opinion happens to be wrong, mankind stands a chance of getting a clearer picture of the known truth through collusion with a mistake. Therefore, freedom of expression acts in the best interests of mankind as it endeavors to progress and its limitation deprives people of the prospects of growth.

Whether we let expression of an opinion to be limited or censored, whereas it could be true, then we present ourselves as beyond reproach. We consider all that we know to be the truth and therefore dispel all opinions that question this truth. It is possible for people or authorities to be in fault. For instance, what we consider to be morally right or wrong may not be so.

The lines that define moral rights and wrongs were set by people who could possibly have mistaken. In order to draw the limit, one must differentiate between sureness and the truth. Our certainty that a particular idea is false does not in any way excuse its expression. Suppressing such an idea would not only justify our confidence of the opinion being wrong, but also proves that we are flawless.

If limitation of people’s freedom of expression in matters such as racism is based on certainty that mankind does not stand to lose any benefit, then this sureness should be founded in the freedom itself. We can only consider ourselves to be certain when there have been no opinions raised to question the truths we hold. Therefore, in order to boost our certainty, we have to leave room for the opposing beliefs.

There are governments that censor the expression of certain ideas not because they are false, but because they are considered to be hazardous to the society. Mill argues that in such a situation, the hazard in the expressed opinions is questionable. The only way to ascertain that the opinion is in fact dangerous is not to suppress its expression but to allow its free discussion.

Secondly, if the opinion that is being limited is true, then the alternative view held by the government must be false. Experience has shown that all beliefs that are false are never constructive in the long run. Therefore, the government that prefers to hold a false conviction in place of a hazardous truth does not act in the best interests of its people.

In many instances, the silenced view may be a mistake. However, most of these mistakes do carry with them a scrap of truth. On the other hand, the existing view on each of the different topics often does not contain the entire truth. By listening to the opinions of others on the matter, an opportunity to learn the rest of the uncovered truths presents itself.

For instance in politics, we could have two political parties with different agendas. One wants to institute reforms while another desires to ensure stability. People may not be in a position to discern what should be retained or altered, but ensuring the parties at opposing ends ensures each party checks on the performance of the other. In the long run, we strike for a beneficial balance between their supposed agendas (Bhargava, 2008).

Moreover, if the opinion being expressed is entirely true, it may not be considered so with certainty. For confidence to feature, these views must be contested against other rational opinions of others in order to single out the supporting arguments. It is expected that those who believe in their opinions will place strong arguments in their favor (Matravers, 2001).

If an authority believes in the rationality of its ideas, then it should leave room for the expression of opposing ideas. For instance, if any reigning political party has faith in the views it has concerning the development of the country’s economy, it should not be wary of an opposition party with contradicting views. After all what they stand for has factual backing (O’Rourke, 2001).

Lastly, the battle for supremacy between different opinions opens up a more comprehensive understanding of our beliefs. We begin to comprehend what is required of us and are, thus, in a position to act on them. Human beliefs do not exhibit any motivation and the debates that arise are what add fuel to the fire.

Holding beliefs with a conservative mindset only serves to hinder our acceptance of the possible alternatives (Jones, 2001). Therefore, opposition exhibited in the freedom of speech opens up a lee way for open-mindedness besides posing a challenge to hypocrisy and logical sluggishness.

The absence of restrictions on people’s freedom of oppression allows for the exchange of error for truth or the clarification of the existing truth. It also reinforces our certainty in the opinions we consider true besides increasing our open-mindedness and thoughtfulness. For governments, it ensures those entrusted with the leadership of the country have reasonable opinions that work for the common good of the country’s citizens.

Free discussion and analysis of different ideas will, thus, result in the prosperity of mankind rather than the detrimental effects it is assumed to bring.

Freedom of Expression FAQ

• What Is Freedom of Expression? Freedom of expression is the ability of individual people and groups to express their thoughts, beliefs, emotions, and ideas without any restrictions or censorship from the government. This freedom is protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
• How Does Freedom of Expression Protect Individual Liberty? The First Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees freedom of expression to all citizens. This means that the US Congress does not have the right to restrict the media or people from speaking freely. People also have the right to peaceful assemblies and petitions to the government.
• Why Is Freedom of Expression Important for Democracy? Freedom of expression is an essential human right. It guarantees the free exchange of information, opinions, and ideas in the public space, allowing people to independently form their own views on all the essential issues.

Bhargava, H. (2008). Political Theory: An Introduction . Delhi: Pearson Education.

Eisenach, E. (2004). Mill and Moral Character . New York: Penn State Press.

Jones, T. (2001). Modern Political Thinkers and Ideas: An Historical Introduction . New York: Routledge.

Matravers, D. (2001) Reading Political Philosophy: Machiavelli to Mill . New York: Routledge.

O’Rourke, K. (2001). John Stuart Mill and Freedom of Expression: The Genesis of a Theory . Connecticut: Taylor & Francis.

• Defamation and Law
• Ethical Issues for Defense Attorneys and Persecutors
• The Importance of Freedom of Speech
• Prometheus: The Protector and Benefactor of Mankind
• Knowledge of the External World
• Animal Cruelty as an Ethical and Moral Problem
• Death Penalty and Ethics
• Attorney Client Privilege: Alton Logan’s Law Case
• Safety at the Construction Sites
• Planning and Reviewing of an Identity Theft Case
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, November 6). Freedom of Expression Essay. https://ivypanda.com/essays/freedom-of-expression/

"Freedom of Expression Essay." IvyPanda , 6 Nov. 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/freedom-of-expression/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'Freedom of Expression Essay'. 6 November.

