I am quite amazed at the bevy of comments relating to my post over my site New Philippine Revolution. Instead of delving into the story behind the post, people have now diluted the discussion to a question of “purism” and “non-purism”. One even commented about how it would be fool-hardy to “police” the blogosphere, which, to my mind is just a peripheral issue which needs another post.
Let me be clear on just three points:
1. First, the post tries to expose something which occurred. The incident did happen. And some bloggers know about it. In fact, I was shocked to know that it happened since, pardon my naive, I view blogging as something of an expression. Being an expression, it was my belief that it should be the clearest expression of the Self. Call me idealist. Call me naive. But, that’s my take. Before I exposed myself to my fellow bloggers over at FV, I thought hard and long if I’ll do so. Because I know that if I expose myself, i’ll also be exposed to the dangers of influence-peddling which could probably muddle my personal take on somethings.
For those of you who just read this–the incident did happen. The person whom this post and all earlier posts referred to here exists. However, I took my fellow bloggers’ counsel and decided not to expose his name. Why? Some commenters here cried foul. Expose him. Show us the proof because it is now affecting the entire Pinoy blogosphere. Name names.
Question–what’s the use of naming him? Will it benefit everybody? No. The post was meant for him to REFORM HIS WAYS. It was not meant to demean him. I believe the blogosphere has its own ethical code. Now, if YOU THINK that you’re the one I’m referring to in my post, the obvious message is–REFORM. I hope that he awakes from his stupor and realize that what he did was wrong, terribly and unsettlingly, wrong. He went the wrong way. Like a prodigal son, he must be made to realize his mistake and reform by: going to that politico and be honest in telling him that he just made up that stupid list and he does’nt own any blogger apart from himself. THAT’S THE ISSUE.
But, like what happened to “whistle-blowers” or those who ” expose”, Patricio Mangubat got the brickbats from people who make a living out of blogging. The post was not meant for them. It was written as a WARNING so that this will never happen again.
2. Second, the post does not frown upon those who make corporate blogging a living. As what BrianB said, he’s earning millions from it. The post does not discourage anybody who wants to make a living as a corporate blogger. That’s their life. What the post wants us–meaning Pinoy bloggers—is to be honest and transparent. If you want companies to pay you for writing their stuff, you need to be forthwith about it. You can self-regulate by including a disclaimer before you write stuff. I don’t agree with BrianB that blogging is not meant to influence. It is. We write views. We seldom write straight, factual articles. What I would like to caution my colleagues here is if we happen to write socio-political commentaries and if we were paid to write about it by some politico, tell your readers straight that the post is meant for so and so politico. Period.
The problem right now is there is no warning sign for everybody reading stuff in the Internet. That’s what I am saying. We must exercise prudence because like it or not, some high school student or an elementary kid will, in time, land in our respective sites, takes our views as “gospel-truth” and believes in it. What if, say, our very own son read our posts and we wrote something that a particular milk is not tainted with melamine when it is melamine in its purest form? Or we wrote something about a politician being clean as Mr. Clean when he’s laundering money abroad and it happens to be our money?
3. Third, the post is not about purity. No. It would be too naive for me to even conjure a veritable Eden here. First of all, I am a realist. That’s actually one of the reasons why I wrote that entry because I saw what’s happening this early and I alerted everybody about it so that we are forewarned on the possible proliferation of this practice in the Pinoy blogosphere. There’s no use making a psychological distinction between being “indie” or “not being indie”. Rom is wrong when she wrote that its the right of a blogger to be “pure” or to be an “indie” or not to be an indie. That’s not the point.
The point is simple really—be honest. Be transparent. In general, if you’re writing stuff about politics or some product, be forthwith about it. Tell everybody that you are writing about a politico or for Unilever or whichever company. Everybody will respect that.
Popularity: 1% [?]
I don’t earn millions. If I were to go sailing it would be on a cheap outrigger boat, with a sail.
Anyway, I think you are now downplaying what you wrote in your blog. Even now, you are being naive when you push for honesty and transparency. Pinoy bloggers, in my opinion, always lie. They always lie, Pat. Their lies in their opinion and my opinion as well are harmless lies but it makes them very boring to read. Contrast Filipinos with their American counterparts. Americans are rather gritty realists, even in their blogs.
