SUMMARY
This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.
MANILA, Philippines – The Commission on Elections (Comelec) doubled down on its fact-checking agreement with news website Rappler, after the Office of the Solicitor General (OSC) ran to the Supreme Court and asked it to nullify the partnership deal.
During the question and answer portion of the PiliPinas Debates launch on Monday, March 7, acting Comelec Chairperson Socorro Inting asserted that the agreement underwent thorough vetting.
“We entered into an agreement with Rappler freely and voluntarily. It underwent review by the law department,” Inting said.
“We cannot do anything but face the music, answer the petition, and defend the memorandum of agreement (MOA) that we signed with Rappler. Whatever decision the court will render, we will abide by it,” she added.
Jose Calida, in his Supreme Court pleading, argued that fact checks violate free speech, and that the “power granted by Comelec in favor of Rappler clearly constitutes prior restraint on freedom of speech and of expression.”
The pleading oddly makes use of the constitutional principle of prior restraint, which usually protects free expression from government restrictions.
Under the agreement with the Comelec, Rappler will mobilize its fact-checking network, which is a collaboration among 14 newsgroups and over 100 civil society organizations. Rappler, for instance, should alert the Comelec about false and misleading election-related claims on social media.
Rappler will also create content on voter education and embed the poll body’s online precinct finder on its website.
Calida mistakenly thought Rappler embedding a precinct finder code on its site exposes voter data. Being able to embed the poll body’s precinct finder, however, does not mean access to its data.
Comelec spokesman James Jimenez also reiterated on Monday that the poll body’s agreement with Rappler is compliant with data privacy measures.
“One of the key points in MOA preparations in the Comelec is to ensure there is no violation of data privacy law. We do that for all memoranda of agreement. We did that for this MOA as well,” Jimenez said.
Calida, who campaigned for Marcos during his failed 2016 vice-presidential bid, falsely argued that Rappler is a foreign entity, and even cited a closure order from the Securities and Exchange Commission to make the case against the news organization.
But Calida is mistaken, because the SEC said in 2018 that Rappler can continue operating as usual until its order becomes final and executory. The Court of Appeals has not resolved the case and Rappler continues to operate.
Rappler, in an earlier statement, also blasted Calida for his claims that were “fraught with falsehoods, innuendos, and hallucinations.”
On Monday, Rappler expressed confidence that “our good justices recognize the value of independent institutions working again together for nothing less than an informed choice on May 9.” – Rappler.com
Add a comment
How does this make you feel?
There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.