IvyPanda . 2018. "Freedom of Expression Essay." November 6, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/freedom-of-expression/.

1. IvyPanda . "Freedom of Expression Essay." November 6, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/freedom-of-expression/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Freedom of Expression Essay." November 6, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/freedom-of-expression/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

• Basic site functions
• Ensuring secure, safe transactions
• Secure account login
• Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
• Remembering privacy and security settings
• Analyzing site traffic and usage
• Personalized search, content, and recommendations
• Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

• Remembering general and regional preferences
• Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

Newsletter Sign Up

Email Address

Your browser is outdated, it may not render this page properly, please upgrade .

Unshackling Expression: The Philippines Report

October 10, 2020

• Key details

Key Details

The Philippines spends more time in social media than any other country. In the early days of the coronavirus pandemic, it even reported the greatest increase globally of users spending more time in social media. This does not mean that the state of its freedom of expression online is at its healthiest. Various governmental restrictions, limitations, attacks, and even abuses of this freedom exist, keeping the Philippines consistently near the top of “most dangerous countries for journalists” lists. (It’s the fifth worldwide.) The Philippines is only partly free on the 2019 Freedom on the Net Report and dropped three notches from last year.

Globally, social media, which was once thought to level the playing field on civil discussion, now “tilts dangerously toward illiberalism, exposing citizens to an unprecedented crackdown on their fundamental freedoms.” Commenting on attacks from online ‘trolls,’ a former Philippine senator expressed that “we used to say the internet was a marketplace of ideas, [but] now it’s a battlefield.”

In the Philippines, social media is where freedom of expression is usually realized. It is also a crime scene, scoured by law personnel for evidence of utterances which they may find illegal, but may also be valid expressions of discontent and dissent. Considering the current political climate—one dominated by a president often described as ‘authoritarian’ and ‘dictatorial’ and a police and military force that takes his word as law— the line blurs and one is usually mistaken for the other. A pandemic of ‘fake news’—i.e., disinformation, misinformation, and false information—also muddle the waters by which Filipinos navigate their sources of information. As of date, Congress has found a way to criminalize “perpetration” and “spreading” of fake news, which does not bode well for a citizenry that desperately needs digital literacy, in light of a collective susceptibility to believe, on face value, whatever they see online.

Freedom of expression thus grapples not only with restrictions or limitations to speech; in the age of social media and increased internet access, it also forces us to rethink the context and environment that enables and assures its meaningful realization, as will be discussed below.

Read the full report here or below.

Download Publication

• Wednesday, 18 September 2024

• email [email protected]

Reevaluating “freedom” in Philippine press freedom during the pandemic

Despite being a democratic country, press freedom and freedom of expression in the Philippines is still undermined. To make matters worse, it was further restricted during the pandemic—the time where a free and factual flow of information was needed the most.

With cases such as the Ampatuan Massacre and attacks on press during the Martial Law, the Philippines has always been on the bottom in championing press freedom. Injustices and flaws in the system continue to prevail, as improvements have never seen the light of day in the previous administrations. Duterte’s Administration is not an exception, where claws are sharpened to diminish the freedom of the press amid the pandemic, shackling press freedom more than ever. As the pandemic arises, it is ideal upon countries to alleviate the number of COVID-19 cases and expand the role of the press in disseminating information across its stakeholders given the restrictions imposed upon. However, when looked upon in the Philippine context, its government’s response shows otherwise.  According to the Reporters Without Borders' (Reporters Sans Frontieres or RSF) 2021 World Press Freedom Index, the Philippines ranked 138th out of 180 countries in line with the level of freedom provided to journalists. This is the country’s fourth consecutive year of dropping its rank in the index, which was rooted in various factors.

Oppress and repress the press: The list of press freedom attacks in the Philippines