My rather hastily written post tries to make a point that blogging is a very general term. The people you mentioned in your post are varied, each one having a different opinion of blogging. I’m glad you seemed to be under control of the situation. That man you hinted on, I hope, is truly guilty, and, sure, if you are guilty you’d rather not be outed here online. But what if he wasn’t and what if it was all a misunderstanding. Pat Mangubat cannot decide for himself, can he?
Please can you correct your entry that I earn millions. I NEVER WROTE I earn millions. That was the traffic of the two most popular tech sites.
Honestly, BrianB, I just met my fellow bloggers this year despite writing as a blogger some two years ago. And I found them real, honest people. I don’t worship them, as what The Cat wrote in her blog.
About you earning millions, okey. You’re not. Now, on the misunderstanding thing, that is not the case. There was really a list. He also tried to scum his fellow colleagues in an event and tried to divert money or funds intended for that event to a company which he hastily formed. That’s a criminal act. He was reprimanded.
That case was never mentioned in other blogs, only now. And you know why? Because he then came up with a list purportedly showing my name and other names of bloggers whom he said he consulted already, given money AND reportedly favorable to the politico already. THIS IS A FACT.
I just cannot help but expose this because I deny ever receiving any money from anybody nor do those other names as well.
Lastly, BrianB, my post is NOT to judge him. Try to read it again so that you’ll be enlightened.
Papa Pat, thanks for clearing things up.
Mga Badette, ang tawag dun DISCLOSURE.
Brian B. Ay naku ano ba yan Filipino Bloggers lie? Oh my gulay ano ka COCONUT? Oh my gulay ang pagbabasa ay dapat colour blind.
Babu tuyo!
What are you his conscience? The readers do not even know who you are talking about.
But you did not expose anything. It’s pure innuendoes. That’s when whistle-blowers get the brickbats…when all they do is produce air from the whistle.
OF course, the problogger, the people earning from their ads fall under “Corporate sponsorships” whatever you may call it, adsense bidadvertiser,PPP,sponsored post.
It helps to go bloghopping, Patricio. These people have disclosure and or show that logo of the companies they write for in their blog’s sidebars.
You do not have to attend a seminar to know that. Don’t you read them? SPONSORED POST, PAYPERPOST, NUFFNANG, REVIEWME and TEXT LINK ADS.
Probloggers write the name of the network they write for.
Should I say short to issuing them certificates of good moral character?
I bloghopped a lot Pat. Even though I am not in the Philippines, many of my friends/bloggers attend corporate events. I know how it works.
They receive freebies and they write about the event.
Wasn’t that an issue before. How can you be honest in blogging when you blog because you got “paid”.
Payment is not only in the form of money. It comes as certificates or free products like doughnuts.
@Pat
why is this a problem? lets say someone is not honest, and writes on a political topic because someone paid him. Whats the worst that can happen? will anyone believe him?
u said that a kid might chance upon it and believe it. are kids naive so as to believe it completely without a critical mind? [critical is not the same as cynical, we should support the former, while fighting against the later].
i find it hard to imagine a scenario where this can be a real problem. maybe you can write about why this is a problem…
@Pat
judging from the many writers and commenters here — none of these people are naive.
When was writing by a political hack ever believed by anyone and had actual impact? Won’t people rise up to criticize this blogger?
I think GabbyD that you find it hard to imagine because the REALITY is that it is really so just a non-issue.
I mean, who gives a shit anyway?
Whatever wheelin’ and dealin’ any of us here happen to engage in outside of FV or, for that matter, outside the Net in the REAL WORLD should be none of anyone’s business here.
If we focus on evaluating IDEAS rather than on one another’s personal circumstances then FV will be collectively self-correcting enough so that anyone who tables stupid, incoherent, or mutually inconsistent ideas here eventually gets discredited anyway.
Simple.
Putting too much time on this micro-intriga crap is simply creating dramas where none really exists.
When we start down this path, then we truly become a microcosm of the bigger dysfunction that underpins Pinoy society.
Is FV a forum to reckon with? From my standpoint, not now. it has not achieved the level of readership or followers of the broadsheet Abante, or M. Velarde’s El Shaddai. So what is this talk about FV’s being used as a forum for political advancement?
If I am targetting a wide expanse of viewers or audience, I will go to Abante or El Shaddai.