RSF cited that the 2021 World Press Freedom rank is highly affected with the continuous attacks of incumbent President Rodrigo Duterte and his administration on the press, particularly in the government-backed shutdown of ABS-CBN, the country’s largest broadcasting company, and its “grotesque judicial harassment campaign” and cyber libel conviction against Rappler and Rappler CEO Maria Ressa. They also cited that the media persecution was worsened with the rise of fake news, misinformation, disinformation, censorship, “online harassment campaigns orchestrated by pro-Duterte troll armies,” and “cyber-attacks on alternative news websites and the site of the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines.” Amid the pandemic, the Republic Act (RA) 11469 or the “Bayanihan to Heal as One Act” that was directed by Duterte and passed by the Congress last March 23, 2020 included a provision on penalizing “fake news” in the sixth section of the passed law. In less than a month from its implementation, 60 individuals across the country had already been charged by government authorities in line with the said provision. This opens up circumstances and danger for random charges to point out a report or post as “fake news” due to a lack of understanding of the provision and feeling of threat from officials who felt that they have been objected to criticism. The lockdown prevents and restricts public protest, and with the curtailing the freedom of expression in social media, the voice of the people has been further controlled and silenced. Another alarming and controversial legislation is RA 11479, or the Anti-Terrorism Law, which was passed last July 2020 despite the strong outcry from lawyers, human rights advocates, National Union of Journalists in the Philippines, some lawmakers, and journalists. This law places the security, life, and liberty of journalists on the line and raises an indirect threat and blow on the practice of journalism given the broad law provisions about how terrorism and propaganda for alleged terrorists are defined. From here, it can be seen that law weaponization has been used as a tool to oppress and repress the press that martial law declaration is no longer needed as it equates with such. Journalists or perceived critics and oppositions of the Duterte administration were labeled as communists and/or terrorists for reporting on issues that were kept from the light and are usually subject to red-tagging, physical and online harassment, arrests, death threats, or worse, killed. These have been reflected in the cases confronted by Ressa, Eastern Vista Executive Director and Tacloban Human Rights reporter Frenchie Mae Cumpio and Northern Dispatch’s Ilocos correspondent Paola Espiritu , and the deaths of Radyo Pilipino host Virgilio “Vir” Maganes and Bicol Today local news website former reporter Jobert Bercasio . As much as there were government claims that press freedom was not under attack because journalists were still free to do their profession, University of the Philippines Diliman Journalism Associate Professor and Journalist Danilo Arao stated that press freedom is not just about being able to report, but rather to disseminate and access information, public or private or even positive or negative, without the aftermath and risks of threat. “So that’s what we need to remember regarding the so-called freedom, or the atmosphere—that particular pretentious atmosphere of freedom that (the) media are experiencing right now,” Arao stated. According to the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility, there were 223 threats and attacks against the press across the country from June 30, 2016 to April 30, 2021. Furthermore, it was reported that 23.31% of them are done in the form of intimidation (followed by libel [16.59%], online harassment [8.97%], and killings [8.52%]), wherein online mediums were mainly used and state agents (51.12%) were alleged as perpetrators of the said increased attacks. “These are the indications, no matter how anecdotal, of how press freedom has been under systematic attack. So we’re using the phrase ‘systematic attack’ to qualify the fact that laws and the entire bureaucracy have been weaponized by the Duterte administration to ensure that its concept of journalism will be one of blind obedience,” Arao mentioned in an interview with INQUIRER.net.

Undermining the (supposed) role of the Philippine President 

President Duterte has made his stand clear with his low tolerance and preference on the press with his speeches and announcements as journalists are investigating and questioning the programs and actions of the government and his “war on drugs.” Ironically, these are what journalists should do: to gather, analyze, investigate, and disseminate the “truth.” According to Arao, Duterte functions as an “enabler” of the Congress’ and the judge’s decision for the ABS-CBN franchise denial and conviction of Ressa. However, this should not be the case. The freedom of expression and press freedom is clearly stipulated in the Philippine Constitution’s Bill of Rights (Article 3, Section 4), stating that “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.”  Given that the government’s prime duty is “to serve and protect the people,” the President, as the highest appointed authority appointed to implement and abide with the highest law of the land, should protect and advocate press freedom; work with the media to ensure free flow of expression and information; protect the rights of its journalists and its people, and; open criticisms as a point of improvement rather take it as a point of offense. 

Protecting the freedom of the press

A free, open, and pluralistic press is the building block of an informed, rational, critical, and empowered citizen and society. Without it, knowledge about public information and government programs and services would be left in disarray and dialogue on domestic issues, public grievances, and government legislations would be out of sight.  Thus, the citizens and officials must work hand in hand to eradicate biased news and information, prevent misinformation and disinformation, and stop the spread of fake news to prevent corrupt minds in society and to regain the trust and relationship between the government and society to function wholly and inclusively. Problems and outcries are raised because there are flaws in the system that need to be corrected. Since the government is made and chosen by the people, for the people; thus, good governance, transparency, and accountability must be practiced, as press freedom is one of the cornerstones of democracy. As World Press Freedom Day is celebrated today, may Filipinos be awakened and reminded of the significance of press freedom in honor of the thousands of lives of journalists and media organizations who have fought and are still arising to the status quo to provide transparency and fact-driven information to the public.

• The Organization

Publications

• The Benildean
• Shades of Gray
• Dekunstrukt
• Health & Fitness
• Buhay / Kolehiyo
• Paglalakbay
• College / Life
• Entertainment

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Press Freedom in the Philippines: A Historical Survey

This paper wishes to explore press freedom in the Philippines with a survey through the pre-colonial to the present day, looking at how press freedom developed as an idea, how it is practiced, how is threatened - not only by the state or external private actors, but within institutions and media collectives as well, and how society, politics and the economy lead to inhibitions and censorship (whether by state, media institutions or journalists themselves) in media.

Related Papers

Jovelyn Marie Navales

PhD Dissertation, University of California, Riverside

Neal Matherne

This work is a critical analysis of art, memory and prestige in the late twentieth- and early twenty-first-century Philippines. I am concerned with the creation of the Philippine nation by various acts of commemoration and recognition (awards, exhibits, and concerts) through which artists are valorized, immortalized and celebrated. I answer three broad questions: (1) how do patron-client and kinship systems determine the national recognition of artists in the post-colonial world? (2) how is music used in the nation-building project? and (3) how is national mythology created and contested through the commemoration of individual artists in the Philippines? I approach Philippine area studies through discussions of the past in ethnomusicology, borrowing theory from memory studies and methodology from historical anthropology while expanding both fields with a consideration of expressive culture. To describe this interaction between state and artist, I focus on the National Artist Award (NAA), the highest honor bestowed upon an artist by the Philippine government. I begin by recounting an aberration of the nominating process: the 2009 National Artist Award controversy. Then-President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo deleted a name from the prestigious NAA nominee list and added artists with suspiciously close ties to her administration. Then, I analyze the 2010 re-performance of National Artist for Music José Maceda’s Ugnayan, a multi spatial composition for 20 radio stations. This work was originally performed in 1974 with the explicit support of then-First Lady Imelda Marcos. Finally, I describe a 2012 exhibit featuring the materials of National Artist for Music Felipe De Leon Padilla Sr. I sort through clashing characterizations of De Leon of as “crisis composer” who served the Philippines at times of foreign and domestic peril. Reading against the grain of these public acts of commemoration and recognition, I provide an account from the “ground up” and consider how the public construction of national artists renders the Philippines into a unified conceptual whole.

Delor Lauchang

Sir Anril Pineda TIATCO

The essay inquires a general question: what is the relationship of theater and human rights? A preliminary reflection is provided using the different activities staged at the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) on the occasion of Pista Rizalina (Fiesta Rizalina) in September 2017. The festival was named after Rizalina Ilagan, a student activist-artist abducted by the military during the Martial Law era under President Ferdinand E. Marcos. To date, Ilagan's body has not been found. The festival is a commemoration of the victims of human rights violations encountered by thousands of Filipinos since the Martial Law era of Marcos. In the end, it is argued that performing human rights at the CCP is a tool to transmit traumatic experiences for the understanding of those who did not suffer violence, oppression and tyranny (i.e. today's younger generation). The relationship of theatre and human rights is asserted to be a rehearsal for a community where the other is encountered with care and responsibility.

MULA TORE PATUNGONG PALENGKE

Sarah Raymundo

Kira Jorgio

Talks about contemporary law and jurisprudence governing the Media and Broadcasting practice in the Philippines.

An Update on Filipino Philosophy: A Critical Bibliography

Rolando M Gripaldo

This bibliographic research is the second update of Filipino philosophy: A critical bibliography [1774-1992]. The first update—from 1993 to 1997—was finished in 1999. Every five years, an update is conducted so that researchers will be abreast with the current works directly or indirectly related to Filipino philosophy. It is hoped that others may continue this kind of update.

Jerryk Alico , Riz Sunio

Student journalists are trained to express and translate their outputs into paper. The preferred language medium they use to do so, however, may convey their perception and attitude towards languages. This study aimed to determine the preferred language that student journalists use in their articles, the reason for their preference, and their attitude towards English, Filipino, and their vernacular language. Mixed qualitative and quantitative methods were used as research design. Data were collected through distributing survey questionnaires to 58 student journalists in Mindano State Univeristy-Marawi during academic year 2013-2014 and conducting interviews to a random sample of 12 from those surveyed. Results showed that most of the student journalists prefer English while only a few uses Filipino and none prefer vernacular in writing. English is perceived by the student journalists to be understood by more people, dynamic and rich; formal, an indicator of better proficiency but not an indicator if intelligence and high social status. Comfortability, ability to express better, training, usage in school, and self-efficacy are the reported reasons why they prefer such language. Filipino and vernacular were least preferred due to lack of resources for reference and writing, lack of knowledge, and low self-efficacy on the usage of the medium. They said that if they were given the mastery of the languages, they are willing to write in Filipino and vernacular. Thus, there is a need to instill versatility of the usage of Filipino and vernacular among student journalists through adequate training and equal appreciation towards them.

Neslie Agoto

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Hitotsubashi Journal of Social Studies

Satoshi Nakano

Chronicle: A Journal of Technology, Design, and Culture

Elvin Amerigo Valerio

Jonalou S Labor

Kate Ashley Caputolan

Philippine Studies: Historical and Ethnographic Viewpoints

Caroline Hau

Vicente L . Rafael

De La Salle University Press (e-book)

Stefan Huebner

Michael Charleston B Chua

sunshine ederango , Luigi C Conti

Philippine Studies

Roderick Galam

Vec Alporha , Meggan Evangelista

Karl Ian Cheng Chua

Kritika Kultura

Josiebeth Hermo

Alfred W McCoy

UP Alay Sining

KEMANUSIAAN The Asian Journal of Humanities

Grace V. S. Chin

Julio Teehankee

Racidon Bernarte

Humanities Diliman

Emerald F Manlapaz

in:Imagining Japan in Post War East Asia: Identity Politics, Schooling and Poular culture

Paul Morris

S. Lily Mendoza

Virgilio Reyes Jr.

informaworld.com

Christine Bacareza Balance

Celina Cristóbal

Trimax Espino

Emily Lopez-Ledesma Tan

Princess Ramos

Asian Affairs: An American Review

Julio Teehankee , Cleo Calimbahin

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• The UP Charter
• University Seal
• University Administration
• UP Strategic Plan 2023-2029
• UP and the SDGs
• University Quality Policy
• Principles on Artificial Intelligence
• International Linkages
• Budget and Finances
• Academic Programs
• Constituent Universities
• Undergraduate Admissions | UPCAT
• Varsity Athletic Admission System
• Graduate Admissions
• Philosophy of Education
• Student Learning Assistance System
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Academics and Research
• Public Service
• Search for: Search Button

What is academic freedom and why the fuss?