This influence peddler is not doing his research, giving rise to speculation that his/her existence could be a product of wild imagination.
jcc – you are right on target
Honesty? One’s dishonesty is another’s smartness. Or one’s honesty is another’s stupidity.
PMangubat, wake up and take a cold bath!
i think whoever will ever buy that “list” is a bigger fool than the one who makes and sells it. classic examples of the proverbial “manloloko” and “naloloko”.
I was one who commented something like that.
If it is a peripheral issue, I must have good peripheral vision. I am now glad that not only my hindsight is almost 20/20.
BrianB,
I once took one of your comments too literally,remember the from eespayne stuff.
How naive of me.
I am not taking it against you,I was the one who misread your post.My bad :(
also nash or the nashman,I learned not to take him too seriously minsan niliteral ko din yun,style pala nya yun kahit sa blog nya.
I find that situation important,because of the what if scenario of pat: what if it is your kid.
Then like all medium lalo na sa TV:parental guidance pa din.
I can imagine a scenario anak, wag kang basta basta maniwala sa mga binabasa mo ha,lalo na pag nakita mo ang pangalan ko ha.May tinatawag kasing sarcasm.
mahirap nga ano.
tulog na ako,kung ano ano na ang tinatype ko.
ps before I sleep.
Re:writing
reading your past comments(ewan ko na tuloy kung ano seryoso at sarcastic); you said that you are a writer who has one a literary award sometime ago, and one comment where your dad threw all your poems and other stuff you wrote on scratch papers,even tissue paper makes me have the impression that you are a good writer.
Now I can somehow understand your balancing act in the online and offline world; and your bias for offline writing..
as usual I have to ask forgiveness for my perennial wrong spellings among other perennial shortcomings.
“If we focus on evaluating IDEAS rather than on one another’s personal circumstances then FV will be collectively self-correcting enough so that anyone who tables stupid, incoherent, or mutually inconsistent ideas here eventually gets discredited anyway”. Benign0..
Right Benign0. This is identical to one of my posts where I said that, eventually, the purveyors of falsehood and personality issues, like rotten products will finally die a natural death as consumers will simply stop buying the products.
But we have no control over our consumers, whose numbers could be as many as those bloggers with miscreant behavior and misplaced products’ appreciation… One of the drawbacks of democracy, if you ask me. :)
Ganon na ba kababa tingin mo sa kabataan para isiping maniwala sila agad sa post mo? Kaya nga may tinatawag na BLOG DISCLOSURE.
Ikaw dapat unang linisin sa blogosphere. Linisin ang mga nagmamarunong!
Mag blog hop ka kaya minsan Mr. Magubat este Mangubat??
JCC,
ang hirap kasing maging open book eh.
I somehow started the fire back at mlq3′s , when I scanned your blog and began asking some questions about your personal circumstances.
I am not blaming you for being an open book,kaya lang me risks involved tulad ng mga nadidinig mo ke n_sh at J_stice L_ague.
In short,it might become a weapon of sorts.
Coherence and Consistence:
What if someone consistently attempts to connect a cultural flaw with what someone said,is that idea already coherent and consistent?????
OK. Mr. Mangubat is not blogging for pay. Issue settled.
Bloggers may blog for altruistic or egoistic self interest or plain material self- interest. Who cares?
This relatively new medium has been credited with helping elect Obama to the W.H. How much of an effect only time will tell. However he intends to use this electronic mass base to keep in touch with his supporters.
A lot of mainstream media personalities in the U.S. have started blogging.
Naturally in this country where onion skinned people are more in number the more adversarial American style of in your face discussions are shunned for the safety of life and limb.
MLQ3 is a trial blazer in that respect.
GWB’s latest was a classic.
http://www.blinkx.com/video/bush-shoe-attack/EjnYejD-kTAuZB-WH_wowg
So, I have’nt exposed anything? Okey. What’s so wrong with a blogger who sold his soul to the devil? Nothing. It’s just my take.
You know people, I was not the one who blew this out of proportion. What I wrote in my blog is what happened. And it did happen. So, you’re saying that the world is dirty and live with it? Fine. You have your views, I have mine.
@pat
i’m interested in your opinion:
i want to know your opinion on why this is a bad thing. as i said earlier, i am curious to know what the repercussions are of someone writing a post based on what he was paid to write.
why should we be concerned about this?