Academic freedom. The term has been tossed around so much in recent weeks, on social media, in the news, on the streets, but what is it really? And why are people so determined to defend it?

The recent abrogation by the Department of National Defense (DND) of its 1989 Accord with the University thrust the subject of academic freedom into the larger public sphere. The subsequent red-tagging of UP alumni by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), which DND Secretary Delfin Lorenzana later acknowledged as an “unpardonable gaffe” and which the AFP apologized for, only served to intensify public discussion.

To put things in perspective, UP organized Usapang KP (Kalayaan sa Pamantasan) , an online discussion series that intends to dive into the nuances of academic freedom. Its first episode, “Mga Terror, Hindi Terrorista,” was streamed live on February 4 and focused on defining academic freedom and its significance to the life of a university.

Watch the replay of the webinar on TVUP’s YouTube channel .

The episode featured alumnae and revered professors emeriti, Dr. Solita Monsod (Economics) and Dr. Gisela Concepcion (Marine Science) as main speakers. Reactors were: fellow alumni Atty. Soledad Deriquito Mawis, Dean of the College of Law, Lyceum of the Philippines University; Dr. Giovanni Tapang, Dean of the College of Science, UP Diliman; and, Atty. Theodore Te of the Free Legal Assistance Group. It was moderated by Professor Emeritus Jose Dalisay Jr., and Malou Mangahas, Co-founder and Board Member, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism.

So what is academic freedom?

While the 1987 Philippine Constitution states in Article XIV, Section 5 (2) that “Academic freedom shall be enjoyed in all institutions of higher learning”, it does not define academic freedom.

The reason for this lack of definition can be found in the deliberations of the 1986 Constitutional Commission on September 9. Commissioner Adolf Azcuna said, “Since academic freedom is a dynamic concept and we want to expand the frontiers of freedom, especially in education, therefore, we will leave it to the courts to develop further the parameters of academic freedom. We just say that it shall be enjoyed in all institutions of higher learning.”

US Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter’s concurring opinion in Sweezy v. New Hampshire (1957), widely acknowledged as having captured the essence of academic freedom, has found its way into Philippine jurisprudence. Monsod, Mawis, and Te cited Frankfurter’s opinion that academic freedom consists of the “four essential freedoms” of a university “to determine for itself on academic grounds who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught, and who may be admitted to study.”

For Concepcion, it is the freedom “to pursue knowledge without boundaries in an unencumbered and enabling environment.” Faculty members, she said, have earned the right to mentor and teach through years of study, research, and training that allowed them to gain expertise.

Academic freedom, she added, exists in an academic framework, a highly complex system that contains not only the functions of universities and their players, but also the factors that affect the successful execution of these functions toward the overarching goal of serving the nation and humanity. Concepcion said academic freedom is ensured by external support, including support from the government, which provides the encouraging atmosphere for teaching, learning, inquiry, and discussion to thrive and flourish.

Monsod, quoting UP Diliman Chancellor Fidel Nemenzo, focused on academic freedom in UP, said that it is the “freedom to challenge orthodoxies and established ways of thinking and acting without fear of repression or punitive action. This freedom is essential for the life of the mind and for UP’s dual role as (a) knowledge producer and (b) social critic.”

However, she emphasized that academic freedom is not “unlimited”. Among others, it does not mean “a faculty member can harass, threaten, intimidate, ridicule, or impose his or her views on students.” It also “does not protect faculty members from non-university penalties if they break the law.”

Why is it important?

It is critical to a university’s role in clarifying and seeking truth, Tapang explained. Academic freedom allows an environment that is “most conducive to speculation, experimentation, and creation. . . . If we are unable to speak our mind with intellectual honesty, what else would the university be for us?” Borrowing Albert Einstein’s words, he added that “any restriction on academic freedom [hampers] the dissemination of knowledge among people and thereby impedes rational judgment and action.”

Monsod made reference to Britannica on the justification for academic freedom. That it “lies not in the comfort or convenience of teachers and students but in the benefits to society; i.e., the long-term interests of a society are best served when the educational process leads to the advancement of knowledge, and knowledge is best advanced when inquiry is free from restraints by the state, by the church or other institutions, or by special-interest groups.”

Academic freedom is essential to any institution of higher learning because it is an “assertion of control over what we want to read, say, think, and how and who we want to think with, discuss with, express ourselves with,” Te stated.

Mawis concurred that academic freedom meant respect for universities to determine their academic governance, and emphasized that it was “consistent with law and jurisprudence.” She also cited Justice Estela Perlas-Bernabe’s concurring opinion in Pimentel v. Medialdea, G.R. No. 230642 (2019), “Academic freedom is anchored on the recognition that academic institutions perform a social function, and its business is conducted for the common good; that is, it is a necessary tool for critical inquiry of truth and its free exposition. Thus, the guarantee of academic freedom is complementary to the freedom of expression and the freedom of the mind.”

Specific to UP, Concepcion, Mawis, and Te made reference to Republic Act No. 9500 or the UP Charter of 2008, where Section 5 states, “The national university has the right and responsibility to exercise academic freedom.” They emphasized “responsibility” as a clear mandate for UP to exercise its right to academic freedom.

How do we protect and defend academic freedom?

“Stop taking it for granted,” Monsod said, adding that academic freedom “does not stand alone in support of the higher education system.” She cited Cary Nelson’s No University is an Island: Saving Academic Freedom, which states that academic freedom, shared governance, and tenure are the three legs in the footstool that supports higher education.

Monsod also proposed that professors emeriti lead in the establishment of a “Philippine Association of University Professors or Philippine Association of University Teachers” because unity in their ranks will create a formidable organization in guarding against threats to academic freedom, among other issues.

Tapang, meanwhile, echoed Einstein’s words on constitutional rights: “The strength of the Constitution lies entirely in the determination of each citizen to defend it.” He also said that “[there are] prevalent tools like Facebook. We have to speak online and on social media. Show that we are taking a stand.”

“UP has given us the tools, skills, attitude, disposition, critical thinking. Now we are called upon to apply these,” Te said.

Mawis added, “Be aware of what is happening. Know the facts. Analyze. Make a stand. Love the truth. We honor excellence by living the truth. We honor integrity. We honor the truth. We were wired that way, therefore we should act that way.”

“What is the proportion of [UP’s] contributions versus speculations [against it]? We need to communicate effectively the good that the University has done, even just in this time of pandemic,” Concepcion emphasized the positive outcomes of academic freedom.

Dalisay capped it off with “The best way to defend academic freedom is to use it. Express yourself. Wherever you are, the university is in you. You do not have to be in UP to exercise the spirit of academic freedom.”

Share this:

University of the philippines.

University of the Philippines Media and Public Relations Office Fonacier Hall, Magsaysay Avenue, UP Diliman, Quezon City 1101 Telephone number: (632) 8981-8500 Comments and feedback: [email protected]

University of the Philippines © 2024

UP would continue expanding under Villamor’s watch, with the Conservatory of Music; the University High School; the College of Education; and, the Junior College in Cebu City added under his watch

The School of Fine Arts (1909), the College of Liberal Arts (1909), the College of Veterinary Medicine (1910), the College of Engineering (1910), the College of Agriculture (1906, in Los Baños, Laguna) follow to form the initial core of the newly established UP.

The UP College of Medicine (then known as the Philippine Medical School) opens. It predates the opening of the University proper by 3 years.

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

A 'Fraught Time' For Press Freedom In The Philippines

Sheila S. Coronel

College students protest to defend press freedom in Manila on Wednesday, after the government cracked down on Rappler, an independent online news site. Noel Celis/AFP/Getty Images hide caption

College students protest to defend press freedom in Manila on Wednesday, after the government cracked down on Rappler, an independent online news site.

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte does not like the press. Stung by critical media reporting, he has in the past months called some of the country's largest media organizations "bullshit," "garbage," "son of a bitch." Journalists, he said, have no shame. They are corrupt fabulists and hypocrites who "pretend to be the moral torch of the country."

But Duterte does not just get mad; he gets even. This week, the Philippine Securities and Exchange Commission revoked the corporate registration of Rappler , an online media startup that has reported aggressively on Duterte's troll army and police abuses in the government's war on drugs. If the order is confirmed by an appeals court, the company may have to shut down.

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, shown here on Dec. 20 at a ceremony marking the anniversary of the military, became president as the Philippine media were losing prestige and market power. Ted Aljibe/AFP/Getty Images hide caption

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, shown here on Dec. 20 at a ceremony marking the anniversary of the military, became president as the Philippine media were losing prestige and market power.

Threatening as this crackdown is, it's only one arm of a pincer-like assault on the press. Duterte is drawing from the Modern Autocrat's Field Guide to Information Control. The aim is complete encirclement so as to drown out critical and independent voices. Like Vladimir Putin, Turkey's Recip Tayyip Erdogan and Hungary's Viktor Orban, he has launched a two-pronged attack.

One prong is media muzzling through government regulation. In Russia, Turkey and Hungary, autocratic leaders have shut down critical news outlets or transferred their ownership to friendly proprietors. In all these countries, government regulators have hounded recalcitrant media owners with spurious allegations like tax evasion and failure to obtain licenses.

More insidiously, populist leaders have tried to de-legitimize independent and critical media by ridiculing their editorial standards and their claims to a moral high ground. The press, said Dutere , "throw[s] garbage at us ... [but] How about you? Are you also clean?"

Demonization by government — something President Trump also deploys against media outlets he dislikes — is just one tactic. The other is letting loose an army of trolls , bloggers on the state's payroll , propagandists and paid hacks who ensure the strongman's attacks against the press are amplified in newspaper columns and on the airwaves, on social media and fake news sites.

In 1972, when Ferdinand Marcos declared martial law, he closed down all newspapers and broadcast stations and hauled dozens of journalists to jail. When the presses and broadcast networks reopened, they were all owned by Marcos kin and cronies and were censored by the presidential palace. The flow of information was strictly controlled: There were only three daily newspapers and a limited number of TV and radio stations.

Employees of Rappler, an online news outfit known for its critical reporting on Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, continued to work in their office in Manila on Tuesday. The Philippine Securities and Exchange Commission revoked Rappler's corporate registration this week. Aaron Favila/AP hide caption

Employees of Rappler, an online news outfit known for its critical reporting on Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, continued to work in their office in Manila on Tuesday. The Philippine Securities and Exchange Commission revoked Rappler's corporate registration this week.

Duterte is an admirer of Marcos, but he is using a 21st century playbook for media control. The strategy is no longer restricting information flows, but flooding the information space with disinformation and propaganda while also attacking legitimate purveyors of the news.

Last year, the president launched blistering assaults against two news organizations that reported allegations he had stashed millions in secret bank accounts. As he turned up the heat, the owners of the Philippine Daily Inquirer , the country's second largest newspaper, announced they would sell the daily to a businessman chummy with the president. Duterte also tightened the screws on the top television network, ABS-CBN, threatening to block the renewal of its franchise and to sue its owners for failing to air campaign ads that he said he had already paid for.

Rappler was investigated supposedly because it violated the ban on foreign media ownership. The pioneering startup issued $1 million in securities, called Philippine depository receipts, to the Omidyar Network, the philanthropic arm of eBay founder Pierre Omidyar.

Other companies, including a giant telecommunications firm and two broadcast networks, have similar arrangements with foreign investors. But only Rappler's registration has been revoked — tellingly, six months after Duterte accused the news site of being U.S.-owned.

During the Marcos era, Filipino journalists and citizens used innovative ways to skirt censorship. There was a robust underground press and above-ground media used allegory and allusion to evade restrictions.

The new media landscape requires new strategies for ensuring that genuine news evades encirclement by poisoned information. More cautious news outlets have taken the path of self-preservation through self-censorship. Rappler, for one, has said it will not stand down, and it has the support of major journalist groups in the Philippines and overseas. In the past, journalists, with the support of outraged citizens, have successfully resisted gagging.

But the Philippine press has never been weaker. Media influence and market power soared after Marcos fell in a 1986 popular uprising. There was a hunger for news and uncensored information and crusading journalists and newspapers were feted for their role in the democracy movement. Before long, powerful families bought newspapers and broadcast networks, using their media clout to advance their interests. Sensationalism ruled in a crowded and competitive media market.

Like elsewhere, technology has disrupted the media business in the Philippines: Revenues have fallen, and audiences have moved online, gravitating toward Facebook, which has become the de facto news source for most Filipinos.

Duterte became president as the media were losing prestige and market power. He attacked the press where it was most vulnerable: His tirades against sensationalist journalists and elitist media owners resonated among many Filipinos.

This is a fraught time for the Philippine press. In the past, journalists and citizens have stood together to defend the right to know. They may do so again, but they need a clear vision, an ark that will see them through the Duterte era's deluge of disinformation.

Sheila S. Coronel (@sheilacoronel) is Director of the Toni Stabile Center for Investigative Journalism and Dean of Academic Affairs at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. She co-founded the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism.

• Philippines
• press freedom
• rodrigo duterte

Read The Diplomat , Know The Asia-Pacific

• Central Asia
• Southeast Asia
• Environment
• Asia Defense
• China Power
• Crossroads Asia
• Flashpoints
• Pacific Money
• Tokyo Report
• Trans-Pacific View
• Photo Essays
• Write for Us
• Subscriptions

Freedom of Expression Declines Further Under Marcos

Recent features.

Envisioning the Asia-Pacific’s Feminist Future

Normalizing Abnormalities: Life in Myanmar’s Resistance Zone

Japan’s LNG Future: Balancing Energy Security With Sustainability Commitments

Why Is South Korea’s President Yoon So Unpopular?

The Logic of China’s Careful Defense Industry Purge

The Ko Wen-je Case Points to Deeper Problems in Taiwan Politics

Anarchy in Anyar: A Messy Revolution in Myanmar’s Central Dry Zone

The Complex Legacy of Ahmad Shah Massoud

Diplomacy Beyond the Elections: How China Is Preparing for a Post-Biden America

Sri Lanka’s Presidential Manifestos: What’s Promised for Women?

The Global Battle for Chip Talent: South Korea’s Strategic Dilemma

Bangladesh’s New Border Stance Signals a Shift in Its Approach to India 

Asean beat  |  politics  |  southeast asia.

As expected, the Philippines’ new leader has done little to reverse his predecessor’s dire track record on free speech.

Three months after coming to power, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has failed to reassure the media community and the public that he will promote freedom of expression and reverse the impunity that worsened during the term of his predecessor. To be sure, there was little expectation that the son of a deposed dictator would be a champion of press freedom, but his election pledge of unity and healing could have been a good opportunity to affirm his commitment to protecting the public’s right to information.

For the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP), the first 100 days of the new government saw a continuing decline in free speech, and the group documented 17 cases of press freedom violations. These include two media killings, four cyber libel incidents, two arrests for cyber libel, one libel charge, one case of surveillance and harassment, two cases of “red-tagging,” one denial of coverage, one physical assault, one death threat, and two instances of online harassment.

The recent murder of a radio broadcaster in Metro Manila was widely condemned because of its chilling effect. The murdered journalist was a staunch critic of corruption activities involving officials of the previous and current governments. Surprisingly, a gunman confessed his crime but it raised more questions since the person who supposedly hired him is inside a maximum prison facility and has already died. The quick response of authorities indicated the clamor for swift action against the rising attacks targeting journalists.

After the killing of a radio journalist, several TV reporters came forward to reveal the threats they have been receiving on social media. A reporter also shared that a police officer visited his house to inquire about his safety. These incidents alarmed media watchdogs. The police clarified that they only have good intentions in personally reaching out to journalists, but they promised to stop the practice of making surprise home visits. Authorities also vowed to look into the online threats directed against several prominent journalists.

The Commission on Human Rights has denounced the recent spate of media-related attacks. “Any attempts to silence the press – particularly by creating a culture of fear and violence – directly impacts democracy and the human rights situation in the country.”

The Movement Against Disinformation (MAD) assailed the culture of impunity that has gravely affected the work of journalists. “This is a death by a thousand cuts of Philippine democracy, where a pillar in the checks and balances system is insidiously undermined then suppressed,” the group said in a statement.

MAD and NUJP have also issued statements condemning the practice of red-tagging after several journalists were named as members of the Communist Party and its armed wing by a former spokesperson of the government’s anti-communist task force.

Among the red-tagged journalists was Rappler editor and Nobel Peace Prize winner Maria Ressa, whose cyberlibel conviction was recently affirmed by the Court of Appeals. She noted that she faces continuing harassment even after a change in government. “The ongoing campaign of harassment and intimidation against me and Rappler continues, and the Philippines legal system is not doing enough to stop it,” Ressa said. “I am disappointed by today’s ruling but sadly not surprised.”

The veteran Filipino-American journalist and editor could serve time in prison if the Supreme Court rejects her appeal. Various groups have expressed support for Ressa including the Hold the Line Coalition which has called on Marcos to withdraw all charges and cases against her.

Ressa’s case is an important indicator of how the Marcos government will deal with the media. It also has a disturbing implication for other journalists and media companies since Ressa was convicted for an article she didn’t write and charged under a law that had not yet been passed when the alleged libelous article was published by Rappler.

Media groups have been calling for the decriminalization of libel. Instead of heeding this appeal, Marcos signed the Mandatory SIM Card Registration Bill into law, a measure that could potentially enable mass surveillance. Despite the numerous economic and health problems facing the country, it is revealing that the first law signed by Marcos could be a tool for political repression.

Human rights group Karapatan cited the notorious record of the government in upholding the privacy rights of citizens. “The SIM card registration is another attempt of the government to institute false public security when it has failed to uphold the people’s right to security and privacy by being the primary source and enabler of more threats like data breaches, surveillance and poor implementation of laws on data privacy,” it stated.

Journalists continue to face violent threats, critics are slapped with harassment suits, and the public is wary about the impact of the mandatory SIM card registration law. The Marcos government should spend its next 100 days addressing the concern about the unceasing decline of freedom of expression in the country.

Will the Marcos Government Uphold Media Freedom?

By mong palatino.

Philippine Court Tosses Final Tax Charge Against Nobel Laureate

By sebastian strangio.

Philippine Court Clears Nobel Winner Maria Ressa of Tax Evasion

Philippines’ Maria Ressa to Appeal Cyberlibel Case at Supreme Court

Arakan Army Commander-in-Chief Twan Mrat Naing on the Future of Rakhine State

By rajeev bhattacharyya.

US Air Force Deploys More Stealth Jets to Southeast Asia

By christopher woody.

Islamic Fundamentalism Raises Its Head in Post-Hasina Bangladesh

By snigdhendu bhattacharya.

Kim Jong Un Abandoned Unification. What Do North Koreans Think?

By kwangbaek lee and rose adams.

By Catherine Putz

By Helen Li

By John Calabrese

By Mitch Shin

24/7 writing help on your phone

To install StudyMoose App tap and then “Add to Home Screen”

Freedom of Speech in the Philippines

Save to my list

Remove from my list

Freedom of Speech in the Philippines. (2016, Nov 26). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/freedom-of-speech-in-the-philippines-essay

"Freedom of Speech in the Philippines." StudyMoose , 26 Nov 2016, https://studymoose.com/freedom-of-speech-in-the-philippines-essay

StudyMoose. (2016). Freedom of Speech in the Philippines . [Online]. Available at: https://studymoose.com/freedom-of-speech-in-the-philippines-essay [Accessed: 18 Sep. 2024]

"Freedom of Speech in the Philippines." StudyMoose, Nov 26, 2016. Accessed September 18, 2024. https://studymoose.com/freedom-of-speech-in-the-philippines-essay

"Freedom of Speech in the Philippines," StudyMoose , 26-Nov-2016. [Online]. Available: https://studymoose.com/freedom-of-speech-in-the-philippines-essay. [Accessed: 18-Sep-2024]

StudyMoose. (2016). Freedom of Speech in the Philippines . [Online]. Available at: https://studymoose.com/freedom-of-speech-in-the-philippines-essay [Accessed: 18-Sep-2024]

• Freedom Is Freedom Of Speech Pages: 3 (896 words)
• Religious Freedom in the Philippines Pages: 10 (2800 words)
• Freedom of Expression in the Philippines Pages: 6 (1552 words)
• The Bill of Rights gives freedom of religion to the citizens Freedom Pages: 5 (1401 words)
• True Definition of Freedom: How Has Freedom Changed Over Time Pages: 4 (920 words)
• Freedom In My Life and What Freedom Means To Me Pages: 2 (540 words)
• Freedom of Speech Taken from People Pages: 5 (1312 words)
• An Analysis Of Freedom Of Speech Philosophy Pages: 5 (1291 words)
• The freedom of speech remains as one of the fundamental elements of Pages: 11 (3114 words)
• The Vitality of Freedom of Speech: A Comprehensive Analysis Pages: 6 (1523 words)

👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!

Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.